This month, leaders of the St. Cloud and Sauk Rapids-Rice school districts made a new policy about what happens when dangerous weather keeps students out of class.

Their decisions, which call for students to have e-learning days after three full snow days in an academic year, are intended to circumvent the need to extend the school year past the planned spring closing date.

Both St. Cloud and Sauk Rapids-Rice administrators made the decision in accordance with state law, which allows up to five e-learning days in an academic year provided school districts make a plan for them before school opens in the fall. They have also said they will comply with a state law that will accommodate students who lack internet access.

Sartell-St. Stephen is holding out for now, however. Superintendent Jeff Schweibert told the Times that while district leaders believe e-learning could work well for older students, the Sartell district wants to be sure it would be effective for younger students before implementing such a plan.

Some parents and taxpayers have expressed skepticism of the plan on similar grounds, wondering how effective e-learning days will be. Others are concerned that kids who can’t go online at home will have an experience different than their peers with Wi-Fi.

Members of the Times Editorial Board know that businesses across the globe, including ours, are using similar tools to connect with peers daily, have meetings and complete tasks efficiently regardless of distance. That experience leads us to believe that, executed well, e-learning can be effective. As a practical matter, we’re on board.

Philosophically, however, we think the cultural resistance to making up snow days in the spring begs a larger debate about Minnesota’s in-school time.

We believe there isn’t enough of it. And we believe the statistics bear that out.

We call on Minnesota lawmakers to consider raising Minnesota’s 165 required instruction days — in the bottom five of the nation — to 180 days. And we call on parents and educators to support that improvement.

We know that suggesting such a radical thing is not without risk — akin to suggesting “Duck, Duck, Grey Duck” is incorrect, only with far higher and weightier stakes.

We know that we Minnesotans have built an entire culture around a public school year that starts after Labor Day and ends before June gets rolling. Our State Fair, our Prep Bowl and our cabin culture are all tied to that academic year. Parts of our economy prioritize teen labor throughout those long summers to keep resorts and farms running. And we know that in 2012, parent opposition to a proposal to shorten spring break threw the Sartell-St. Stephen board and leadership into chaos.

But we also know that Minnesota has a high school graduation rate 83% in 2016-2017 — that ties it for 33rd in the nation according to data from the National Center for Education Statistics.

Thirty-third place. Two percentage points behind the national average.

But what about Minnesota’s best-in-class ACT scores? Absolutely brag-worthy, yes. Of the 20 states where nearly all graduates take the test, Minnesota consistently comes out at or near the top.

But here’s the fine print: Of those 20 states, 16 have higher graduation rates than Minnesota. So while the Minnesota kids who make it through to graduation are in fact highly successful, a larger percentage of our kids never make it to that test compared to the competition.

Is tied for 33rd place — with Mississippi, California, Hawaii and Oklahoma — somewhere Minnesota wants to be?

More days on the school calendar is not the whole answer, but it should be part of the discussion. Excellent public education is another of Minnesota’s beloved cultural traditions, after all.

— St. Cloud Times, Nov. 15