Cutting Summer Break NOOOOOOO

[thrillme]

:(I'm depressed. This latest news article about wanting to cut summer break. If anything I've been wanting it extended till after labor day.

There's just not enough time for kids to be kids anymore. I guess I'm going to have to write my congressman. I guess I'm just posting because I feel like I've lost so much control over what I want for my son and I'm really :(

I just can't imagine 307 million people trying to fit summer vacation into only 3-4 weeks what's hard enough to do in 2 1/2 months. Can you imagine how packed Disney will be in June?

************************************************** *

WASHINGTON - Students beware: The summer vacation you just enjoyed could be sharply curtailed if President Barack Obama gets his way.

Obama says American kids spend too little time in school, putting them at a disadvantage with other students around the globe.

"Now, I know longer school days and school years are not wildly popular ideas," the president said earlier this year. "Not with Malia and Sasha, not in my family, and probably not in yours. But the challenges of a new century demand more time in the classroom."

[Jeri]

I saw this too this morning. I don't like it either. I know for my kids a longer school day would not be good and I do not want our summers taken away. Here in Minnesota our summers are short enough as it is weather wise.

I get mad too though when I hear about schools telling parents they can't take their kids out for things either. I always say they are MY kids and shouldn't I get a say in what is best for them.

Oh well that is a disscusion for another day. I just don't like the government telling me how I should raise MY kids.

Sorry I will stop now:soapbox:

[DVC2004]

I don't like this either.

My older son goes to a special school for his needs and goes year round. However, the school has always been very accomodating when we take him out to travel at various times of year. In the summer he only goes half days as well- but the reason he goes all year is for retention of what he was taught as well as ongoing therapy.

As a mandatory thing across the country for kids who don't have special needs? Uh, no.

[vicster]

It might not be as bad as you think. Approximately 60% of Chicago schools go year round. They go for 9 weeks and have 2 weeks off throughout the school year with the exception of summer where they have 5 weeks off. There's plenty of time for vacations throughout the year. My friend is off this week and next week (a teacher in Chicago). Believe me, this would be a better time to go to Disney than July. Kids lose too much during the summer and too much time is wasted at the beginning of each school year reviewing. The education in this country lags way behind other countries.

[Ian]

The education in this country lags way behind other countries.While that may be true, does it really have anything to do with the amount of time our kids spend in the classroom? Not to mention the amount of time they devote to homework!

I'd love to see a comparison between how much time American kids are in school vs. how much time kids from school systems that have measured superior are in school.

There are tons of reasons why American kids are at a disadvantage educationally, but I'm not sure lack of time working on schoolwork is part of it.

[vicster]

There are tons of reasons why American kids are at a disadvantage educationally, but I'm not sure lack of time working on schoolwork is part of it.

Just a note - the Chicago kids on year round school attend the same number of school days as everyone else.

[Simba's Mom]

I saw Obama's ideas, and as a former teacher, whether I personally agree or not, I think the teachers' unions will really fight his idea! Either that or they'll demand big increases in salary!

[bucky at disney]

And just where are they going to come up with the money to pay for this? The states are already cutting the financing for schools. Most districts are not getting by now...this just frustrates me!

[vicster]

And just where are they going to come up with the money to pay for this? The states are already cutting the financing for schools. Most districts are not getting by now...this just frustrates me!

From CHINA!!!

[Mickey'sGirl]

I can't see how it would cost any more money... aren't teacher's salarys based on 12 months? They are here in Ontario, but they are paid out over 10 months. We have several year round schools in our region, and the idea of several shorter breaks through the year is far more appealing to us than the long summer break. Unfortunately, the programs our children need are only available during the mainstream program. My brother's children in England go to school in a "year roundish" schedule too. It means opportunity for travel in off times as well.

I agree with the whole idea. If the information is kept fresh in the child's mind, then less time will be needed to review, remind and reteach.

[MNNHFLTX]

I'm not opposed to year-round school or a longer school-year. In fact, in the past I have had the opposite problem with our current school district. Last year between Hurricane Ike and a storm that caused water damage to the school, the kids in my son's high school missed 14 days! They utilized one weather make-up day in January, otherwise applied for and received a waiver for the rest. This was a big loss of classroom time and I think potentially put these kids at a disadvantage.

It's true that our average school year (and school day) in the U.S. is much shorter than most other comparable countries. I do believe it's true that the amount of time kids spend studying outside the classroom is very important. But it's kind of hard to ignore the fact that kids from countries with longer school years outscore U.S. kids pretty much across the board. More days = more homework? Maybe. But whatever it is, the correlation exists.

The matter of summer vacations aside, I would be interested to hear what teachers think the value (or not) of a longer school year and/or year-round school would be for students. Do they have trouble completing the curriculum in the amount of time they have now?

[Melanie]

I'd love to see a comparison between how much time American kids are in school vs. how much time kids from school systems that have measured superior are in school.

I know in Japan the kids go 6 days/week. They get a 6 week summer break, and a two week break in both winter and spring. I could be wrong, but I would rank the Japanese education superior to ours.

Oh, and I should add that I wouldn't be against this. Of course, my oldest son leaves the house now at 8:25am and doesn't get home until 4:45pm. How much longer can the day get?

[Mickey'sGirl]

I know in Japan the kids go 6 days/week. They get a 6 week summer break, and a two week break in both winter and spring. I could be wrong, but I would rank the Japanese education superior to ours.
I believe it's South Korea and Japan at the top in maths and sciences. Finland, Canada and New Zealand rank highest in reading literacy, and near the top for science and maths.

[Lizzy]

I would be all for more days in school each year if that would allow for less homework time.

As a working single parent, while I do enjoy helping my son with his projects for school, I get very little time to spend quality time with him. We don't get home till after 6:30. He then has to sit down and do his homework and usually needs help with it. Then I have to go over it and usually he will have one or two things to fix, then I have to sign his planning books to say that I checked (I love that his teachers do this, it keeps me and my son on track with his homework) but by the time all this is over with, he usually only has an hour and a half left before bedtime. In which he has to take his shower, eat dinner and his daily chores. That leaves me less than an hour a day to just "hang out" or do something fun with my son. I don't want to spend every night doing homework when I could find more enriching things for he and I to do together.


Side note though, shortening the summer break would totally mess with my divorce paperwork and parenting plan! :-o

[Melanie]

I believe it's South Korea and Japan at the top in maths and sciences. Finland, Canada and New Zealand rank highest in reading literacy, and near the top for science and maths.

So Jenn, what is Canada's school year/day like?

[Ian]

I can't see how it would cost any more money... aren't teacher's salarys based on 12 months?They may be paid out overr 12 months, but they're not paid to work 12 months.


But it's kind of hard to ignore the fact that kids from countries with longer school years outscore U.S. kids pretty much across the board. More days = more homework? Maybe. But whatever it is, the correlation exists.Not necessarily. There could be other factors un-related to length of time spent in school that influence the success of school systems in other countries.

It could be that, since Asian cultures put a high premium on education in the home, that their children are just primed more and supported more to succeed in school. The length of their school year/days could be irrelevant.

This just seems knee jerk to me. I highly doubt length of time spent in the classroom really has any solid correlation to success.

Personally, I think the failures of the U.S. education system have a lot more do with the parents and certain systemic problems with the way our schools are structured than with how much time kids are spending in the classroom.

In fact, I'll go as far to say that I find it highly unlikely that's got any real bearing on kids' success or failure. Why? Because education is a highly complex issue and simplistic solutions like "Spend more time in the classroom" are rarely adequate solutions to complex problems. If that was the case, then we could just send kids to school 12 hours a day every day, 365 days a year and they'd all be brilliant.

Right?

[Mickey'sGirl]

I agree with Ian that the importance a family or society puts on education likely plays a HUGE role in a child's success.

Melanie, there are 194 instructional day (basically September to June with 2 weeks at Christmas, and a week in March). School days are 7 hours long, with an hour for lunch/breaks. School starts in "Junior" Kindergarten (age 4), and homework starts at that time too. Nothing taxing, but simple worksheets (letters, numbers, rhyming etc) are sent home daily in Kindergarten. Homework for the higher grades (I only have knowledge up to Grade 6 so far) tends to be unfinished seatwork and projects. The children also have daily phys ed, two periods of music, and two periods of art per week.

There are also two government paid school systems in Canada (as set out by the British North America Act), one is completely secular, and the other involves the Roman Catholic doctrines. There's a bit of competition between the two systems, so I think that eggs on success. Honestly. We also perform standardized testing in Grades 3, 6 and 9.

Also, it's cold for a very long time during the school year. What else are kids gonna do but read? :D

[MNNHFLTX]

Because education is a highly complex issue and simplistic solutions like "Spend more time in the classroom" are rarely adequate solutions to complex problems. If that was the case, then we could just send kids to school 12 hours a day every day, 365 days a year and they'd all be brilliant.

Right?Um, yeah--I kind of think they would be. ;) That's probably closer to the amount of time kids in Japan spend on education, between classroom time and homework.

I do agree that a lot depends on parental involvement, but there again, the length of time kids that are at risk (i.e.--from homes where there is little parental participation in the education of their children) are out of school for any extended length of time, the greater it can affect their overall learning. If it affects their ability to succeed in school, it might also make these kids more likely to drop out. A high drop-out rate is another reason that the schools in the U.S. are sometimes regarded as inferior.

[MNNHFLTX]

Also, it's cold for a very long time during the school year. What else are kids gonna do but read? :DYou don't have video games up there? I think I want to send my son off to school in Canada! ;)

[Lakin]

Did you also hear that they want to make our school days longer?

[meldan98]

If my dd could get art taught by an actual teacher instead of a parent volunteer, have PE more than one time a week, and have music, and a foreign language taught during the week, then I'd be all for a longer day. I wouldn't even mind having fewer weeks of summer vacation, if it would mean that my dd was getting a better education. Right now, she is only attending half day for Kindergarten and IMHO should be attending full day. I'm one of those involved, active parents, and she is bored silly, but because of the odd age requirements is almost 6 and in class with kids that are 4. I also feel that we need to raise the bar as far as what we should expect our kids to accomplish. I get letting kids be kids, but what about letting them be smart well rounded kids too!

[thrillme]

Yep...longer days in addition to more school. This isn't "year round school" that's being talked about. Year round school still only goes "x" amount of days a year...they still get week to two week vacations throughout the year that make up the single chunk of summer vacation. That time will be devoted to school. Year round schooling has it's good parts and bad parts. I guess the good is being able to get time outside of the normal summertime for vacations/outings...the bad...kills teens from being able to hold summer jobs and devote the fall to school.

Students that perhaps need additional assistance will end up being more limited. Usually in the summer they have an opportunity to have smaller classes and more devoted attention in a quiter environment. Well that time will be gone. Teens wanting to earn some money ...forget it...after school jobs too because they'll pretty much be going till dinner time.

Parents and families are a MAJOR part of what makes a child successful. Schools do not do that alone. I guess I don't want the school raising my child. I don't need my child becoming some mindless drone to the system. My views and values deserve time too.

I also don't think teachers are going to be to pleased working more hours with less time off.

[PirateLover]

As a teacher, I'm totally with Ian and the OP on this one. In fact, my written essay for my Praxis I exam was on this very issue. I argued a few main points. First I would ask you if you've ever had to teach a classroom of 30+ Children in 90+ weather. Many schools in our country do not have air conditioning (mine included). Those last days before vacation and the first days back are pretty much lost because the kids are dead. Last week we had a spike in humidity and some of my 12 year old boys were dripping in sweat! The cost of installing and running air conditioning is very high and simply not feasible for many schools.

Another point is that summer vacation to me is something that is quintessentially American. Yes learning is important but schools should always have summer assignments anyway to keep the most important skills fresh (more than just summer reading). The kids need some time to be kids and re-coup, go to summer camp, go to the beach, go on vacation, etc. AND as a teacher, we need that time as much as the kids! I spent the whole summer reflecting on my lessons, making them better, shopping for supplies, etc.
As to extending the school day- Again, I ask you if you've taught kids in the morning or afternoon. The first and last classes are typically the worst as the kids are just waking up, and then by 2 they are counting down the minutes until dismissal. My high school actually rotated the order of our classes each day to combat this, and it worked pretty well. There are many things broken with our education in this country, but I'm not so sure the school schedule is one of them.

[Mammabruski]

As a high school math teacher (I teacher ALL the math classes 9-12 in a small high school), I can say without a doubt, that a longer day and more days would make a difference in the education of American children. Period. Yes there are other factors that contribute to a child's education (social-economic status, parental involvement, lack of funding, I can go on and on) but with more time, my 9th graders might actually be able to add, subtract, multiply and divide when they get to me. This is a good idea from an educational standpoint - not considering things like vacations and kids being kids (which is important). If we want to improve education in America, this is one step in the right direction.

[Melanie]

As a high school math teacher (I teacher ALL the math classes 9-12 in a small high school), I can say without a doubt, that a longer day and more days would make a difference in the education of American children. Period. Yes there are other factors that contribute to a child's education (social-economic status, parental involvement, lack of funding, I can go on and on) but with more time, my 9th graders might actually be able to add, subtract, multiply and divide when they get to me. This is a good idea from an educational standpoint - not considering things like vacations and kids being kids (which is important). If we want to improve education in America, this is one step in the right direction.

:thumbsup:

And let's throw mandatory school uniforms in there as well! :D

[Hammer]

As a high school math teacher (I teacher ALL the math classes 9-12 in a small high school), I can say without a doubt, that a longer day and more days would make a difference in the education of American children. Period. Yes there are other factors that contribute to a child's education (social-economic status, parental involvement, lack of funding, I can go on and on) but with more time, my 9th graders might actually be able to add, subtract, multiply and divide when they get to me. This is a good idea from an educational standpoint - not considering things like vacations and kids being kids (which is important). If we want to improve education in America, this is one step in the right direction.


:thumbsup:

And let's throw mandatory school uniforms in there as well! :D

:ditto:

I absolutely think that we as a nation need to beef up our children's classroom education and this would be a good start.

[magicofdisney]

Generally speaking, the first 6 weeks and last 4 weeks of school are typically review. There are approximately 36 weeks in a school year. Just think of the educational advantage our kids would have using those 10 weeks for learning instead of reviewing. Year round schooling helps to accomplish this.

Although we are a homeschooling family, I like this idea. My kids want to be "off" when public school is "off" and I prefer the idea of schooling continually.

[Georgesgirl1]

As a teacher I hate this idea and will be writing the president and my elected officials regarding it. First, kids are already overscheduled with no time to "just be kids" and this would only add to the problem. Second, I find it hard enough to make time with DS with my current hours and commitments at school. Third, you better believe that if they increase my hours and days worked I am going to be expecting a large salary increase which wouldn't be in the budgets of any local school system in my area. Fourth, the federal government doesn't even have the right to make these types of decisions if they would actually read and follow the constitution (another topic entirely).

Yes, there are problems with our current education system, but throwing more days into the school year would not solve these problems.

[MNNHFLTX]

First of all, I want to acknowledge what Maryanne mentioned as a potential problem with year-round school or longer school years--the cost of air-conditioning schools. That certainly would be a budget consideration.


First, kids are already overscheduled with no time to "just be kids" and this would only add to the problem.
Studies show that American kids, on average, spend about 30 minutes on homework after school. As far as the rest of their afternoon and evening, I think a fair amount probably spend it doing fairly mindless things--watching TV, playing video games, text-messaging each other, etc. And during the summer months it seems to be much of the same. I know a lot of kids out there are involved in activities outside of school--sports, dance classes and the like. But there are very few kids that I know that seem overscheduled to me, even with the extra activities. But maybe that's just my experience.

