In contrast to other European countries the implementation of all-day schools is one of the core issues of the current and future school improvement debate in Germany and in Switzerland (Holtappels et al. 2009; Schüpbach & Herzog, 2009). The aim of the future «all-day school» is the linkage between school lessons and activities out of the classroom including lunch. The so-called extended education ties extracurricular activities, school lessons and lunch into an educational concept that offers carefully considered and genuinely comprehensive education throughout a child’s day at school.

Extended education is often seen as a great solution as it provides a stimulating learning and socialization environment, as well as allows parents to manage their family and professional lives with somewhat less stress (Schüpbach 2009). The effectiveness of extended education was shown clearly in the first two longitudinal studies in German speaking countries – Switzerland and Germany – in the StEG study (Fischer, Kuhn & Klieme 2009) and the EduCare study (Schüpbach 2010). These studies showed that positive impacts on the individual academic achievement and socio-emotional development due to regular participation in highly qualitative extracurricular activities occurred (Fischer et al. 2009; Steiner & Fischer, 2011).

In Germany in particular the Federal Government has supported the regions in their development and expansion of all-day schooling through the investment programme "The Future of Education and Care" (IZBB) from 2003 to 2009. Among other things, the question of quality is one of the main focuses of the debate among multiprofessional educators. For this reason some universities in Germany developed quality models for extended education which are widely recognized (Strätz et al 2008, Nordt 2009; Tietze et al 2003, Tietze et al 2005).

In Switzerland, however, in terms of quality in extended education there is currently no generally accepted model. Meanwhile schools in bigger cities struggle with an increased demand for extended education without having additional resources. This leads to a lack of quality in their extracurricular activities.

And because there are limits in copying the German quality models a working group at the Zurich University of Teacher Education is working on the question of quality in extended education. The aim is to develop a quality instrument which can be used by schools and local school boards to change from a traditional to an all-day school with extended education.

The creation of a quality instrument aims to formulate standards and criteria. This allows the schools to initiate an educational change process. At the same time a debate about quality in extended education is launched (see Strätz et al 2008, p 15).

The Zurich model of extended education is based on different quality management instruments. Traditionally quality management instruments define four main areas: orientation, structure, process and outcome. The Zurich model instead sets a hierarchical structure and focuses primarily on the area of «orientation». The area of orientation  always examines the pedagogical aim of extended education: what do we want to reach by educating children during the whole day?

This emphasis on pedagogical orientation helps the school staff to develop a common understanding of extended education. At the same time, this orientation is the main quality area for the Zurich model and the guideline for all the other areas. Structures, processes and outcomes all depends on the pedagogical aims.

With such an understanding of quality in extended education the Zurich model invites discussion of new perspectives of extended education and offers future school improvement activities in Switzerland.

Andresen Sabine & Hurrelmann Klaus (2010). Kindheit. Weinheim & Basel: Beltz Brägger Gerold, Posse Norbert (2007). Instrumente für die Qualitätsentwicklung und Evaluation in Schulen IQES. Bern: h.e.p. Bruggmann Guido (2012). Qualitätskonzept: Für die Entwicklung und Sicherung der Qualität in den Volksschulen der Stadt Zürich (QEQS). Schul- und Sportdepartement der Stadt Zürich Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (2013). Bildung für mehr! Ganztagesschule der Vielfalt. Zugriff unter http://www.bmbf.de/de/1125.php [31.01.2013] Fischer, Natalie; Kuhn, Hans-Peter; Klieme, Eckhard: Was kann die Ganztagsschule leisten? In: Zeitschrift für Pädagogik. Beih., (2009) 54 , S. 143-167 Holtappels, H. G.; Kamski, I.; Schnetzer, Th. (2009): Qualitätsrahmen für Ganztagsschulen, in: Kamski, I.; Holtappels, H. G.; Schnetzer, Th. (Hrsg.): Qualität von Ganztagsschule, Konzepte und Orientierungen für die Praxis (S. 61 – 88). Münster u.a.: Waxmann. Schüpbach, Marianne; Herzog, Walter (Eds.) (2009). Pädagogische Ansprüche an Tagesschulen. Bern: Haupt. Schüpbach, M. (2009). Tagesschulen in der Schweiz – eine mögliche Weiterentwicklung. In Schüpbach, M.; Herzog, W. (Hrsg.), Pädagogische Ansprüche an Tagesschulen (p. 207-229). Bern: Haupt. Landwehr Norbert, Steiner Peter (2010). Q2E. FHNW, Pädagogische Hochschule Nordwestschweiz Krappmann Lothar & Hans Oswald (1995). Alltag der Schulkinder. Weinheim/ München: Juventa Kray Jutta & Schaefer Sabine (2012). Mittlere und späte Kindheit (6 – 11 Jahre). In Wolfgang Schneider & Ulman Lindenberger (Hrsg.), Entwicklungspsychologie, Weinheim Basel: Beltz, S. 211 – 233 Nordt, Gabriele (2009). Methodenkoffer zur Qualitätsentwicklung in Tageseinrichtungen für Schul- und Vorschulkinder. Cornelsen: Scriptor Oerter Rolf (2008). Kindheit. In Rolf Oerter & Leo Montada (Hrsg.), Entwicklungspsychologie. Weinheim & Basel: Beltz, S. 225 – 270 Schweizerischer Verband für schulische Tagesbetreuung (2010). Qualitätsrahmen für die schulische Tagesbetreuung. Zürich: Eigenverlag Schüpbach, M. (2010). Ganztägige Bildung und Betreuung im Primarschulalter. Qualität und Wirksamkeit verschiedener Schulformen im Vergleich. Wiesbaden: VS. Steiner, Christine; Fischer, Natalie: Wer nutzt Ganztagsangebote und warum? In: Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft. Sonderh., 14 (2011) Suppl. 3 , 185-203 Strätz Rainer, Hermes Claudia, Fuchs Ragnhild, Kleinen Karin, Nordt Gabriele & Wiedemann Petra (2008). Qualität für Schulkinder in Tageseinrichtungen und Offenen Ganztagesgrundschulen (QUAST) – ein nationaler Kriterienkatalog Mannheim: Cornelsen Tietze Wolfgang, Viernickel Susanne, Dittrich, Irene, Grenner Katja, Groot-Wilken Bernd, Sommfeld Verena & Hanisch Andrea (Hrsg.) (2003). Pädagogische Qualität in Tageseinrichtungen für Kinder. Nationaler Kriterienkatalog, Cornelsen, Scriptor Tietze Wolfgang; Rossbach Hans-Günther, Stendel Martina, Wellner Beate (2005). Hort- und Ganztagsangebote Skala (HUGS). Feststellung und Unterstützung