"Thinking outside the box" is one of those bits of management jargon that has become so cliched that it is hard to take seriously.

But in floating the idea of changing the school year to a "year-round" school, that is exactly what the Ministry of Education is doing – and it should be welcomed.

That's not just because the Ministry has traditionally been one of the most bureaucratic and stifling parts of Government, but because fresh ideas of this kind are critical to improving education.

Having said that, the idea that the calendar change will help reduce gang activity is akin to looking at the issue through the end of a telescope.

Any changes to education should only have to pass one test – will this change improve the quality and standard of education? If that's the case, then questions of cost and practicality should be considered.

But gang activity, crime and the like are all caused at least in part by poor education or the failure to engage students in their schoolwork. So getting education right should help to solve other social problems too.

With regard to the school calendar, it would appear there was a concern that too long a school year could burnout children. As an aside, the belief that the long summer holiday for schools largely came about because children were needed to help with harvests seems to be untrue.

There is a risk that teachers and children will become exhausted in a different system, such as the nine weeks in-two weeks out schedule floated by Education Minister Elvin James.

And it must also be said that good teachers – and the emphasis on good is deliberate – work extremely hard in term time, including nights and weekends. Nor do people who have not been teachers always appreciate how physically and emotionally draining it is to stand in front of a class for five or six hours a day, as many classroom teachers do. When the summer break comes, good teachers need it. And it is also the time when they can take time to do extra training or improve their credentials.

The Ministry is right to say that it is now looking at the evidence from other school systems which operate with different calendars. Before any decision is made, an empirical study of what works and what does not should be carried out.

A similar study should be undertaken of the school day, as Shadow Minister Grant Gibbons has suggested. The practice of starting the school day at 8.30 a.m. and finishing at 3 or 3.30 p.m. is as outmoded as the school year tradition, and it causes huge problems for working parents, and forces children to spend time either in after school programmes, at home alone or on the streets.

If the school day was extended to eight hours, and time for homework, clubs, sports and extra learning was included, it is possible that everyone would benefit.

On the other hand, it would come at a cost because it is likely teachers would have to be paid more and they may well get burned out.

But it is an idea worth considering, and the Ministry would do well to study it.

For all of that, a final cautionary note is essential. What studies have consistently shown is that the single most important predictor of educational success is the quality of teaching.

Having teachers work longer days or different school years will make no difference at all if they are poor teachers to begin with.

Finding, hiring and encouraging good teachers to excel, while holding poor teachers accountable is still the best way to improve the quality of education.