I'm with those who say that the educational bar in our country could be raised a little higher and adding on a limited number of extra classroom days might be a start.

[Suz36]

I will be home schooling my kids if this goes through! Our summers are already too short, and I really cherish that time with them. And they need that break! Oh, I could go on and on about this one!

[Lakin]

I say, to this idea, NO! I'm an 8th grader that works my hardest in school, does all of my assignments, and does 100% into everything I do. This means, with my schoolwork, I'm busy, busy, busy. All 9 periods of the day, 7 hours, thinking about something. Subject, after subject, after subject. It's difficult work for us kids, and frankly, when I come home from school, I'm pooped. I want to rest. But, I can't. Why? Because I have to do about 40 Advanced Math problems, 20 questions for current (Advanced) English novels, along with a whole entire portfolio for math, and having to study for the next extremely difficult Social Studies test. So, what's the extra time in school going to do me? Nothing. It not like they're going to give us the time to study or do homework or anything. Nope. They're just going to use it to pack even more of a load on us. For us kids that work hard in school, this extra time is going to do nothing but give us less time to go home and do our 'geek' homework. Not to mention when I come home I don't have any time to do anything else - well, unless I come onto the computer at 9:00, like I am right now. I manage to somehow fit softball into my schedule, too.

Now, for the opposing point of view, what is this going to do for the people that slack off in school? Nothing. It just gives them more time in school to talk, misbehave, and act childish. It gives them more assignments to not do, and just more time to bug their teachers. As soon as the slackers hear about having longer school days, it's just going to encourage them to skip!

Sorry to speak so strongly on this, but I really can't help it.

[magicofdisney]

Maybe I missed this somewhere, but it is my understanding that year round schooling DOES NOT mean more schooling. The amount of time in school is the same, just without the long summer break.

Essentially, less reviewing is necessary and more learning is possible because kids are continually exposed to teaching. So the number of weeks in school (approximately 36) would not change, they would just be spread out more.

There seem to be a lot of unfounded fears because this doesn't require the student to attend school more often or take on a heavier work load.

[PirateLover]

Many schools are instituting block scheduling, or time cycles. In block scheduling classes are similar to college- Instead of 45 mins every day, you'd have close to two hours every other day. This gives the teacher more time to really get in depth into topics and touch base with each learner. Time cycles are similar... you have all of your classes each day, but one class is longer. Which one it is will switch each day. This is one way to get more learning in within typical school times.

MagicofDisney, I have to say, both as a student and as a teacher, I have never spent 6 weeks reviewing in the beginning of the year or 4 weeks reviewing at the end.
Typically your first week is half a week for organizational stuff, laying out the course, setting standards. You spend the first full week reviewing, quiz or test on it if you like, and then move on to that year's curriculum in the 2nd full week. At the end of the year, exams are the final week and we review the week before.

*This is another place where schools and teachers can make sure students retain information. Instead of testing on each individual unit and then having to cram for finals, tests should be cumulative, throwing in questions from previous topics as well. "Use it or lose it."

[PirateLover]

Maybe I missed this somewhere, but it is my understanding that year round schooling DOES NOT mean more schooling. The amount of time in school is the same, just without the long summer break.
.

The article that the OP is talking about had this quote: "Now, I know longer school days and school years are not wildly popular ideas"

Year round schooling was brought up by other posters as an example of how some areas do it. This is not necessarily what is being proposed.

[magicofdisney]

Year round schooling was brought up by other posters as an example of how some areas do it. This is not necessarily what is being proposed.
Gotcha. I guess I jumped the gun with solutions on hand. I shouldn't have assumed, ya know? :)

[magicofdisney]

MagicofDisney, I have to say, both as a student and as a teacher, I have never spent 6 weeks reviewing in the beginning of the year or 4 weeks reviewing at the end.
Typically your first week is half a week for organizational stuff, laying out the course, setting standards. You spend the first full week reviewing, quiz or test on it if you like, and then move on to that year's curriculum in the 2nd full week. At the end of the year, exams are the final week and we review the week before.
This has been our experience so far. I apologize for generalizing this information. At times it's seemed so wasteful to me and at others times necessary because of the summer break.

This review I'm speaking of is in core classes such as arithmetic and language.

[green ranger]

There seem to be a lot of unfounded fears because this doesn't require the student to attend school more often or take on a heavier work load.

There would be more days added onto the school year.

As a teacher, I could tell you that a longer school year would NOT make a difference. In my teachings, I have found that students that made the greatest strides throughout the school year were those who had strong parental involvement. I keep hearing about our schools compared to other countries, but I was just wondering if anyone looked at how much the parents are available and involved in the other countries. Maybe that's the difference.

[magicofdisney]

As a teacher, I could tell you that a longer school year would NOT make a difference. In my teachings, I have found that students that made the greatest strides throughout the school year were those who had strong parental involvement. I keep hearing about our schools compared to other countries, but I was just wondering if anyone looked at how much the parents are available and involved in the other countries. Maybe that's the difference.
Is this your opinion, or have you worked both scenarios to know for a fact? I'm not trying to be snarky, I truly want to know.

I'm not contradicting your assertion that parental involvement is key. I wholeheartedly agree.

BTW, most of what I've posted is opinion because I haven't tried out the year round option but I'd be willing to give it a shot.

[Melanie]

I keep hearing about our schools compared to other countries, but I was just wondering if anyone looked at how much the parents are available and involved in the other countries. Maybe that's the difference.

I think it's a combination of parent involvement and school schedule.

Sadly though, I believe parental involvement is too far gone in so many instances in our society (as compared to some other countries).

[IloveDisney71]

I don't think this will happen any time soon. My school district and state are talking about cutting the school days because we don't have any money. They are cutting teachers, custodians, bus drivers, aides, cafeteria workers, and office staff left and right. We have no funding for school supplies or new text books due to the economy. There is no way we can extend our school hours or year in the economic crisis my state and county are facing.

[JPL]

Also remember we are the only country that tests and educates every child through high school. Other countries use a more funneled approach. So when they are comparing these results they are looking at other countires honor students with all of student averaged together.

As for a longer school day and year that' will not help. By June I can see it with both students and teachers burn out starts to set in. For those of you have never been in a classroom it's easy to say increase hours but it's extremely draining on teachers and students a like. I think if you want to fix education parents need to be held more accountable and become more involved in the process.

[Jeri]

Many schools are instituting block scheduling, or time cycles. In block scheduling classes are similar to college- Instead of 45 mins every day, you'd have close to two hours every other day. This gives the teacher more time to really get in depth into topics and touch base with each learner. Time cycles are similar... you have all of your classes each day, but one class is longer. Which one it is will switch each day. This is one way to get more learning in within typical school times. ."

This is what my sons middle school has started doing this year. The kids like it alot. They have the normal 7 classes Mon, Tues, Friday and Wed, Thurs the schedule is different with longer classes depending on the day. They only have 3 to 4 classes on those 2 days.
As far as homework goes someone said their kids only have 40 minutes , well I wish my 7th grader only had 40 minutes. He has atleast 1hour and sometimes up to 2 hours a night. Also they jumpped right in to working on the 1st day back and had homework the 1st night. I don't think he could handle more hours in the day. He goes from 7:30 to 2:20 and that is long enough. I will point out that he has been a straight A student every year too.
I think longer days, and/or taking away the summer vacation would burn him out. And I believe would only cause those students who are bearly keeping up or have not a lot of interest to drop out. I think you would see more kids dropping out due to being burned out by such schedules.

[green ranger]

Is this your opinion, or have you worked both scenarios to know for a fact? I'm not trying to be snarky, I truly want to know.

I'm not contradicting your assertion that parental involvement is key. I wholeheartedly agree.



I have not worked both scenarios. I was just talking about my own personal teaching experiences based on 180 days of school. When I heard about this today, I started thinking of students that I had throughout the years that entered my classroom at a low academic level. I had an open door policy where the communication between myself and parents was continually ongoing, but the parents had to be willing to do their part. The students of those parents that jumped on board made huge improvements throughout the school year, compared to those students whose parents didn't become as involved for whatever reason. In my classes, I could tell which students had parents involved in their education and which ones did not. I just don't believe adding another 20 days or so onto the school year is going to make brighter students. It's much more than just the amount of school days. It's outside of the school day that maybe we should be looking at as a society. So I guess my reply is based on experience and opinion.

[thrillme]

I say, to this idea, NO! I'm an 8th grader that works my hardest in school, does all of my assignments, and does 100% into everything I do. ........
Sorry to speak so strongly on this, but I really can't help it.

Please keep "speaking strongly"...We need 8th graders like you...Maybe if all of you and your friends speak up...maybe they'll hear you.

Mor skoolin' doesn't make smarter childrens...AMBITION does!

[sportsguy2315]

As a college student, to me this is another case of our culture's obsession of "Keeping up With the Jones'" in terms of test scores. Sure, other countries such as Japan may have more intense school schedules, but what is best for some may not be best for all.

I work at a science summer day camp and for the past couple years we've had kids come the week after school ended. To say they were zoo animals is a pretty fair comparison. Kids today I find have less of an attention span, and pushing them to their ultimate limits in terms of time in the classroom will cause more problems than it solves. What I do believe will solve the problem is a system they use in most parts of Europe where they figure out if you're ready for college/trade school in 8th grade in a series of tests similar to our ACT/SAT; along with a 1 or 2 year service requirement either helping out the community or country on some level.

[Mickey'sGirl]

*This is another place where schools and teachers can make sure students retain information. Instead of testing on each individual unit and then having to cram for finals, tests should be cumulative, throwing in questions from previous topics as well. "Use it or lose it."I completely agree with you.

I keep hearing about our schools compared to other countries, but I was just wondering if anyone looked at how much the parents are available and involved in the other countries. Maybe that's the difference.I don't know. Top performers on a general level are Canada, Finland and New Zealand. Societies very similar to the US. From a personal standpoint, I work full time and commute. My day starts at 5:20am, and I do not get home until dinner time. We have a lot of family stuff to squeeze into those precious two hours each night. We do what we have to do (and have the bags under our eyes to show for it! ;) )

Also remember we are the only country that tests and educates every child through high school.I disagree. My country educates all the way through to high school too, and it is my understanding that these tests are based on "standardized" tests for all 15 year olds.

The students of those parents that jumped on board made huge improvements throughout the school year, compared to those students whose parents didn't become as involved for whatever reason. In my classes, I could tell which students had parents involved in their education and which ones did not. I just don't believe adding another 20 days or so onto the school year is going to make brighter students. I think you have a very valid point ... but perhaps that "extra" time in the classroom will provide the adult involvement the child is missing at home? They say it takes a community to raise a child. (Thanks for doing what you do... Teachers ROCK!)

[Tinkerfreak]

I say, to this idea, NO! I'm an 8th grader that works my hardest in school, does all of my assignments, and does 100% into everything I do. This means, with my schoolwork, I'm busy, busy, busy. All 9 periods of the day, 7 hours, thinking about something. Subject, after subject, after subject. It's difficult work for us kids, and frankly, when I come home from school, I'm pooped. I want to rest. But, I can't. Why? Because I have to do about 40 Advanced Math problems, 20 questions for current (Advanced) English novels, along with a whole entire portfolio for math, and having to study for the next extremely difficult Social Studies test. So, what's the extra time in school going to do me? Nothing. It not like they're going to give us the time to study or do homework or anything. Nope. They're just going to use it to pack even more of a load on us. For us kids that work hard in school, this extra time is going to do nothing but give us less time to go home and do our 'geek' homework. Not to mention when I come home I don't have any time to do anything else - well, unless I come onto the computer at 9:00, like I am right now. I manage to somehow fit softball into my schedule, too.

Now, for the opposing point of view, what is this going to do for the people that slack off in school? Nothing. It just gives them more time in school to talk, misbehave, and act childish. It gives them more assignments to not do, and just more time to bug their teachers. As soon as the slackers hear about having longer school days, it's just going to encourage them to skip!

Sorry to speak so strongly on this, but I really can't help it.

I agree with you. My DD's spend hours a night doing homework and then have to study for tests and squeeze in soccer practices and other after school things. They come home from school at 3:00 and are doing something until 10:00 at night. They do not sit in front of the tv, play video games or play on the computer. They are doing homework, studying and reading. I don't think they could handle much more unless they stopped soccer. I would hate to see this because they need that 2 hour practice a week for the exercise. They need more time to play outside and get exercise not less!

[Ian]

As a high school math teacher (I teacher ALL the math classes 9-12 in a small high school), I can say without a doubt, that a longer day and more days would make a difference in the education of American children. Period.That's a pretty bold statement. What do you base that on? Do you have any facts or statistics to back up what you say or is it just opinion?

If it's just opinion, I'd probably avoid stating it with the " ... period." at the end.


Studies show that American kids, on average, spend about 30 minutes on homework after school.I don't know what schools that study looked at, but in secondary education in our school system our kids have a mandatory 90 minutes of homework a night.

30 minutes?? I've never even heard of students at the secondary level getting such a small amount of homework. Even back in the Stone Age when I went to high school, we had at least an hour of homework a night.


As a teacher, I could tell you that a longer school year would NOT make a difference.Just quoted this as an obvious counterpoint to Mammabruski's post. Seems like even teachers aren't united on this topic.


Also remember we are the only country that tests and educates every child through high school. Other countries use a more funneled approach. So when they are comparing these results they are looking at other countires honor students with all of student averaged together.Right ... very true. We measure and test every student, regardless of their inherent ability. That definitely skews our test results when compared against other nations.

Look, I'm not saying that I know longer school days and years aren't going to help (although I strongly suspect that it is the case). What I'm saying is that this seems like a knee-jerk, overly simplistic solution to a very complex problem that I suspect is being considered just to make it look like we're "doing something."

[Mickey'sGirl]

Right ... very true. We measure and test every student, regardless of their inherent ability. That definitely skews our test results when compared against other nations.
I'm sure we discussed this in the past. All students are included in testing results in Canada. Even my autistic sons. So, your testing results should stand up compared to Canadian testing results.

[JPL]

I disagree. My country educates all the way through to high school too, and it is my understanding that these tests are based on "standardized" tests for all 15 year olds.


Canada does but most European and Asian countries do not. They use a funneled education system and decide who goes beyond a certain point. Overall there are several differences in the way we educate children opposed to other countries some are good and some are not so good. But the main problem I see as a teacher is parental involvement.

[Ian]

I'm sure we discussed this in the past. All students are included in testing results in Canada. Even my autistic sons. So, your testing results should stand up compared to Canadian testing results.I actually don't know where U.S. students stack up against Canadian students ... I've always heard we lagged behind the Asian nations, but I haven't seen comparisons between us and other North American countries.

Although based on my understanding of where the U.S. education system ranks globally, I'd bet we rank unfavorably against Canada, too.

