A Sordid Story

Laura Ann Wurzberger, a Master of Arts candidate in the Loyola University program for cultural and educational policy studies, wrote a thesis hashing out the history of recess in Chicago Public Schools from 1855 to 2006. She notes that the history of Chicago Public School (CPS) recess policy begins in 1855. Original CPS policy allowed for daily recess (even mandating it for a short time from 1905-1910). From 1922-1990 recess was a regular part of each CPS school day, unless the superintendent ordered otherwise. This occurred on only one occasion, in 1947, when Superintendent George F. Cassell made the stipulation that recess must be indoors, to help conserve the coal supply (Wurzburger, 2010). Also interesting is that up until 1990, recess was not scheduled directly before or after lunch (Wurzburger). This means that students were provided at least two distinct breaks during the school day compared with one mid-day lunch/recess combination break which seems to be most common today.

In 1991 Chicago Public Schools adopted a policy that was in stark contrast to the preceding recess standard. The new policy eliminated recess altogether. After seven years of no-recess policy, the 1998 revisions allowed schools to decide for themselves how they would schedule the school day with a minimum of 300 minutes of instructional work each day. Wurzberger suggests that because the process to bring recess back was complicated (the teacher’s union representative, administration, and the local school council had to agree on reinstating recess), only one-third of schools reinstated recess (2010). Additionally, she comments that many schools undervalue recess because of the need to raise test scores. Seven years later, in 2005, the policy was not increasing the number of schools with daily recess. A Catalyst Chicago survey uncovered only 18 percent of CPS schools were providing recess (Wurzburger). So what was the school board’s motivation for taking recess out of the school day? CPS records do not explicitly identify the motivation for cutting the requirement for recess in the first place. Wurzberger suggests that the policy changes were informed by, first, violence during the late 19th century.

CPS recess violence was first documented in 1897 at Moseley School, where students were reportedly involved in race wars. Fights between black and white students happened at recess, as well as travelling to and from school. Concern for the safety of the supervising teachers who were breaking up fights may have been the precipitating factor (Wurzberger, 2010). There were also several recorded instances of bullying during the school day, with one case escalating to the point of a 13-year-old being stabbed in the thigh. Between 1927 and 1974, there were three different cases of stabbings and one shooting of a nine-year-old student, (all perpetrators were classmates) during recess. Additionally, in some areas gang violence threatened the safety of recess. In 1968 six shots were fired into a crowd of 400 students during the morning recess at Wadsworth School. In this instance, a 14-year old was shot by a rival gang member while he was playing basketball (Wurzberger). Children were also more vulnerable to assault and kidnap during recess. Cases of kidnapping and assault were documented in 1899 when a man watched students playing at Lewis-Chaplin school, eventually carrying a girl off, cutting her braids off. She safely returned to the school but the Chicago Daily Tribune reported of more serious instances of students being sexually assaulted during recess hours at several CPS schools between the years of 1939-1987.

Beyond violence, there were other safety concerns during recess. This included children who were injured or killed by cars during recess. In the 1942-1943 school year, 47 students were accidentally killed during recess when they ran into the streets. Also, stray dogs became an issue. Three students at Grant School were bit by a rabid dog during recess in 1908. Seven students were bit by a dog at Calhoun Elementary in 1943. There is little debate that students are more susceptible to injury during recess. In 1987 a serious collision during a recess kickball game at McKay School resulted in one student suffering brain damage and partial paralysis. His mother filed a lawsuit against CPS because there was over a one hour delay of medical attention. Some schools provided unsuitable play areas, including empty lots with broken glass, beer cans, and no playground at Reavis School in 1964 (Wurzburger, 2010). Undoubtedly the breadth of challenges that schools face in implementing safe recess time is daunting. And yet, few experts suggest shutting down recess altogether, yet this was the reaction from individual schools, such as Barton Elementary, even before the 1991 policy. Barton was an overcrowded school and this may have contributed to their lack of recess, with concerns about adequate supervision. Goudy School also faced overcrowding, and did not have recess starting around 1988, perhaps even earlier (Wurzburge).

That same year, the Chicago Tribune wrote an article claiming that CPS was a system of “institutionalized child neglect,” due in part to the lack of recess at some schools (Reardon et al., 1988). Near this same time there was rising national pressure to shut down recess. A study by John Goodlad at UCLA came out in 1981 saying that instructional time was being negatively impacted by long recess and lunch breaks. Another study from Michigan State estimated that approximately 42% of the school day was being absorbed by recess, lunch, transitions, assemblies, and classroom interruptions (Wurzberger). We don’t know if these findings were directly related to CPS policy shifts around recess, specifically the mandate for 300 instructional minutes in each school day, though the general societal trend toward maximizing instruction timing and minimizing all else was very likely a factor.

This year, 2012, recess is back in all CPS schools, thanks to the longer school day, which was approved in January 2012 (Shulte, 2012). At last CPS students are again guaranteed what Pellegrini describes as “one of the few places in elementary school children’s day where they can interact with peers on their own terms....Seeing the value in this natural laboratory of peer interaction, child psychologists and educators have considered the playground as an important venue for children’s social and cognitive development (Pellegrini, 1995).” And herein lies the potential for another social justice issue, beyond the cruelty of allowing no unstructured break time in a 7 hour school day: by withholding recess we may have contributed to the achievement gap between minority students and their white counterparts. We know that two-thirds of American high school students do not meet the recommended level of 60 minutes per day (at least 5 days a week) of physical activity. White students, however, are about 20% more likely to meet this recommended level of physical activity. The reasons for this are probably varied. We could consider availability of outdoor recreational opportunities by neighborhood, affordability of sports teams, gym memberships, or exercise classes, and safety of neighborhoods. One aspect that may also contribute to the disparity is that schools in under-resourced areas, which are more likely to have high minority populations, are less likely to have sufficient supervision for recess and they may feel that it is better to skip recess. The results of this action would be to further divide the educational outcomes of students, because students who have recess are better able to retain knowledge, stay in class, and perform on task (Basch, 2011). To deprive a student of recess is to cripple their opportunity for success, academically and socially.