Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Calendar topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board reviews single-draft 2025–26 school calendar; some members say committee didn’t present alternatives
Summary
At the Dec. 18 meeting the board received a first-reader draft of the 2025–26 Talbot County Public Schools calendar. The draft starts school Aug. 25, includes a split spring break in April and fewer midweek half days; several board members said the calendar committee’s single draft did not reflect the variety of ideas discussed.
The Talbot County Board of Education reviewed the calendar committee’s first draft for the 2025–26 school year at its Dec. 18 meeting and heard objections from several board members who said the committee did not present multiple calendar options.
Dr. Einhorn, who presented the draft, said the calendar complies with state regulations (COMAR) requiring 180 student days and respects negotiated agreements on teacher workdays. The proposal shown to the board calls for students to begin Monday, Aug. 25; includes two consecutive half days for conferences in November; schedules a split spring break with student spring break April 2–6 and staff time April 3–6; and sets the last student day as Friday, June 5 if no inclement weather days are used (or June 11 if four inclement days are required).
The committee chair, Bill Keswick, was cited by staff as leading the committee’s work. Presenters said the committee aimed to reduce the number of midweek half days, respond to feedback that half days are burdensome for families, and better distribute teacher preparation time. The draft also front-loads teacher workdays at the start of the school year and adds a teacher workday at the end of the school year to satisfy grading and planning requirements.
Several board members said they believed the committee would present multiple draft calendars and that those who had introduced ideas such as a staggered or multi-year calendar did not see their concepts reflected in the single draft. One board member said the committee discussions had been “surprisingly contentious” and that the presented draft “does not accurately reflect what I took away from the discussions.” Another board member asked staff to return the calendar to the committee with explicit direction to produce additional drafts that more clearly reflect alternatives, including staggered starts for transition grades and options for spring-break timing.
Staff said they would seek additional legal and regulatory clarification from the state on whether staggered starts or other variations require waivers, and that the calendar will return to the board as a second reader after committee revisions. The board asked staff to provide a one-page summary that lists days per quarter, instructional days, professional development days and half days to make comparisons easier for the next review.