[VWL Mom]

I say, to this idea, NO! I'm an 8th grader that works my hardest in school, does all of my assignments, and does 100% into everything I do. This means, with my schoolwork, I'm busy, busy, busy. All 9 periods of the day, 7 hours, thinking about something. Subject, after subject, after subject. It's difficult work for us kids, and frankly, when I come home from school, I'm pooped. I want to rest. But, I can't. Why? Because I have to do about 40 Advanced Math problems, 20 questions for current (Advanced) English novels, along with a whole entire portfolio for math, and having to study for the next extremely difficult Social Studies test. So, what's the extra time in school going to do me? Nothing. It not like they're going to give us the time to study or do homework or anything. Nope. They're just going to use it to pack even more of a load on us. For us kids that work hard in school, this extra time is going to do nothing but give us less time to go home and do our 'geek' homework. Not to mention when I come home I don't have any time to do anything else - well, unless I come onto the computer at 9:00, like I am right now. I manage to somehow fit softball into my schedule, too.

Now, for the opposing point of view, what is this going to do for the people that slack off in school? Nothing. It just gives them more time in school to talk, misbehave, and act childish. It gives them more assignments to not do, and just more time to bug their teachers. As soon as the slackers hear about having longer school days, it's just going to encourage them to skip!

Sorry to speak so strongly on this, but I really can't help it.

Couldn't have said it better myself, nice job :thumbsup:

After reading these posts it becomes very clear that the educational standards are not equal across the board. IMHO for those that are entering the 9th grade with no math skills or spending 10 weeks reviewing the accountability starts in the individual districts. Let's start using the tax dollars wisely and help out those districts in need of funding so that they can produce well rounded individuals.

Randomly expanding days and school years nationwide isn't going to help ailing districts and IMO seems like a back door approach to tax funded daycare.

Just my :twocents:

[oliver&bianca]

Do I care whether children in Japan are more superior than my child??????? NO I DO NOT!!!

I am like a lot of the other posters in that I do not like the idea of the government having a sense of ownership of my child.

Also, I live in a very rural area and children already have long days due to the bus situation. My son's friend is on the bus for approximately an hour each way (On the bus at 7am and not off until 4:30pm).Add more school time to this plus homework. How is that healthy for a child? Where does family time get put in?

c r a z y !

[Ian]

I am like a lot of the other posters in that I do not like the idea of the government having a sense of ownership of my child.Precisely why I'm fundamentally opposed to government running the school system in the first place.

As parents, we should have choices as to where and how our kids are educated. It shouldn't be this Big Brother approach where it's a "one size fits all" mentality.

If I want my kids to be more well-rounded and have more time to spend with friends and family, that should be my choice. If I want my kids to be hyper-educated, that should also be my choice. It shouldn't be mandated by faceless people with questionable educational credentials.

[Hammer]

Do I care whether children in Japan are more superior than my child??????? NO I DO NOT!!!


People will care when jobs go to people from Japan because a company wants to hire the best trained/education person for the job. It is already happening and will only grow.

[d_m_n_n]

And just where are they going to come up with the money to pay for this? The states are already cutting the financing for schools. Most districts are not getting by now...this just frustrates me!

I think this administration (especially, but let's admit...all government has a habit of spending money it doesn't have) has shown it doesn't matter if we can afford it or not... :thedolls:

[d_m_n_n]

If I want my kids to be more well-rounded and have more time to spend with friends and family, that should be my choice. If I want my kids to be hyper-educated, that should also be my choice. It shouldn't be mandated by faceless people with questionable educational credentials.

DING DING DING!!! I want my children to be more well-rounded, so what do I do? I TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR IT!!! If I want them to learn something more than what they are learning in school...I TEACH IT!

[Ian]

DING DING DING!!! I want my children to be more well-rounded, so what do I do? I TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR IT!!! If I want them to learn something more than what they are learning in school...I TEACH IT!Right or you facilitate them being taught it by someone else.

For example, I think it's ridiculous that school tax dollars are used to teach kids music and art. If my kids want to play a musical instrument or learn to paint, I'll send them to a music teacher or an art school. If they don't, then why should I pay for someone else's kid to learn to play the flute or paint posies???

[Melanie]

People will care when jobs go to people from Japan because a company wants to hire the best trained/education person for the job. It is already happening and will only grow.

Exactly.

[Mammabruski]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mammabruski:
As a high school math teacher (I teacher ALL the math classes 9-12 in a small high school), I can say without a doubt, that a longer day and more days would make a difference in the education of American children. Period.

Posted by Ian:
That's a pretty bold statement. What do you base that on? Do you have any facts or statistics to back up what you say or is it just opinion?

If it's just opinion, I'd probably avoid stating it with the " ... period." at the end.

I have two first hand situations where more time has greatly improved the performance and educational well being of my students. The first school I taught at when I moved to Colorado was on "Academic Alert" this meant they were being watched due to very low test scores, specifically in math and language arts (I know, test scores aren't everything, that's a whole other debate) This school which was grades 8-12 with about 900 students, and was on a block (90 minute class periods) decided to have 8th graders take math and language arts everyday, all year for 90 minutes instead of 90 minutes every other day. So I taught my 8th graders (ranging from remedial to advanced) 90 minutes every day. What progress we made. Not only could we address the holes in their math education, we could, in detail and without being rushed meet the standards set by the state. This extra time was amazing.

The second situation is from my current school (the small high school where I teach all the classes). Again there were some issues in math, again culminating in the 8th grade, so the school district added a second math class that they attended every other day. It once more addressed the holes in their learning and allowed critical topics to be addressed in more detail.

In both situations the improvement in the students was marked. It showed in their scores, in their confidence and in their comprehension of mathematics. It also allowed the students to have almost no homework, as they had extra time in school to perfect their skills. Currently with my 9-12th graders I do give at least 30 minutes of homework per night, but they only have 50 minutes in class per day.

As for research, as an individual with a degree in mathematics, I can say that you will find studies that agree that a longer day and more days make a difference and studies that say they don't. Both will have statistics backing them up. Statistics can be skewed to favor pretty much any conclusion, so my personal experience is what I based my earlier statement on.

Anyways, I stand behind my statement that more days and longer hours will make a difference in the education of American students. Period. ;)

[Ian]

I don't disagree that some students would benefit from more time in class. Kids that are slower learners in certain subjects definitely benefit from after hours tutoring, etc.

But look ... there are thousands of kids who go to school in the U.S. every year and come out among the greatest minds in the world. They don't need to spend additional time in the classroom.

That's my issue ... you're penalizing all the kids for the benefit of only a few of them.

[TheVBs]

I would be open to changes in the school scheduling if I could read a report of a long term study actually showing that this would be beneficial. Does one exist? I have to admit to being skeptical because so often changes are made that are not studied first, where no clear determination has been made that it's beneficial. If it's proven to be beneficial, then I would be all for it.

As for overscheduling, someone mentioned that they don't see it. I feel immersed in it. Our DDs, 9 & 5, are allowed one activity outside of school. You would not believe how difficult it can be to get them together with friends when some of those kids have one free night a week or are booked up months out. It's insane. And being spontaneous with playdates is almost impossible.

[Ian]

I would be open to changes in the school scheduling if I could read a report of a long term study actually showing that this would be beneficial. Does one exist? I have to admit to being skeptical because so often changes are made that are not studied first, where no clear determination has been made that it's beneficial. If it's proven to be beneficial, then I would be all for it.:ditto:


As for overscheduling, someone mentioned that they don't see it. I feel immersed in it. Our DDs, 9 & 5, are allowed one activity outside of school. You would not believe how difficult it can be to get them together with friends when some of those kids have one free night a week or are booked up months out. It's insane. And being spontaneous with playdates is almost impossible.Same with our DD7. Right now she's in cheerleading and dance classes and in the summer she takes swimming and tennis.

But her schedule is light compared to the parents whose kids play soccer! We can never get playdates together with them because they're always at practice or a game!

[DisneyDog]

To be honest, my DS7 was sooo upset when school ended in June. He didn't want summer break. He just wanted to go right into the next year. He loves school that much. He just started this year and he's already asking when NEXT year starts. He was at day camp all summer, but he's really not an athletic kid. He's really into learning and discussing things. He'd rather read a book than anything -- and he's been asking me for two years when he can join the chess club (not until 3rd grade). So, it takes all kinds.

[Granny Jill A]

I'm not for a longer school DAY, but they can certainly change the school YEAR schedule to include more frequent but less lengthy breaks.

Today's teachers spend valuable time re-teaching what most kids lose over the summer break. They also spend a good portion of their day not teaching, but keeping order in the classroom. This is teaching time lost.

If the school year had 4 two-week breaks in between four sessions of 11 weeks each, that would benefit both students and families.

For one thing, you wouldn't have to take your kids out of school to visit Disney World :D.

Each state could set up its' own rotation to accommodate the wishes of the residents.

What do you think?

[MNNHFLTX]

I think you have a very valid point ... but perhaps that "extra" time in the classroom will provide the adult involvement the child is missing at home? They say it takes a community to raise a child.That was my thought process too, Jennifer--too many children fall through the cracks without that extra adult involvement. It's fine to say that parents just need to be more involved, but from what I've seen and experienced, you're not going to be able to "fix" most of the parents. And those kids are part of standardized testing too, so if they test low it brings the curve down for the whole age group.

As for the kids who are really motivated and are already doing well at school, I think there could be some built-in exemptions. For example, at my son's high school if a kid gets obtains a high score in TAX (Texas' standardized test) and maintains at least a A or B level in a particular class, they can get an exemption from the final exam in that class and from the reviews days for the final in class.

[Lizzy]

I don't agree with the federal government deciding this. This is something that needs to be voted on by the parents of the American students, the school boards, teachers etc. This is my son, and my community, my neices and nephews and my neighbors children. Where does the goernment get the right to say that teachers are better making my child more well rounded than I can at home? Why should I lose even more time with my children because some other parents aren't as involved as I am?

While spending more days in school for my son in particular would probably be benificial, longer hours in school would send him backwards.

[Ian]

I'm not for a longer school DAY, but they can certainly change the school YEAR schedule to include more frequent but less lengthy breaks.Each state could set up its' own rotation to accommodate the wishes of the residents.

What do you think?I'd support this, as long as it didn't result in significantly more days spent in school.

The only issue I see is that it would probably complicate childcare for a lot of folks. It's easier to line up camp or daycare or whatever for one duration over the summer than it is to have to worry about it for five or six two week periods throughout the year.


I don't agree with the federal government deciding this. This is something that needs to be voted on by the parents of the American students, the school boards, teachers etc. This is my son, and my community, my neices and nephews and my neighbors children. Where does the goernment get the right to say that teachers are better making my child more well rounded than I can at home? Why should I lose even more time with my children because some other parents aren't as involved as I am? I wish more people thought like you did, because I totally agree with you.

Part of me thinks we've gotten to this point because so many parents have just abdicated responsibility for raising their children to the public school system.

[sportsguy2315]

As for the kids who are really motivated and are already doing well at school, I think there could be some built-in exemptions. For example, at my son's high school if a kid... maintains at least a A or B level in a particular class, they can get an exemption from the final exam in that class and from the reviews days for the final in class.

We had something similar at my high school, but only for the seniors. I actually ended my senior year a week early because I only had one class and I was allowed to skip the final and review days, which was incentive in itself for me to do well.

[Scar]

Where does the goernment get the right to say that teachers are better making my child more well rounded than I can at home? For that matter, what right does the Federal Government have to do about 90% of the stuff they do. All they have to say is that they "are doing it for our own good", and enough people will believe it. Until enough people have the guts to say STOP, and vote these politicians (from both parties) out, it will only continue until they control everything.

[MNNHFLTX]

Part of me thinks we've gotten to this point because so many parents have just abdicated responsibility for raising their children to the public school system.And there is the complicated part of this equation. It's just become a part of our culture.

So what some of you are saying is that if folks voted on a state or local level and decided to change the school calendar that it would be acceptable? Our old school district in Florida did that and did change the calendar of some schools to year-round and I think they are still operating as such today. The trouble with having both in a school district is that some parents would have elementary-age kids on the year-round calendar and then have middle/junior or senior high school students on the regular calendar. That makes vacation planning very challenging for some people I know.

[BrerGnat]

Wow. This is clearly a hot topic!

First of all, for those of you asking the general "what right does the GOVERNMENT have to decide this?", I have to ask you: What do you think a PUBLIC school system is? If the government does not oversee it, who will? At the very top level, the Federal Government has control of the public school system in this country. IF they decide they are going to make changes, they are well within their rights, and I imagine any additional funding needed to support this type of change would be provided from a federal budget of some sort. I know the states, and then the counties within each state control the individual school districts, but the schools are still government entities.

The OPTION to send your child to PRIVATE school or to homeschool is your CONSTITUTIONAL right.

Personally, I'd be all for longer school days and a longer school year. I think kids have more than enough "down time" as it is. Kids who have out of school activities are the FORTUNATE ones, and those probably come from supportive, well to do families (probably the majority on here). What no one seems to be thinking about is the kids from disadvantaged home lives. Not everyone can afford lessons. Many kids have two working parents, and they come home to an empty house. Too many kids are bored these days, and they get into trouble after school. Perhaps longer school days and/or MORE school days would, at the very least, provide more structure and a more enriching environment for these types of kids.

Our society needs to wake up and realize how far behind we are, globally. Why should we care? Because OUR KIDS are the ones who will be taking over this country in the future. Do we want our country to be better or worse than it is today? We can argue till we turn blue about who is running it right now, and how smart THESE people are, but the sad truth is, if we continue to hold our schools to the standards that they are at (which are quite poor, overall), and not DEMAND improvement, our country is going to be in a dire situation when OUR KIDS are adults. Do you want that for them? I applaud ANY idea that at least takes notice that our schools are messed up, and at least TRIES to fix it. If it doesn't work, maybe that will open the door for ANOTHER idea, and so forth, until a great solution is found.

And, for all the teachers moaning and groaning about salary increases and such. I have to say this: quit your griping and remember that you CHOSE this job!

I think Teachers are a very honorable breed. I think the work they do is extremely important, but I get so annoyed at teachers who cry "Union" and "salary increase" left and right. MOST other jobs in this country require a 40+ hour workweek, 52 WEEKS PER YEAR. If you're lucky, you get 2 weeks paid vacation per year. Maybe. At this point, I think teachers get paid a VERY FAIR salary for the time and work they do. For comparison, my husband, a Captain in the Marine Corps gets paid LESS base salary per year than my sister, who is a first grade teacher. He routinely works 12 hour days. He is frequently gone from home, and he has been deployed several times. He doesn't complain about getting a raise when he is asked to work more hours...and I would argue that his job is just as important as that of a teacher...

Sorry to rant, I just hate when something like this comes up and one of the major points of contention becomes "all the teachers will demand raises." Of course, if they are asked to work significantly more than they are now, they should get salary increases accordingly, but it shouldn't be the first thing that comes out of this idea. :mad:

[Hammer]

Right or you facilitate them being taught it by someone else.

For example, I think it's ridiculous that school tax dollars are used to teach kids music and art. If my kids want to play a musical instrument or learn to paint, I'll send them to a music teacher or an art school. If they don't, then why should I pay for someone else's kid to learn to play the flute or paint posies???

So, only those children whose parents have discretionary income should be able to cultivate musical and artistic abilities? Many great talents in this country would never have been able to grow if you had your way.

[Hammer]

Natalie, you and I were posting at the same time, but I have to say I agree with you 110%!

[BrerGnat]

For the record, I have two kids who are both in the public school system right now. They are both special needs. One is in Special Education Preschool (he's 3), and is on a year round schedule. The other is in Special Education Kindergarten, on a "typical calendar" schedule.

I prefer the year round schedule. However, I think the breaks are too long. My younger son's breaks are 3 weeks. He is on one now, then again around Christmas, then again in March/April. They get out June 22, then return on July 30. Still too much "down time" as far as I'm concerned.

The typical calendar is even worse. Since my older son has Autism, big lags in school time really work against him. He does really well in the structured environment of school. He regresses during the summer and during the break periods at winter and spring. I would love for him to be in school 52 weeks per year, if that were possible. ;)

My kids don't know what to do when they are not in school. And, I don't know what to do WITH them. I am a stay at home mom, but their "issues" make it very challenging to find activities that are appropriate. Play dates? Forget it. Team sports? Never gonna happen. My kids NEED structured, supervised, facilitated social interactions, with a staff that is well trained in dealing with their disabilities. It's EXTREMELY difficult to find that (at an affordable price) outside of the school environment. The school does NOT raise my children, but it DOES provide something that I will NEVER be able to provide for them at home.

There are certain things that we, as parents, can do for our children. However, there are things that school can teach our children that they will NEVER learn at home...

Think back to your own time at school. Not everything is learned in the classroom.

[Ian]

Ugh ... I hate a great response typed up to a bunch of the comments in this thread and I just accidentally clicked on a link on the page and lost them all!!! :mad:

Consider this, though ... the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

The government is the entity that's been running our schools for the last infinity years and they're the ones who got us into this mess. Why would you expect them to get us out of it?? They haven't run a successful endeavor in their history!! Social Security, Medicare, the Post Office ... all unmitigated failures!

And look ... the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development found that, even though the U.S. education system lags behind over 35 developed and under-developed nations in terms of results, we actually spend 38% higher than the global average per student on education!

So we spend more and get significantly less. And you want to keep going down this path?? :confused:

[Lizzy]

As a single working parent, homeschooling is ruled out. I choose not to send my child to a private school because the only private schools in my area are all religious. While I am a believer and consider myself a Christian, I raise my children with options. I do not want it stuffed down their throats day in and day out until they can make their own opinions.

Also, I cannot afford private school, again I am single working mom of 2. My child is not in a traditional "public school" I chose to send my son to a Charter School. Where I feel my opinions on my child's education actually matter. My input about my child has always been taken into consideration. I am constantly involved in what classroom activities I can be when I can miss work.

And I am not disagreeing that more days in school would be detrimental. Just more hours in school. I value my time with my kids. If he is run down after spending 7 hours in school now I can't imagine how he would be after 8-10 hours. Then homework time. Where would I be able to fit in quality time with him? Sure there is a gap between when my son gets out of school and I get out of work that he could be working on his homework, but I can't rely on his father to make sure he does it. And I would still have to go over it.

Extending the school day would cost more money. It would require more time out of the teachers so of course they would want raises, if they work more hours then they would deserve it. Yes they chose that career, but as in everyone's career- you would expect to be compensated accordingly.

[BrerGnat]

Well, a lot of the reason why we keep having to spend more on education is the teacher's Unions...

But you already know how I feel about THAT topic...:-o

I don't think it's a matter of spending significantly MORE per student. But, something has to change about our educational system. Whether it be longer days, a longer year, HIGHER QUALIFICATIONS for teachers, better screening for "at risk" students (meaning, potentially developmentally disabled students), WHATEVER. Something has to change.

Here's a story for you. My sister teaches first grade. On the first day of school this year, she was evaluating her students to see where they fell in terms of reading and math ability (so she could group them accordingly). She has one kid who could NOT count to 10. Out of the 52 letters (upper and lowercase), he only knew THIRTEEN of them. He only knew 4 letter sounds. This is a FIRST GRADER. Upon speaking to his parents, this is what his mother said "well, they wanted us to have him repeat kindergarten, but we said 'no'...he's just dumb. Repeating a grade isn't going to make him any less dumb. There's nothing we can do about it." :(

Can you imagine? Meanwhile, my sister is trying to advocate to have him fully evaluated and tested for developmental delays, because she has NO IDEA how to even teach a child who is this far behind. She says he needs a lot of supports, and he is so far behind it's not funny. But, how come he came this far without anyone noticing??? That's what I want to know...

Parental involvement is KEY. But, the sad truth is, THIS example shows you just how "involved" some parents are with their kids these days...

[Ian]

But, something has to change about our educational system. Whether it be longer days, a longer year, HIGHER QUALIFICATIONS for teachers, better screening for "at risk" students (meaning, potentially developmentally disabled students), WHATEVER. Something has to change.Right ... and maybe what has to change is who runs the schools!

Look, if you think the union is the problem (and I largely agree) then you're never going to get rid of them while the government is running things.

Another thing that needs to change? They need to do away with all this touchy-feely, "Don't use red ink because you might hurt someone's feelings" baloney and get back to truly measuring success and failure. Like it or not, in the real world competition and yes even the occasional failure are all part of life.

We're not preparing our kids for that with all this, "Oh let's not make anyone feel bad!" mentality. It's time to abandon this 1970's era "Everyone's a winner!" garbage and get back to real, hardcore educational standards.

[Hammer]

Here's a story for you. My sister teaches first grade. On the first day of school this year, she was evaluating her students to see where they fell in terms of reading and math ability (so she could group them accordingly). She has one kid who could NOT count to 10. Out of the 52 letters (upper and lowercase), he only knew THIRTEEN of them. He only knew 4 letter sounds. This is a FIRST GRADER. Upon speaking to his parents, this is what his mother said "well, they wanted us to have him repeat kindergarten, but we said 'no'...he's just dumb. Repeating a grade isn't going to make him any less dumb. There's nothing we can do about it." :(

Can you imagine? Meanwhile, my sister is trying to advocate to have him fully evaluated and tested for developmental delays, because she has NO IDEA how to even teach a child who is this far behind. She says he needs a lot of supports, and he is so far behind it's not funny. But, how come he came this far without anyone noticing??? That's what I want to know...

Parental involvement is KEY. But, the sad truth is, THIS example shows you just how "involved" some parents are with their kids these days...

All I can say is...wow :shake: ! Thank you for another example of people who should not be raising children.

[PirateLover]

When you are a dedicated teacher, who does the best they can and deals with kids day in and day out, you do start to get burned out. It's different than most jobs. You can't go hide in your cubicle or maybe leave early if you aren't feeling so hot. You owe it to those kids to be there every day as long as you can stand. That's my opinion anyway. Some nights I get very little sleep because I'm reworking lessons, worried about the kids I'm not getting through to, etc. So, yeah, I enjoy my summer vacation and I'm not jumping up and down to give it up.

As far as pay... I work for a Catholic school. I realize most of the rants are against public- but I get paid half of what a public school teacher gets paid and sometimes I feel like I do twice the work. My school is so low on funds that we have rotating lunch and yard duties...*Wanted to clarify that we do not get paid for this* when you have these duties you only get a 15 minute lunch! Since we accept state money for various things, it is likely that we would be affected by these changes as well.

At any rate, I do agree there are many bad teachers out there who are not held accountable, so my question to you is this: Do we really want our children spending more hours in the day with unqualified teachers???? We need to fix the QUALITY of our education before we make such a drastic increase in the QUANTITY!!!!

One other thing that no one has mentioned... if we convert to a year round system, I wonder how many summer businesses will take severe hits or have to close shop. I'm thinking shore towns, local amusement parks, etc. Just a thought.

[Ian]

We need to fix the QUALITY of our education before we make such a drastic increase in the QUANTITY!!!!I knew I loved you for a reason, Maryanne. ;)

:ditto:

[BrerGnat]

Yes, well, it's hard to fix the QUALITY of the educational system when the teachers/administrators are a product of said "broken educational system."

I think EVERYONE wants a higher quality educational system.

Problem is, in order to get better teachers, better administrators, etc. you need people who, for lack of a better term "come from better stock."

Our available pool is pretty pathetic at this point, all the excellent and highly educated teachers who dot the map here and there nonwithstanding, of course. ;)

It will take YEARS to see an increase in the quality of teachers, and THAT's only if we fix the "system."

It's like a really messed up cycle...

I'm not sure if there's really any reasonable way to "fix it." At this point, the only thing that seems feasible is "more school", because it's probably easiest to implement, and because there probably ARE numerous studies that prove that MORE time in the classroom=higher test scores. Somewhere.

[Ian]

Problem is, in order to get better teachers, better administrators, etc. you need people who, for lack of a better term "come from better stock."Yeah, but even this stems from the fact that the school system is run by the government.

Just like in every governmental bureaucracy there's no profit in education, which means there's no way to attract and retain top talent.

If schools were run for profit, then educational instituions would have an incentive to offer better compensation packages to attract better teachers, thus (at least theoretically) resulting in better results with their students, the ability to charge higher tuition, etc.

Instead we have this stifling mess of tenure and raises being dictated by arbitrary things like length of service and level of education ... as if simply having a Masters Plus 60 means you're a good teacher?? But that's what happens when you have a union ... everything has to be completely uniform and "fair."

[Lakin]

At any rate, I do agree there are many bad teachers out there who are not held accountable, so my question to you is this: Do we really want our children spending more hours in the day with unqualified teachers???? We need to fix the QUALITY of our education before we make such a drastic increase in the QUANTITY!!!!

Couldn't agree more! Many teachers at my school that I do NOT want to spend more time with.

:teach: :bored:

[Jeri]

I understand that some kids don't have parents that are involved and that these kids if left alone after school will get in trouble, but why should my kids be forced to be in school longer days because of this? I know our schools have after school activities or clubs for these kids all the way through 9th grade. I just don't think every child should be punished for the lack of parenting of some, or whatever the case may be.

I know it would be bad for my kids to be in school longer days. I like them having a regular school calendar with summers off. My oldest son has Aspergers and does get help at school, and did get summer school provided to him from the district to keep him from losing those skills. However he no longer needs it.

Our school district had to make budget cuts this year and because of that my 7th grader does not get to learn a language this year and instead has Gym class all year and an additional gym class because thay didn't have teachers for anything else. He also has art, music. I agree with Ian that I don't think he needs all these fluff classes. I would not have a problem with them giving him either a structured study hall or extra core classes

I don't know about some other schools but here the teachers work long hours. Most teachers are in an hour before school andd many are still ther and hour or two after either helping students or doing things they didn't have time to do during the day.

[MNNHFLTX]

I understand that some kids don't have parents that are involved and that these kids if left alone after school will get in trouble, but why should my kids be forced to be in school longer days because of this? I know our schools have after school activities or clubs for these kids all the way through 9th grade. I just don't think every child should be punished for the lack of parenting of some, or whatever the case may be. I understand the other points you make, but the idea that the pursuit of quality education for any child (disadvantaged or not) is perceived as a punishment doesn't sound like the right message. I wouldn't want changes in the school day or calendar to punish kids but to give them an equal foothold in the increasingly competitive world of college admissions and the job market.

[JPL]

Here's a story for you. My sister teaches first grade. On the first day of school this year, she was evaluating her students to see where they fell in terms of reading and math ability (so she could group them accordingly). She has one kid who could NOT count to 10. Out of the 52 letters (upper and lowercase), he only knew THIRTEEN of them. He only knew 4 letter sounds. This is a FIRST GRADER. Upon speaking to his parents, this is what his mother said "well, they wanted us to have him repeat kindergarten, but we said 'no'...he's just dumb. Repeating a grade isn't going to make him any less dumb. There's nothing we can do about it." :(

Can you imagine? Meanwhile, my sister is trying to advocate to have him fully evaluated and tested for developmental delays, because she has NO IDEA how to even teach a child who is this far behind. She says he needs a lot of supports, and he is so far behind it's not funny. But, how come he came this far without anyone noticing??? That's what I want to know...



These are the problems that will not be fixed by a longer school day! I see them every day as a teacher and it really is sad. Parents also have the final say in any form of Child study Team testing and most kids will never get the help they need since their parents are afraid they will labelled.


Thanks Maryanne!
I really don't think most people realize that teachers need to go in and give 110% everyday. The younger students you teach the more energy it takes. I need the breaks and the summer to recharge my batteries so I can give my all.

[Melanie]

Yeah, I definitely think many of us here have different perceptions of 'punishment'.

Natalie, I think your thoughts on this are RIGHT ON! :thumbsup:

[Jeri]

I think maybe I worded my last post a little wrong. What I was trying to say is some kids excell in school exactly the way it is. Normal school day and year, however some don't. I feel that while my child is and always has been a straight A student and school comes easy for him inspite of his Aspergers, he should not have to go to school longer because some kids need more school time.

Where we live the teacher are always willing to help those students out that need it either after school one day a week, or during luch. The district also runs busses later in the day for students who stay after for activities or extra help every night of the week. Also most of the highschool kids have to do service learning and volunteer work as a requirement of graduation and many will do free tutoring for that.
So I just do not see the need for longer school days. Or shorter summer vacations.

Hope I explained it better.

[TheVBs]

So if we don't know what the best way to fix the school system is, and the best way to further education, we're just going to do more of it? Again, I'm for anything that helps our children, but actually show me that someone put in the work to find out if the proposed changes will help. I agree that our education system could use some improvements, but let's find out exactly why we're falling behind and find out what will really make a difference before proposing costly and disruptive (and potentially detrimental) changes. Doesn't that seem like a more reasonable approach? :confused:

[PirateLover]

I think what it really comes down to is that this not a panacea. There are many issues with schools and it's just too easy to say "More hours and more days!" I did not mention earlier but I made this a journal topic for my 7th and 8th graders and we held a discussion. Of course none of them were for it- many of them play sports and were worried about it cutting into practice and games. But, interestingly enough, they really responded to the idea of block scheduling. They thought it was a pretty neat idea and were intrigued.

As far as how we make the quality better... accountability, accountability, accountability. In the public school system, once you reach tenure, it is very hard to get rid of you. Many teachers do start "phoning it in." Principals and department chairs should be evaluating classes every year. If your evaluations are not up to par, you should be put on notice.
I will say that most of the college programs out there are very intense now. Most of my friends are fantastic teachers. There is hope for the future on our end, I feel. :thumbsup:

[Ian]

I understand the other points you make, but the idea that the pursuit of quality education for any child (disadvantaged or not) is perceived as a punishment doesn't sound like the right message. I wouldn't want changes in the school day or calendar to punish kids but to give them an equal foothold in the increasingly competitive world of college admissions and the job market.I don't think she meant "punishment" in the normal context of the word, but rather ... why make my kids spend needless time in school if they're doing perfectly well with the system as it is?

If the answer is, "Because not all kids are doing well and they need more time in school to help them along." then I'll tell you that this sounds exactly like a "more of the same" kind of solution to me.

Half the problem with our schools is that we try and treat everyone the same instead of recognizing that, with education, a one size fits all approach isn't realistic. The fact is, despite many people's refusal to admit it, not everyone has the same capacity to learn.

As painful as this is, some people really aren't as smart as others. I know this isn't fashionable to admit anymore, but I think it's a cold dose of reality we'd do well to remember. As my Grandfather used to say, "The world needs ditch diggers, too."

Although that brings up a good point ... I think our educational failures used to be masked to a degree because of the relative prevalance of good, blue collar jobs in this country. I know in my school the "dumb" kids took vo-tech education and prepared for lucrative careers as auto mechanics and plumbers (no joke ... I mean that sincerely ... those guys make big bucks).

Sadly, though, blue collar jobs and factory work and construction and all that is increasingly being offshored or turned over to illegal immigrants willing to work for pennies on the dollar. So people are now realizing that option isn't there anymore and they're maybe trying to fit a square peg in a round hole ... since there aren't any other holes available, if you get my meaning.


I think what it really comes down to is that this not a panacea. There are many issues with schools and it's just too easy to say "More hours and more days!"Don't forget "More money!" which is always thrown in there, as well.

Despite the fact that we, as a nation, already spend far more than others well ahead of us in terms of educational quality.

[Jeri]

Thank you Ian, that was what I was trying to say however it just didn't come out right.

I agree with you too about some kids just are not as smart as others. It is not a bad thing it is just a fact of life.

[Georgesgirl1]

First of all, for those of you asking the general "what right does the GOVERNMENT have to decide this?", I have to ask you: What do you think a PUBLIC school system is? If the government does not oversee it, who will? At the very top level, the Federal Government has control of the public school system in this country. IF they decide they are going to make changes, they are well within their rights, and I imagine any additional funding needed to support this type of change would be provided from a federal budget of some sort. I know the states, and then the counties within each state control the individual school districts, but the schools are still government entities.

The OPTION to send your child to PRIVATE school or to homeschool is your CONSTITUTIONAL right.



And, for all the teachers moaning and groaning about salary increases and such. I have to say this: quit your griping and remember that you CHOSE this job!

I think Teachers are a very honorable breed. I think the work they do is extremely important, but I get so annoyed at teachers who cry "Union" and "salary increase" left and right. MOST other jobs in this country require a 40+ hour workweek, 52 WEEKS PER YEAR. If you're lucky, you get 2 weeks paid vacation per year. Maybe. At this point, I think teachers get paid a VERY FAIR salary for the time and work they do. For comparison, my husband, a Captain in the Marine Corps gets paid LESS base salary per year than my sister, who is a first grade teacher. He routinely works 12 hour days. He is frequently gone from home, and he has been deployed several times. He doesn't complain about getting a raise when he is asked to work more hours...and I would argue that his job is just as important as that of a teacher...



The federal government DOES NOT have the right to interfere with the education system. Ammendment 10 of the Bill of Rights states: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Since there is no ammendment giving the federal government the right to interfere in education, it should be the right of the states to make decisions in this matter.

Yes, most jobs require you work 40 hours a week 52 weeks a year, but you also get paid accordingly. As a teacher, I get paid for 194 teaching and planning days. If my work load suddenly went from 194 days to 200 something days, darn right I would cry salary increase (and I am not a union member)! I love my job, but I don't work for the fun of it. Plus, as a teacher I always work more than a 40 hour work week!

[MNNHFLTX]

The only comment I can make here is that I feel that complacency and resistance to change are our biggest barriers to overcome here in the United States. Yes, there are some good features of our educational system, but if we are honest with ourselves there is much that could be improved. Even the best and brightest of students are not being challenged enough and those that "aren't smart" still deserve a system that helps them achieve their potential. I think we owe it to all our children to continuously investigate strategies to improve their future and their opportunities. Some of them might not seem that appealing at first, but I would hope we would look beyond what is convenient and comfortable and be open to possibilities.

I still believe that all students would benefit from certain changes, whether it is an increased number of days in school or a calendar that does not allow such lengthy gaps in the learning process. My son is 17 and a good student in his last year in a good high school in a good school district. Yet I have often wished that "good enough" was not the mantra of his education. And I really wish that his school district cared enough about the kids education that they wouldn't have waived 13 days of education last year in favor of vacations and teacher contracts.

Of course, my son would not agree with anything I have posted here, because he is a typical kid and would not want to increase his classroom time either, but that's another story. ;)

That's it for me--continue the debate. :)

[Ian]

The only comment I can make here is that I feel that complacency and resistance to change are our biggest barriers to overcome here in the United States. Yes, there are some good features of our educational system, but if we are honest with ourselves there is much that could be improved. Even the best and brightest of students are not being challenged enough and those that "aren't smart" still deserve a system that helps them achieve their potential. I think we owe it to all our children to continuously investigate strategies to improve their future and their opportunities.I totally agree ... Without a doubt if someone could show me some concrete data, with a clear link established between length and amount of time spent in the classroom and results, I'd be all for it.

I want what's best for my kids and I definitely want them to get a great education. I also, however, want them to have a good amount of time to just be kids and spend time with family and friends. I firmly believe those things are just as important, if not more important, than sitting in classrooms when it comes to creating well-rounded productive members of society.

[bucky at disney]

The one thing I am most concerned about - is if they lengthen the school day. Aren't there any studies out there that state the length of a child's ability to concentrate is limited to a certain amount of time? I know there are somedays where I have problems concentrating for an 8 hour work day - I don't see how our children will day after day. They need the down time to just be kids and recharge their batteries. The way the school year is now - perhaps needs to be changed - so there are shorter breaks in between - but I think lengthening the school day is a bad idea.

As far as how art and music are being labeled "fluff" classes by some in this forum....I believe there are studies that suggest kids that take music and art classes do better in other areas of their education. The extra classes i.e. music, art, physical education are just as important as the basics.

Maybe some of what we need to look at is how many of the public high schools are branching off into other "extras" - things that should be saved for post high school eduation. Maybe we need to get back to basics - reading, writing, and arithmetic along with keeping art, music, and physical education.

[Ian]

I'd be curious to see the breakdown of performance from a geographical standpoint, as well.

I suspect (although I have no statistics to back this up) that a significant percentage of schools with sub-standard results are located in urban areas. Based on what I've read in regards to the suburban schools in my area, their performance is well above average.


What does that mean? Not sure ... but I would suspect there's something to be learned there. It definitely suggests to me that the root cause of this problem is not that kids aren't spending enough time in school.

[Lizzy]

I agree that all children deserve a system that helps each child reach their individual potential. However, keeping the kids that are a little slower or require a diffrent learning style than the kids that are considered the "smart" kids in with the "smart" kids only causes insecurities. They are not doing as well as the children that excell in book smarts. Also, the "smart" kids are not reaching their potential this way because they are constantly being held back waiting for the rest to catch up. Sure many schools have gifted programs and advanced classes, but they are not the full school day for the advanced students.

My ex husband's 13 y/o daughter is brilliant. Straight A's her entire life. She entered Jr High school, and her school only has so much money for advanced learning. So she is sitting in classes with students who are years behind her in their reading and math levels. While it may help those students to do better having her in their class helping them, she is not reaching her full potential. She has to wait until she is old enough to Dual Enroll in Community College before she will be challenged in the classroom again.

How will spending more time in school benefit her? She will just be spending more time as an unpaid volunteer teacher and have less time at home to study and continue to try to work ahead of her peers.

[thrillme]

I feel like a lot of the worlds greatest minds have come from right here in the US and I'm proud of it.

We can't compare to a number of other countries because many of those countries are a LOT smaller than we are. We are HUGE and very very diverse. What about the comparative studies of the children in other countries born to "rural" areas. Some of those aren't even "counted".

My son has "enough" of school by the summer (he even has a count down clock on his cell phone). I keep tabs on his grades and if they slip...we get outside help if I can't help him myself. He is now in 8th grade taking sophmore math, honors classes for the rest of his curriculum and he does very well. If his grades slip to "B's" we take immediate action to find out what's happening.

I have several friends who are teachers or who WERE teachers...it's not all the "system's" fault...a LOT of parents don't care...a LOT of parents argue with the system on the last month of school because their child is failing (Hello...they were TOLD their child was doing badly...). Somewhere too we changed from if you make the grade... you pass...if you don't you go to summer school and if you do well... you pass...if not you stay put.

For those kids who don't like the summer breaks...Down here they offer lots of "continuing education" classes that can be anything from "writing or computers" or "engineering with Legos" camps that may last a week to 2 weeks. As kids get older (middle school)...they have opportunities for "ambassador programs", "engineering studies" at local colleges, world studies etc...usually all held during the summer.

Winter and Spring breaks offer some marvelous time for "charity" work or organizations such as Boy/Girl Scouts to hold merit badge opportunities.

There's after school programs for Drama, Karate, Gymnastics etc.

NOW...perhaps some people say this costs money for these extra programs...well...YES it does. When you have kids...they cost money. This is not the BRAVE NEW WORLD where the government controls breeding. I don't think we really want to see that happen.

No matter how many hours they are in school, no matter if you keep them in school 7 days a week 365 days a year...you will NEVER teach them "ambition".

[Melanie]

Discussing this on CNN right now.

[Ian]

Somewhere too we changed from if you make the grade... you pass...if you don't you go to summer school and if you do well... you pass...if not you stay put.Yeah, this is another issue. Schools are way too reluctant to just tell parents, "Look. Your kid isn't ready to move up. He needs to repeat the grade."

Instead they do everything possible to move kids along. I don't know if it's fear of the parents, fear of lawsuits, disinterest, self-interest, or something else entirely. But it happens.

[Hammer]

I'd be curious to see the breakdown of performance from a geographical standpoint, as well.

I suspect (although I have no statistics to back this up) that a significant percentage of schools with sub-standard results are located in urban areas. Based on what I've read in regards to the suburban schools in my area, their performance is well above average.


What does that mean? Not sure ... but I would suspect there's something to be learned there. It definitely suggests to me that the root cause of this problem is not that kids aren't spending enough time in school.

Ian, I think it is more than just urban areas. There are areas of the country where the educational offerings are not as strong as where we are, though there are suburban schools in our area which aren't that strong. The high school in the NJ suburb I lived was not that good and consequently, a smaller percentage of kids went to college from there and the colleges were not the highest caliber either. So, as my parents wanted to make sure my college choices were not limited, I went to Catholic high school. Just pointing out that it is not only an urban phenomenon.

I think in addition to a longer school day, I would like to see track learning instituted at a middle and high school level. They use that in some of the high schools here (both public and private) and it keeps from what is happening to Lizzy's former stepdaughter from happening. Unfortunately, I have found that the state of Florida's educational system to be not as strong as a whole and they do not have things like "track" learning. That is the state government's fault for not properly funding and regulating the state's education offerings.
.

[Ian]

Yeah, I'm certain it's not only urban schools ... My point was that I'd bet the majority of underperforming students come from inner city schools.

Christine, I'm surprised to hear you say your Enjay school was sub-standard. South Jersey schools routinely rank among the best in the nation.

And just FYI, our school district just did lengthen the school days for all kids by 1/2 hour. We'll see if it has any noticeable impact.

[BrerGnat]

I just wanted to point out that the Federal Government DOES have a say in the control of local Public Schools as long as those schools are accepting Federal Funding. IF they are accepting federal funding, then they have to concede to certain programs/rules/regulations set by the Fed. Gov't as "stipulations" for accepting said money. If a state decides to accept Federal funding for its schools, then any decisions by a local school district have to first be approved by the state government, and then by the Fed. Gov't, just to make sure they agree with the way the money is being used (or to make sure it is being implemented properly). It's called oversight.

That's how it works. Whether or not it "jives" with the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights, that's irrelevant.

I love it when people go back to these arcane documents as The Word, when there are FAR more things to consider in the modern era of government...MONEY being the primary motivating factor. :rolleyes:

And, for those of you who live in school districts with all these wonderful summer and after school programs, good for you! I happen to live in one of those districts too. But guess what...MOST districts don't have the funding to provide those sorts of programs.

My sister applied for a job as a summer school teacher for a specialized program which would have had her teaching kids some specialized fitness/yoga classes at the middle school level. It was supposed to be part of a "Summer Enrichment Program" through the school district. It WOULD have cost some money for the students to attend too, BUT it was cut at the last minute due to lack of BOTH funding for the teachers AND interest (not enough students signed up for the ENTIRE Summer Enrichment Program, which provided ALL SORTS of classes and learning opportunities for grades 6-12). This is in a district near L.A. which is not exactly inner city, but not exactly upper middle class either. I'd say it's a district that LIKELY represents close to 1/2 the districts in this country, in terms of demographics. THIS is the reality.

Some people need to take off the rose colored glasses, or perhaps travel outside of their local areas more often to get a sense of what this country is REALLY all about. It's shocking, truly.

I happen to live in a VERY nice city, with a quite high median income, EXORBITANT property taxes, and an EXCELLENT school system. It's an ideal "master planned community." It's everything I could ever dream of for raising my kids. However, I can get in my car, drive approximately 3 miles north on the street that borders my home, and be, for lack of a better phrase "deep in the ghetto" of Santa Ana, one of the WORST neighborhoods in the county, with one of the highest crime rates, HORRIBLE schools, and a ridiculous drop out rate. The difference is like night and day. It's hard to believe, unless you actually see it for yourself. If I never got in my car and drove anywhere, I'd think everyone around here was living just like us, and had the same access to a great education, and low crime, etc.

It's easy to experience this in a densely populated area like Southern California. I suspect, though, for those of you who live in nice suburbs in states like Minnesota, or Texas, or Colorado, where the "next town" might be miles and miles away, it's hard to fathom that not everyone has the same experience as you.

States only have so much money to go around. The school districts are largely dependent on property taxes to fund the schools (and if the residents of that county vote against taxes being used for education, too bad for the schools...). In a nice, upper class area, where the residents pay lots of property taxes, and the PTA is able to coerce families to donate to the schools, you're going to have better schools overall. In an area where there is little or no income from property taxes, and the districts have to depend on state and federal funding, with NO outside support from the residents, that is a recipe for a poorly run school. Bottom line.

Ian is right that MONEY is the motivating factor behind everything. The problem is that our government doesn't HAVE any, MAINLY because we (the taxpayers) keep wanting our taxes LOWERED, while at the same time demanding: health care, better schools, better this and better that. BUT, no one seems to want to PAY for any of it. I mean, where is the money supposed to come from?

If we want the schools to get better in this country, WHY aren't we willing to pay for it? And I don't necessarily mean directly by paying more federal taxes, but what about a "school tax" to be paid directly to the district in which you live?

I mean, I would be for that...but I seem to be in the vast minority with that crazy idea.

[Ian]

That's how it works. Whether or not it "jives" with the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights, that's irrelevant.

I love it when people go back to these arcane documents as The Word, when there are FAR more things to consider in the modern era of government...So let me get what you're saying here ... the Constitution is an "arcane" document that should just be ignored or discarded? That's what I get from what you said and, if that's actually what you meant, I have to say I find that terrifying.

The Constitution is the law of the land in the United States. The minute that ceases to be the case, we cease to be Americans and become just another tinpot country left to the whims of whatever moron happens to be in power.

Seriously ... I can't even believe you actually just put that in writing. :confused:

As to the gist of the rest of your post, that's the same old tired rant you get every single solitary time this subject comes up. "We need more money!!!"

Guess what? It's baloney. Patently false and untrue.

As I mentioned above for everyone to conveniently ignore, money is not the answer. The facts (something people often appear to be disinterested in, preferring instead to stick with their own uninformed opinions) show that money spent per pupil has very little bearing on results.

I'll repeat what I said before for the benefit of those that missed it:


The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development found that, even though the U.S. education system lags behind over 35 developed and under-developed nations in terms of results, we actually spend 38% higher than the global average per student on education.

[Scar]

I don't have kids and probably never will so I will aviod talking about whether or not this idea or that one is good/bad. But, I am a taxpayer and feel I should have a say about how my money is spent.
I just wanted to point out that the Federal Government DOES have a say in the control of local Public Schools as long as those schools are accepting Federal Funding. IF they are accepting federal funding, then they have to concede to certain programs/rules/regulations set by the Fed. Gov't as "stipulations" for accepting said money.I agree with what you are saying here, I just think the system would work better if the Fed wasn't involved. Let the States collect the taxes and fund as they see fit.

That's how it works. Whether or not it "jives" with the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights, that's irrelevant.

I love it when people go back to these arcane documents as The Word, when there are FAR more things to consider in the modern era of government...MONEY being the primary motivating factor. :rolleyes:Wow! I'm not even sure how to respond to this except to say I hope you never become a Supreme Court Justice.
Ian is right that MONEY is the motivating factor behind everything. The problem is that our government doesn't HAVE any, MAINLY because we (the taxpayers) keep wanting our taxes LOWERED, while at the same time demanding: health care, better schools, better this and better that. BUT, no one seems to want to PAY for any of it. I mean, where is the money supposed to come from? Just because everyone wants things to be better, doesn't mean we all think the Fed can make it better.

[Lizzy]

So let me get what you're saying here ... the Constitution is an "arcane" document that should just be ignored or discarded? That's what I get from what you said and, if that's actually what you meant, I have to say I find that terrifying.

The Constitution is the law of the land in the United States. The minute that ceases to be the case, we cease to be Americans and become just another tinpot country left to the whims of whatever moron happens to be in power.

Seriously ... I can't even believe you actually just put that in writing. :confused:



I agree with Ian 100% here. I wasn't even sure how to react to someone saying that the Constitution, the basis of our entire government would be irrelevent a discussion concerning whether or not the federal government has juristiction over the given subject!

[Ian]

I agree with what you are saying here, I just think the system would work better if the Fed wasn't involved. Let the States collect the taxes and fund as they see fit.Even better ... get the States out of it, as well.

Government ... any government ... is the worst entity to have involved in any kind of important endeavor. They're systemically inept and inefficient and perpetually inclined to complete and total failures.

I honestly just cannot fathom why people continue to want to turn things over to the government! Do people not pay attention??? The government destroys everything it touches and yet people want to continually go back for more??

Someone said earlier that we need some kind of change and that people's resistance to change was a large part of our problem. To that I say ... I agree ... but the change we need is getting the government OUT of our every day lives entirely and becoming responsible for our own successes and failures.

[Granny Jill A]

I'd support this, as long as it didn't result in significantly more days spent in school.

The only issue I see is that it would probably complicate childcare for a lot of folks. It's easier to line up camp or daycare or whatever for one duration over the summer than it is to have to worry about it for five or six two week periods throughout the year.


I don't believe that lot more days would be necessary because there would be less backtracking through the subject matter.

Childcare has been and always will be an issue. Some school districts have before and after daycare for working parents. This helps a little.

One of the main objections to year-round schedules is the lack of time for organized sports, music or dance lessons. If the school day were shortened by a couple of hours, perhaps this would help.

[Granny Jill A]

Here's a story for you. My sister teaches first grade. On the first day of school this year, she was evaluating her students to see where they fell in terms of reading and math ability (so she could group them accordingly). She has one kid who could NOT count to 10. Out of the 52 letters (upper and lowercase), he only knew THIRTEEN of them. He only knew 4 letter sounds. This is a FIRST GRADER. Upon speaking to his parents, this is what his mother said "well, they wanted us to have him repeat kindergarten, but we said 'no'...he's just dumb. Repeating a grade isn't going to make him any less dumb. There's nothing we can do about it." :(

Interesting story about your sister. My daughter has a Masters in Special Education and spent 10 years teaching kids with Behavioral Disorders before she burned out. Most of the kids were from broken homes or the parents were druggies. She was trained specifically to evaluate the kids and create an individual education plan for them. When she tried to return kids to the regular classroom, the teacher would object because they weren't trained to continue the behavior modifying plan for the student. Today's teachers are woefully underprepared for the type of student they will encounter.

A bit of irony regarding my daughter. She is certified to teach any subject to kids with behavior problems, but the State will NOT certify her to teach regular kids. Why? She did not take Elementary Music, Elementary Art, or Elementary Phys Ed in college. :confused:

[Jeri]

It's easy to experience this in a densely populated area like Southern California. I suspect, though, for those of you who live in nice suburbs in states like Minnesota, or Texas, or Colorado, where the "next town" might be miles and miles away, it's hard to fathom that not everyone has the same experience as you.

Well I do live in Minnesota, however I live in a town with only 1000 people and most are farmers. I only need to drive 5 minutes to see another town. The school distric my children are suppose to go to does not do well money wise, nor do they have high test scores. They also rank very poor in their special services and we need them for both our kids. We chose not to send our kids there. We have the option to open enroll our kids and do. I have to drive my kids to the better schools everyday. I am willing to drive over 300 miles a week to give them the chance to have the best education they can get.
I can completly fathom that people don't have the same experience as we do, however I also understand that if you don't like the school situation where you live you do have choices. We have made these choices and in doing so have had to make sacrifices too. I have to drive my kids, bussing isn't an option. But we do it because giving them the best education is important right now.

[Ian]

A bit of irony regarding my daughter. She is certified to teach any subject to kids with behavior problems, but the State will NOT certify her to teach regular kids. Why? She did not take Elementary Music, Elementary Art, or Elementary Phys Ed in college. :confused:Yeah see ... just another example of what happens when you get mired in this kind of bureaucratic baloney.

[BrerGnat]

Hold on a second. I think my point about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights was taken WAY out of context.

I wholeheartedly agree that these documents provide the foundation for our country. Without them, we would not BE America.

The problem is, people often ignore or FORGET the context of these documents as they relate to our MODERN lives. These documents were drafted as a foundation for the laws of our land. However, let's not forget the numerous ratifications and amendments that have been made to them over time.

As times change, and our society evolves, we cannot simply grab up the ORIGINAL draft of the Constitution and say "well it says here blah, blah, blah, SO WE CAN'T DO IT." Nonsense! We are a society that is evolving and has changing needs. I have to think that when our forefathers drafted the Bill of Rights over 200 years ago, the idea of allowing the Federal Government to decide whether or not our public school day/year needs to be longer did not enter their minds. Along with countless other issues that have come up since the 1700's...

Listen, I don't think Government is the answer for everything. I don't think our government is particularly efficient. I have a lot of negative feelings about it, to be quite honest. However, I still maintain that there is a reason why there are PUBLIC schools as well as PRIVATE schools, and it all comes down to choice. Our PUBLIC school system is failing. It needs to be fixed. If you don't like it, though, you have choices, and THAT is what makes this America. Unfortunately, not everyone has the ability to exercise their freedom of choice, due to their station in life. Is that fair? Not at all. I'm not advocating for some communist way of life or anything, but I think it's time to level the playing field for students across America. There needs to be some sort of overhaul of the school system, so that ALL American children have a shot at an equal primary education.

In THIS country, money fixes things. Whether you agree with that or not, it's the truth. Where you see a failure to improve, despite increased spending per pupil...THAT has to do with POOR ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS about how the money is spent, as well as POOR OVERSIGHT from the taxpayers, who should be demanding more information as well as more input as to how these funds are put to use.

Our society as a whole is so self centered these days that we only think about how a decision like this will affect "my" child or "my" family, and to heck with anyone else. That is the most "un American" thing I can imagine. Where's the sense of community in that?

Competition is a good thing. It drives us to do our best. However, there is a fine line between healthy competition and leaving those who can't fend for themselves in the dust. Who do you think is going to pick them up when they can't fend for themselves as adults? If we want our society to improve as a whole, we have to start with the kids, who are the future. After all, THEY are going to have to take care of US when we are old and grey...

[Ian]

As times change, and our society evolves ... Yep. And that's why the Constitution allows for a process to amend it.

If we want to expand the powers of the Federal government, then fine. Propose an amendment to the Constitution, we'll vote on it as a nation, and if it passes so be it.

Outside of that, you need to stick with what it says. Period.


In THIS country, money fixes things. Whether you agree with that or not, it's the truth. Where you see a failure to improve, despite increased spending per pupil...THAT has to do with POOR ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS about how the money is spent, as well as POOR OVERSIGHT from the taxpayers, who should be demanding more information as well as more input as to how these funds are put to use.Right, but you've got a circular arugment here. You admit that the government does a poor job of running things and that the current system does a lousy job of administrating funds, etc. But then you turn around and claim you want the government to continue to run things?

I've got a news flash for you ... the government exists solely to do things like run things poorly, do a bad job handling money, and in general ruin anything they touch.

Why? Simple. No real accountability. It's not their money. They don't answer to anyone on how it's spent. So why worry about little things like efficiency and productivity and effective use of funds? Heck, there's more where that came from!

Sure there is ... if you want to continue mortgaging our future to China. You're worried about competing with Asians? How well do you think we'll compete with them when they own our entire country?

Like it or not there's not an endless supply of money. You don't fix problems by borrowing more, spending more, printing more money ... you fix problems by spending what you have more wisely.

And that's something governments are just completely and totally incapable of doing.

I'm telling you flat out ... 100% ... government will never fix the problems with our educational system. In fact, I'd challenge anyone to name one thing ... just one thing ... that our government has ever touched and improved!

[Kenny1113]

Wow! This a hot topic!
I just want to throw my two cents out there.
I do not agree with longer hours in the school days. As for what someone posted as an argument for longer days, that kids have too much free time. The public school system is not babysitting and should not be treated as such.

In regards to public v private ( dh and I are debating for our children right now), private is not always better.

The story about the first grader who did not know his letters or numbers... This is the case for 95% of my moms first grade class. The reason they passed kindergarten? "just pass them FCAT (Florida mandatory testing in 3rd grade, fail fcat=fail 3rd grade) will weed them out" mentality. Not fair to the 5% that do know their letters and numbers. But that's another discussion.

I would be for year round school (read :more smaller breaks, not more days)

Homeschool is looking better and better.

[Ian]

Homeschool is looking better and better.
We've considered homeschooling, but I just have a lot of concerns about the social implications. I just can't see how kids can learn to interact with others, follow rules, conform to group norms, and the like without spending time in a formal classroom.

I think that, aside from what you learn in class you also learn a lot from being in the classroom.

[BrerGnat]

Ian, I just have to ask you, who do you want to run this country? The free market? If you think there's a lack of accountability and oversight NOW, what do you think will happen when EVERYTHING turns into a "for profit" endeavor? If a school doesn't make money, shut it down, or sell it to the lowest bidder? Then what?

If the government (whether state or federal) does not run the public schools, WHO should?

I really want to know, in all honesty.

I have to wonder about all the nations whose students perform above ours. Who runs THOSE schools...I would bet it's the country's governing body...

I think our country screwed up royally from the very beginning, by NOT allowing the Fed. Gov't to be in control of the country's public schools. By putting the control in the hands of the states, it allowed for far too much discrepancy in terms of standards for everything, from testing to hiring standards for teachers. There is no consistency. That probably has a lot to do with why, ON AVERAGE, our nation's children look so poorly educated on paper.

[Lizzy]

Ian,

My first husband's family homeschooled his 4 younger brothers. The parents got together and the kids would go to each other's houses for diffrent subjects, depending on which parent was stronger in which subject. It seemed to work very well in keeping the kids socialized. Not only that, they had the time to take their kids out into the real world on a daily bases and the kids learned how to interact with adults better in my opinion. The 4 of them all turned out to be very well rounded individuals.

If I had the ability to earn and income and homeschool my children I would do so, but I don't have that option at this point in my life.

[Lizzy]

ON AVERAGE, our nation's children look so poorly educated on paper.

So how is keeping my child at school more hours in a day and more days in a year supposed to make that any better? How is the Federal Government deciding this rather than my being a parent and deciding if that is right for my children or not going to make that better?

If the parents want their children in school more hours in a day or more days in a year, then taxpayers should have a say in it by voting for it. It should not be decided without going to a vote.

Or, additional study halls and tutoring could be made available as an optional option (say that fast) but with a clear cut answer as to where the money will come from for the extra time spent by teachers and school staff members.

[PirateLover]

I just found these stats in an article about this issue:
Kids in the U.S. spend more hours in school (1,146 instructional hours per year) than do kids in the Asian countries that persistently outscore the U.S. on math and science tests -- Singapore (903), Taiwan (1,050), Japan (1,005) and Hong Kong (1,013). That is despite the fact that Taiwan, Japan and Hong Kong have longer school years (190 to 201 days) than does the U.S. (180 days).

[BrerGnat]

I definitely think this type of decision should require a vote. After all, this IS a Democracy... supposedly.

[d_m_n_n]

Yeah, this is another issue. Schools are way too reluctant to just tell parents, "Look. Your kid isn't ready to move up. He needs to repeat the grade."

Instead they do everything possible to move kids along. I don't know if it's fear of the parents, fear of lawsuits, disinterest, self-interest, or something else entirely. But it happens.

Since I am at DS's school so often volunteering, many teachers have opened up to me. In regards to students being held back, I will never forget what one teacher said..."He doesn't care, so I'm not going to waste his time or mine..." I was shocked. Then we saw this particular child during the summer at a store. He came up to us and asked it DS was going into the (then) 5th grade and was ecstatic that he had been passed. :( He was then passed out of the 5th grade for the same reasons I'm afraid...

[Scar]

Even better ... get the States out of it, as well.I don't disagree, but if it were at the state level maybe the voters of my state want the state to run it, while the voters of your state (assuming we live in different states) want all private.


I definitely think this type of decision should require a vote. After all, this IS a Democracy... supposedly.Well, it's not a pure Democracy. In fact there is no provision for a national ballot initiative in the US.

[BrerGnat]

Well, it's not a pure Democracy. In fact there is no provision for a national ballot initiative in the US.

That's why I said "supposedly".

A lot of people don't realize that this is NOT really a Democracy, in the true sense of the word, but those same people are very quick to want to exercise their right to vote on EVERYTHING, as though it is. ;)

In this case, though, I think the final say on the matter should lie with the citizens.

[Tink2002]

My honest opinion is that we just spread our kids too thin over here - all the way through k-12 and in college as well... I don't think it's anything that a longer school day would fix - I think it has to do with all of the demands that are placed on our kids in addition to their studies when they come home.

I did a project for a communications class last semester where I interviewed an exchange student from china to talk about cultural differences. He told me that the fact that students over here go to class, and then go to work and hold part time jobs, play sports, and participate in clubs and other extracurricular activities seems crazy to him. He said something to the effect of "In China, we are expected to go to school and come home and learn and study. Here, you have to be involved and work. It's not just school."

I know a several fellow students right now who would be able to devote a lot more time to their studies if they didn't have to work as many hours to help put themselves through school. But then we're getting into the cost of a college education, which is a whole other can of worms...

Just my :twocents:

[Ian]

Ian, I just have to ask you, who do you want to run this country? The free market? If you think there's a lack of accountability and oversight NOW, what do you think will happen when EVERYTHING turns into a "for profit" endeavor? If a school doesn't make money, shut it down, or sell it to the lowest bidder? Then what? With all due respect, are you kidding me??? Are you trying in some way to imply that a corporation with a Board of Directors, shareholders, the SEC, and myriad other agencies to oversee their activities are, in some way, less regulated than the Federal Government!! No one regulates the Feds except the Feds!! Seriously ... they have no oversight at all and can spend willy nilly, with no accountability at all to anyone!

And you know you ignored my question ... name me one, single, solitary entity the Federal government has ever run successfully.

Maybe the Armed Forces to some extent, but even that's debateable.


I just found these stats in an article about this issue:
Kids in the U.S. spend more hours in school (1,146 instructional hours per year) than do kids in the Asian countries that persistently outscore the U.S. on math and science tests -- Singapore (903), Taiwan (1,050), Japan (1,005) and Hong Kong (1,013). That is despite the fact that Taiwan, Japan and Hong Kong have longer school years (190 to 201 days) than does the U.S. (180 days).Exactly ... this just substantiates what I've been saying all along.

There is absolutely no solid correlation between money spent on education or time spent in the classroom when it comes to results.

Bottom line? Our problems run much deeper than facile suggestions that we "just need to spend more time in the classroom."

Baloney. We need to start holding parents accountable for their children. That's what we need to do to get real change. You want results? Hold parents legally accountable for being involved in their children's education.

[Hammer]

And you know you ignored my question ... name me one, single, solitary entity the Federal government has ever run successfully.

Maybe the Armed Forces to some extent, but even that's debateable.



1) G.I. Bill
2) U.S. National Parks Service
3) NASA

I can give you a few more if you want...

[Ian]

1) G.I. Bill
2) U.S. National Parks Service
3) NASA

I can give you a few more if you want...Well the G.I. Bill is really part of the Armed Forces, which I already listed as a "sort of", but I'm not even sure I'd give you this one.

On what basis are you listing it as "well run?"

NASA has been routinely criticized as a poster child for government waste and inefficiency. I'll have to go pull some data, but for decades now people have been urging the government to privatize NASA to eliminate the wasteful spending and drain on our tax dollars.

And the National Parks?? In 2009, the U.S. National Parks have an annual budget of $2.4 billion. By contrast, according to the 2008 company annual report, The Walt Disney company spend just $691 million to operate all of their theme parks worldwide.

That means that Disney required only 29% of the money to run their global theme park operations that it took the U.S. government to run the National Parks. Disney employes over 111,000 people at their parks globally (not including those employed in the Theme Park division at the Corporate office). The U.S. National Park Service employs 13,000.

Which company is more efficient with their dollars?

[Hammer]

Well the G.I. Bill is really part of the Armed Forces, which I already listed as a "sort of", but I'm not even sure I'd give you this one.

On what basis are you listing it as "well run?"

NASA has been routinely criticized as a poster child for government waste and inefficiency. I'll have to go pull some data, but for decades now people have been urging the government to privatize NASA to eliminate the wasteful spending and drain on our tax dollars.

And the National Parks?? In 2009, the U.S. National Parks have an annual budget of $2.4 billion. By contrast, according to the 2008 company annual report, The Walt Disney company spend just $691 million to operate all of their theme parks worldwide.

That means that Disney required only 29% of the money to run their global theme park operations that it took the U.S. government to run the National Parks. Disney employes over 111,000 people at their parks globally (not including those employed in the Theme Park division at the Corporate office). The U.S. National Park Service employs 13,000.

Which company is more efficient with their dollars?

Yet again, Ian, it is all how you spin it. You are continually going to try and spin to your viewpoint, just as I will for my opposing viewpoint.

You are comparing apples and oranges with the U.S. Parks and NASA with a for profit organization. Not every entity's mission is to make a profit, nor should it be in my opinion. The mission for some things can be for the greater good of our development as a society. Sometimes, those programs will cost more than running a for profit corporation just because some things cost more to do. Not everything should go to the lowest bidder.
The G.I Bill? You have an issue with millions of people receiving an education in exchange for service to our country? Many people, including my own father (Vietnam), would never had been able to complete college educations without it.

[Ian]

You are comparing apples and oranges with the U.S. Parks and NASA with a for profit organization. Not every entity's mission is to make a profit, nor should it be in my opinion. The mission for some things can be for the greater good of our development as a society.But here's the point I don't get ... why can't you do both those things?

I mean, Disney makes a profit ... do they not do "some things for the greater good of our development as a society?" They give away millions every year to charity, foster "environmentality" and volunteerism ...

Why do profit and work towards the greater good have to be mutually exclusive? And really ... what makes you think the government cares a lick about "the greater good???" All they care about is staying in power!


The G.I Bill? You have an issue with millions of people receiving an education in exchange for service to our country? Many people, including my own father (Vietnam), would never had been able to complete college educations without it.No ... I don't have any "issue" with it. My only point is, could it be run more efficiently and more effectively if it was run privately?

Surely you wouldn't have an issue with more G.I.'s having access to more educational funds due to streamlining operations, driving out efficiencies, generating profit which would generate better access to capital ... All these things are things that would happen if it was run privately.

This is what people fail to realize ... just because you're against the government running something doesn't mean you're against the concept. I just know that private enterprise will always use money more efficiently and to better end results than any governmental entity ever could.

[Hammer]

This is what people fail to realize ... just because you're against the government running something doesn't mean you're against the concept. I just know that private enterprise will always use money more efficiently and to better end results than any governmental entity ever could.

I think the people who burned by corporations like Enron might disagree with you that private enterprise always uses money more efficiently...;)

The reason why I think you can't have something that does both is that with time greed will take over and they'll want bigger profits at the expense of society's greater good.

With that, I am off to enjoy a certain theme park we all know and love :). To be continued later this evening...

[Ian]

Well sure ... corruption exists in private enterprise ... of course, it does.

But even you wouldn't dare imply that it doesn't exist in government, would you?

:secret:

[Janmac]

Not to put too much of a damper on the public vs private debate, I am compelled to chime in, however late, on the education issue being beaten, excuse me :blush: discussed here. Disclaimer: I don't have citations for my opinions, anecdotes and possibly improperly recalled info from past reading.

Do we need to define what constitutes an education before we try to "fix" the system? In the 1800s an educated person might have been someone familiar with the classics, having possibly read them in the original Greek or Latin. That obviously isn't relevant so much nowadays. On the other hand, hopefully a plumber doesn't have to have a Masters degree to put a new wax ring under my upstairs toilet.

Perhaps much of what we lament in the schools is societal. Society isn't where it was when we were suffering with the Depression, struggling to win a world war, or even learning to live with the specter of over-annilation by long range missile. None of my grandparents and many of their offspring were schooled past the 8th grade. Yet they were productive members of society, often owning their own prosperous businesses. DH's grandmother had one day of first grade before her father put her back in the fields. His mother went to school through the fourth grade. Yet both those women were functionally literate. They had enough understanding of the importance of literacy to work with the toddlers of their families to ready them for reading.

Which segues nicely into motivation, possibly one of the keys. Student motivation may be based on where society is and what drives adults. What is there to work for? Or even more basically, what is work?

Which brings us back to goals.

It is my understanding that the United States is a country of individuals. Mavericks, if you will. Rebels. I read somewhere, sometime, that Japan had few inventors, which might possibly be changing in recent decades. What is our goal with standardized testing? Will we be producing inventors? Who decided that standardized tests define education? Anecdote warning: our oldest granddaughter told us of two math classes in her jr. high. One teacher focused on hands on stuff - making change, counting, "relevant" stuff. The other teacher focused on the standardized test. No points for which class scored higher on the test but wouldn't you rather hire the kid that could make change? Why can't they learn both? Good question. Maybe that goes back to the motivation question. Or maybe the definition question.

I recently read a book about the investigative branch of the CDC, the EIS. In the chapter about the polio vaccine, I read about an acceptable level of failure in even successful vaccines. This may be something we don't like to think about but there is probably an acceptable level of failure even in successful educational programs. If the teacher described in a previous post had only encountered one first grader with poor (to non-existent) reading and math readiness, that's pretty good. In the early 70s I worked with two third graders who could neither count to 10 nor say their alphabet past the letter G. Thess kids were motivated, bright, and eager - definitely not dullards.

If we fix education with more standardized testing, longer school days and more of them, what becomes of the many learning styles and types? Will a kinesthetic learner find more desk time to be a punishment?

We live near the Lake of the Ozarks in a very rural county. The school in our local district has 700 students k-12. Probably 70% of the parents work in a seasonal job, either tourism, agriculture (yes Mr. Obama, those agrarian societies still exist) and construction, probably in roughly equal percentages. Hopefully, even tho we do have federal funding, our schools' needs can be based on specific local circumstances.

Okay, I'm done. Someone help me down off the soapbox. :D

Jan

[Ian]

Jan, that was an awesome post. Very great points and very well thought out.

You know one thing I'd like to say about this thread ... I think it proves that you can still have a productive, respectful debate on important topics without degenerating into name calling and accusations.

My congrats to all participants for, thus far, keeping things very civil. :thumbsup:

[magicofdisney]

If we fix education with more standardized testing, longer school days and more of them, what becomes of the many learning styles and types? Will a kinesthetic learner find more desk time to be a punishment?
I too think this post was well thought out and well written, but this particular paragraph stood out for me.

I have a kinesthetic learner and more time at a desk, doing worksheets would be torture for her. Alternately, if I were to engage her with hands on activities for longer periods, she would thrive.

This is yet another problem in teaching and learning. Most schooling (and society for that matter) is geared toward visual learners. This is how many educators are trained to teach. What about the auditory learners? And then there's the various combination of all three.

There are are a multitude of issues at hand. So many problems need to be acknowledged but there's no blanket answer to address them all.

[Ian]

This is yet another problem in teaching and learning. Most schooling (and society for that matter) is geared toward visual learners. This is how many educators are trained to teach. What about the auditory learners? And then there's the various combination of all three.It's not an inherent problem, though. It's only a problem because we try and employ a one-size-fits-all, cookie cutter approach to education. The whole "teach to the middle of the class" mentality.

[Granny Jill A]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Granny Jill A
A bit of irony regarding my daughter. She is certified to teach any subject to kids with behavior problems, but the State will NOT certify her to teach regular kids. Why? She did not take Elementary Music, Elementary Art, or Elementary Phys Ed in college.


Yeah see ... just another example of what happens when you get mired in this kind of bureaucratic baloney.

Yup! And it gets stranger..... she went from public school to teaching at a very expensive private school. When she gave low grades to students who did not do the work, she was reprimanded by the head of the school. The school depended on parents staying happy while paying the high-priced tuition. She was ordered to change the grades. It was a real eye-opener for her, and she did not renew her contract the next year.

Sorry, I just realized how OFF TOPIC I was with this last post. I guess some of the problems with changing the school day and/or year is overcoming the natural resistance to change.

[Wayne]

Why is it that when others start threads on topics that have the potential for generating strong feelings (a la death of Ted Kennedy), they are closed because this is a family site and "we don't discuss these issues here." Yet, now we have how many pages of the non-sensical, anti-public schools rantings of one of our "moderators?"

What a joke.

[Lizzy]

I don't find Intercot's stand on these issue's a joke. I have been around this site for many years and know that the minute this thread turns ugly it too will be shut down.


With that, I do want to say that while I don't agree with some of this idea for our children, I don't agree with our government inforcing it and so on I do appreciate the fact that, even while his daughter's get to attend a top rated private school, That Obama does have it is his mind that our educational system is failing as it is. I do appreciate that he sees a need to fix things, even if I don't agree with his solution at this time.

[vicster]

With that, I do want to say that while I don't agree with some of this idea for our children, I don't agree with our government inforcing

Who does everyone think is enforcing our education system right now? THE GOVERNMENT! Who's idea was it to have the summers off? THE GOVERNMENT! Whose idea was NCLB? THE GOVERNMENT! Yet no one wants the government involved in education?

I think the kids can do with a shorter summer break. Most kids are bored within 2 weeks of summer break and since when does a little more education hurt?

[Ian]

Who does everyone think is enforcing our education system right now? THE GOVERNMENT! Who's idea was it to have the summers off? THE GOVERNMENT! Whose idea was NCLB? THE GOVERNMENT! Yet no one wants the government involved in education?Yes. That's the entire point. And they've completely and totally ... to borrow a phrase from ESPN ... "jacked it up".

They've had their chance. They've failed. Time to move on and try something new.

And I'd like to thank our most recent new contributors to this thread for taking what was a productive, respectful, adult conversation and sending it down the path the majority of dialogue takes in this country today ... childish name calling, pointless rhetoric, and a complete and total refusal to listen to opinions different from your own.You know ... things like calling other people's viewpoints "rantings."

If you don't have anything productive to contribute to this discussion, then I'd suggest you move along.

[Mousefever]

Ian,

Since you have been the strongest voice against the current state of our education system, I'd be really interested in your comprehensive view of how it should be run. I'm hearing from you that you think schools should be run from either a state system, or even better, a private enterprise system. What would that look like? It would be disingenuous of me to suppose you have everything about such a system worked out, but I'm interested to hear some of the basics.

I'm asking you this, Ian, for a couple of reasons. I am interested to hear what you have to say. And I think it takes much less intellectual effort to look at everything that's wrong with our system, than to come up with real solutions. I would love this conversation to continue with a focus on what we can agree on, what we can build consensus around. I think what you and others are saying has merit, and is important in our discussion. It's only through civil discourse and consensus that we can move forward.

Wayne, I don't think that anyone here is asserting that this isn't a bi-partisan problem. While the focus has been on Obama's ideas for education, I don't think that anyone can assert that our education system has been deteriorating under any one administration. Obviously, prior to Obama's short tenure, there has been eight years of a Republican president. Bush faced these same problems and came up with "No Child Left Behind", a program that hasn't universally succeeded either. Maybe Ian is right and we need to scrap the whole system and start over! ;)

Please keep the constructive ideas coming!

Amy

[Ian]

Hey Amy ... Great post. Thanks for bringing us back in focus.

I will do exactly what you suggested and provide some concrete examples ... But tomorrow.

I'm headed out for the night, but I'm excited by the challenge!

[meldan98]

I just wanted to add one thing about "fluff" classes, where would Disney be if we didn't have classes. Let's, there would be no musicians, no movies, no rides, no imagination and no magic. "Fluff" isn't fluff. It is an important part of education.

For example, I didn't like math as a kid and didn't understand a lot of it. However, during the holidays, we were handed sheet music to learn some carols for our school holiday production and the teacher explained whole notes, half notes and quarter notes. Guess what, I figured out fractions. Who would have thought a kid could learn math while learning music.

Just teaching the kids the 3R's won't do our kids, our states, or our nation any good.

We shouldn't leave it up to the federal government to solve this, nor should we leave it to the states. We need to stand up and start locally to get this issue solved. A grass roots effort is what is going to get our kids the education that they deserve and the education that they have a right to. If your neighbor doesn't stand up for their kid, then you need to stand up for them too.

And I will agree with the teachers out there, you don't get paid enough to put up with the stuff you have to deal with. However, the person who sits behind the desk at the school district office that gets paid $300k+ to make really poor decisions needs to find a new job or get paid a whole lot less.

[Ian]

Okay, so ... the most common solution I've heard discussed in terms of privatizing the school system involves what's most often referred to as the voucher system.

Most of you probably know that the Federal Government currently spends around $60 billion on education annually. In addition, states spend around an additional $500 billion every year. And then you have to factor in the difficult to pin down expenses that individuals incur by sending their kids to private schools. At the end of the day, the U.S. as a whole probably spends close to three-quarters of a trillion dollars every year on education.

These numbers are pretty easily verifiable, so if you don't believe them just go to www.ed.gov (http://www.ed.gov) and you can find them there.

Anyway ... the voucher system involves the government taking the money they already spend on education and distributing it out to parents in the form of an education voucher. These vouchers can then be exchanged at a for-profit educational institute of your choice for a year of schooling for your child or children.

There would be no restrictions on where you could send your child, so parents in inner cities would no longer be forced to send their children to the sub-standard public schools they attend today. They could go pretty much anywhere they wanted to.

The system would still be regulated by the Department of Education, to some degree, but individual schools would have wide lattitude to teach children through whatever methods they chose. As with all free markets, if the methods worked they'd draw more students (or "customers", if you prefer). If they methods didn't work, the school would ultimately fail and parents would opt to send their children elsewhere.

If you think about it, we already have a pretty similar system in this country with pre-schools, right? And it's worked pretty well thus far.

The benefit here is that you essentially remove any potential financial barriers that currently exist between parents and finding a good education for their kids. I mean sure ... the uber-rich would still be sending their kids to snooty, fabulously expensive prep schools, but that happens now. What would change is that the lower and lower middle class families who have no choices now, would have a choice.

And of course, since the primary motivator for these institutions to attract students is achieving top results, the current "zero accountability" system would largely disappear.

Now look ... obviously that's just a rough frame of an idea and there's probably holes in it that would need to be plugged. It's definitely not perfect, but neither is our current system ... far from it, actually. Again, this isn't any kind of political statement. I'm just a concerned parent looking for ways to improve the educational system his young children are just entering.

I don't need anyone to tell me that our educational system has been slowly but surely degrading over the last 50 years, as all the while we keep spending more and more and more trying to "fix" it. And it isn't working. And I see no signs that it's going to work. As someone else has pointed out, we've had just about an even number of Democrats and Republicans in office over the last 50 or 60 years and none of them has done anything to correct this problem.

This wasn't intended to be any kind of slam on President Obama. I'm just looking for new, creative ways to fix a very, very broken system that is failing our children ... the future of our nation ... in very, very fundamental ways. You don't have to agree with my ideas. But I would ask you to at least read them with an open mind and consider them. What can it hurt??

[Hammer]

First, Ian, great post. There is a lot of it which I do not agree with, but it is still a good post.

Flaws I find with voucher systems-

1) Transportation- Some form of government (federal or state) will need to provide a way for the inner-city kid to get to the suburban school as many who live there do not drive. A kid from Camden wouuld definitely have an issue getting to Haddonfield HS without it.

2) What I see happening is many of the schools would raise their prices to the amount of the voucher in addition to what they already charge, basically keeping out the inner-city voucher children.

I am getting ready to leave Beach Club Villas, but I'll come back later with a few more counterpoints.

[Ian]

1) Transportation- Some form of government (federal or state) will need to provide a way for the inner-city kid to get to the suburban school as many who live there do not drive. A kid from Camden wouuld definitely have an issue getting to Haddonfield HS without it.I agree. This is a partial, but certainly not insurmountable, issue. Honestly, though, I don't see it as any serious impediment. There are any number of ways to get around it, not the least of which would be the institutions themselves offering some mode of transportation to their schools.

Think about it ... there would be a large financial incentive to do that.


2) What I see happening is many of the schools would raise their prices to the amount of the voucher in addition to what they already charge, basically keeping out the inner-city voucher children. I'm not sure I understand this point. Since everyone would have the same vouchers, how would raising the tuition price up to the amount of the voucher keep anyone out?

I may just be misunderstanding what you're saying, though.

[Kenny1113]

Voucher system was proposed several years ago in FL, and ,if I remember correctly, voted down because it was unconstitutional.

Someone correct me if I am wrong, like I said it was several years ago. I was very dissappointed to see this did not go through. :(

[thrillme]

Personally I think this whole discussion is FABULOUS for both adults and kids alike. In school our kids study government and they too should have a voice in this.

Yes we as parents should be able to decide what WE feel is best but...I'm proud of the kids that have posted here with their voices. My DS is 13 and we listen to talk radio on the way home and have discussions about how WE feel about it. You can't and should hide politics from children. They are immersed in it more than ever before.

I really believe there are a LOT of tweaks that can happen in the school system as opposed to forcing the kids to stay LONGER and more days (remember this is NOT year round school he's talking about it's LONGER hours and MORE days).

[diz_girl]

I know that vouchers were mentioned to be used towards for-profit schools, but what about religious-based schools? I'm not saying that vouchers should or shouldn't be used there. I don't want to open up a can of worms bringing up religion (an Intercot no-no), but vouchers used towards religious-based schools can be construed as government funding of religious schools. This brings us to the sticky point that school vouchers being used for religious-based schools (of which I am a product) might violate the Establishment clause of the Constitution. In essence, it would give tax dollars to a religious institution, and can be interpreted as supporting the establishment of that particular religion. So this question is from a constitutional perspective, not a religious perspective.

A tax credit for tuition may circumvent this rule, but that wouldn't help the poorest of children who need better schools, whose parents don't even meet the minimum tax bracket.

But as a pp mentioned earlier, many of the problems with our educational system might go away with more parental involvement.

[Ian]

Voucher system was proposed several years ago in FL, and ,if I remember correctly, voted down because it was unconstitutional.You are correct, although to be clear they ruled that it violated the Florida Constitution and not the U.S. Constitution.

It was also a different situation to a degree, because the voucher system was somehow being set up in addition to the existing public schools system in Florida.

So basically the Court ruled that because, " ... it set up an "alternative system" not accountable to the state, the diversion of money reduced public funds for a public education but also used public funds to provide an alternative education in private schools that are not subject to the 'uniformity' requirements for public schools," the ruling stated."

So it was more an issue with the way this particular voucher was structured that caused the Court to strike it down than it was any kind of inherent legal issue with a voucher system.

[Scar]

ETA: Never mind, Ian is faster (and more resourceful) than I. ;)
Voucher system was proposed several years ago in FL, and ,if I remember correctly, voted down because it was unconstitutional.Something doesn't sound quite right here. Was it voted down in the state legislature because the lawmakers felt it would not stand in the court, or was it passed and overturned by the State Supreme Court? And if so, on what basis was it deemed unconstitutional? And which constitution, US or FL.

[Ian]

I know that vouchers were mentioned to be used towards for-profit schools, but what about religious-based schools?As long as the vouchers could be used at any religious schools (i.e. mosques, Hebrew schools, Catholic school, etc.) I see no issue with that in regards to the First Amendment.

As long as the Federal Government isn't endorsing one religion over another or discriminating somehow in terms of the distribution of funds, I think it would be fine.

[Lizzy]

2) What I see happening is many of the schools would raise their prices to the amount of the voucher in addition to what they already charge, basically keeping out the inner-city voucher children.


Ian, what I think Christine was trying to point out is that the schools would make their prices so that they could discriminate from certain students being able to attend, even with a voucher. Sure everyone would have the same voucher, but the schools would raise their prices above the amount the voucher would represent, essentially keeping out the "poorer" class

What I hope would happen would the inner city schools would start to compete with other schools so that they would gain more students, and by gaining more students gaining more money for their school.

[MNNHFLTX]

ETA: Never mind, Ian is faster (and more resourceful) than I. ;)Something doesn't sound quite right here. Was it voted down in the state legislature because the lawmakers felt it would not stand in the court, or was it passed and overturned by the State Supreme Court? And if so, on what basis was it deemed unconstitutional? And which constitution, US or FL.

It was originally passed by Florida legislature, but eventually was eliminated after repeatedly being struck down by the state courts (the last one being the Florida Supreme Court). It was declared unconstitutional under Florida law since most of the people initially used the vouchers to attend religious schools and because it violated the tenet of the Florida Constitution requiring a uniform system of free public schools. In other words, the schools receiving funds in the form of vouchers were not required to adhere to the same standards as the state's public schools, nor were they accountable to any oversight from the state government.

Another point--vouchers were only given to students who were attending a school with a "failing" grade. Taking funds away from these schools (most of them low-income and in urban locales) was seen as potentially causing their demise, since there was no way for schools to improve their programs without the funds to do so.

[Scar]

Ian, what I think Christine was trying to point out is that the schools would make their prices so that they could discriminate from certain students being able to attend, even with a voucher. Sure everyone would have the same voucher, but the schools would raise their prices above the amount the voucher would represent, essentially keeping out the "poorer" classBut why would they. If there were two competing supermarkets, one isn't going to charge unreasonably higher prices just to "keep a certain class out". They'd be shooting themselves in the foot because everyone would shop at the cheaper store.

[Lizzy]

While I don't agree that this is right or fair or even completly founded but


For the same reason Obama doesn't send his girls to a high end private school. He could send his daughters to any school in the country he wanted to, but did he choose to send them to a school with inner city students or did he send them to a school with students who also come from a wealthy background? There are certain classes of people in this country that want to keep their kids within a certain class. They discriminate against people with less household income.

Again, I do not agree with this thinking, but it is a harsh reality in this country.

[Ian]

Ian, what I think Christine was trying to point out is that the schools would make their prices so that they could discriminate from certain students being able to attend, even with a voucher. Sure everyone would have the same voucher, but the schools would raise their prices above the amount the voucher would represent, essentially keeping out the "poorer" class.No, I'm not saying this right, I guess. If you're a school in the voucher system, you accept a voucher. Period. They're all redeemable from the government for the exact same amount.

If you don't agree to allow students to attend your school in exchange for a voucher, you're considered a private school where parents have to pay full, out-of-pocket tuition.


But why would they. If there were two competing supermarkets, one isn't going to charge unreasonably higher prices just to "keep a certain class out". They'd be shooting themselves in the foot because everyone would shop at the cheaper store.Well yeah ... that, too. Schools would be incented to accept as many students as they could handle and still maintain quality results.

Now where you could run into an issue is if schools tried to keep out poorer performing students in order to try and keep their test scores up. You'd have to have some kind of equal opportunity policy they needed to operate under that required them to accept a broad range of students in order to qualify as a voucher school.

[Hammer]

No, I'm not saying this right, I guess. If you're a school in the voucher system, you accept a voucher. Period. They're all redeemable from the government for the exact same amount.


So you are saying that all schools would charge the same price? I can't see that happening. Let me try and give an example which may better explain my point:

School A currently charges a tuition of $5000 (yes I know that figure is very low; I'm just using it for an example). The government decides to have a voucher system which gives $5000 per year, per child. School A decides to raise its tuition to $10,000 so that only those who were already paying $5000 to attend can go to the school.

[HollyB]

I've read this entire thread, but am just now commenting. So my points are made in no particular order:

Re: Public Funding for the Arts:
There are many studies that suggest a foundation in the arts (music, art, drama) enhance a students understanding in core areas. Music helps with math, knowledge of art helps with the study of history, and so on. I think suggestions that the public should not fund these subjects for a "few" students are short sighted. Are you making the same suggestion for sports, vocational training, foreign language, etc.? A well-rounded curriculum exists because students learn in different ways. Having different activities available gives you the best chance of hitting a students learning style. As has been pointed out, one-size-fits-all does not work in schools. We should be expanding the program offerings as much as we can afford, not contracting them.

Re: longer school days and longer calendar year
There are indeed studies that show students who attend school for longer than the 180 days currently used by the American school system do better than many of our students. But I'd be happy if we hit the 180 days. School districts allow teacher in service days/parent-teacher conference days, and half days to count. Studies show that most school districts get in somewhere between 150 and 170 actual instruction days. I know our school district sits at about 164. Take out testing days as well and I would bet, most kids are getting less than 160 days of instruction per year. Let's change that. 180 full days in the classroom plus a week for testing. Teachers should get their in service days, but not at the expense of a teaching day.

As for a longer school year, I think spreading those 180 days out over the calendar year would work well for retaining learning. All schools have to do it for it to work, however. There was a push to move the high schools to year round here, but they can't do it because it messes with the athletic schedule. Someone made the point that it would cause havoc with tourist economies. It would shift the timing of tourism, but I don't think it would hurt it in the long run.

And for a longer school day, I'm for that as long as it has an accompanying drop in homework. There are good studies that show that homework does more to widen the learning gap than eliminate it after third grade. If the student doesn't understand the problem/assignment and has no one to help at home, that homework isn't helping. It's hindering. Use that extra hour in the classroom to reinforce teaching for all students.

Re: Tracking
I agree with the person that said tracking should be reintroduced, but you have to be really careful. A lot of schools with tracking systems were hit with lawsuits because minority students were more likely to be placed in lower tracked classes (regardless of ability). So I think tracking should be tied to ability, but testing needs to be done, not just the assignment whim of some teacher or administrator--or even a parent.

Which brings me to NCLB:
Seriously, the stupidest idea brought to education in years. It is impossible to get 100% of students to pass any test. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try. But what makes more sense is to do away with traditional grade levels. Schools are being judged on whether kids can pass a set test. If they can, they can meet Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and eventually under NCLB 100% of kids in every sub group have to meet AYP on that year's test. As I said impossible.

Let's pretend Student A is 2 years behind 3rd grade level, for example, because his family was homeless. Now his family life is stable and he (in the course of the year) came up 1.5 grade levels and is now only half a year behind. That kid still fails the 3rd grade AYP test, but he's made tremendous strides. It's ridiculous to punish the kid, teacher, and school for his "failure".

On the flip side, on day 1, Student B in a different third grade already reads at a 7th grade level, does 5th grade math, and 4th grade science and social studies. By the end of the year, Student B hasn't moved any levels, but still exceeds AYP on the third grade test. The teacher, who taught the kid nothing all year, and the student, who has made very little progress, still get praised.

The kids aren't cookie cutter, but too many teachers teach like they are. Differentiated education needs to be the norm, not the exception so that all kids progress each year. We need to test how much each kid has learned individually (What did he know on day 1? What does he know on day 180?) or it's not meaningful.

Parent Involvement:
This is one of the most frustrating aspects of our education system. Parents are stretched thin, too. Many were failed by the education system themselves and don't know how to advocate for their child. No question that kids with involved parents do better. Some parents don't have that luxury, however, as they are working two or three jobs to meet basic needs: food and shelter.

So how do we combat that?
It's up to us to step up when we can and get involved. Mentor someone else's kid. Stop thinking only about what is right for "my" kid. Education is everyone's concern.

We can spend 13 years educating kids--at taxpayer expense--so that they become productive members of society, either via a trade or a profession. Or we can spend 60 years supporting people--at taxpayer expense--because they can't find work because they aren't literate, aren't engaged in society, aren't employable.

Frankly, I know which I'd rather do!

Off my soapbox now. . . . Thanks for reading my long list of points. . . .

[PirateLover]

Holly I read your entire post and I appreciate much of what you have to say. The one thing I'd like to point out though is that summer tourism in my area would most certainly be hit hard and would most likely not recouperate. Most people around here go to the Jersey Shore in the summer. Ever seen the movie "Jaws" where the mayor freaks out and doesn't want to close the beaches because people wouldn't come and all the tourism money would be lost? Beach towns around here depend on the summer. No one is going to go to the beach on an "off season" break.

You did point out some important facts about how many days in the school year are "wasted" days. That is so true.

[HollyB]

Holly I read your entire post and I appreciate much of what you have to say. The one thing I'd like to point out though is that summer tourism in my area would most certainly be hit hard and would most likely not recuperate.


Hi Maryanne:

I guess I was thinking that the various school districts would have staggered summer breaks anyway. I know our year round school vacations are slightly skewed from my sister's area's year round school vacations. So If everyone got 8 weeks (instead of the 11 we get now) for example. There'd still be plenty of time for people to take vacations. We're done at the end of May, and start well before Labor Day. I'm sure other districts would still choose to start after Labor Day, so their calendar might end in June.

[A Big Kid]

From CHINA!!!


Remember the old story that if you dig a hole deep enough, you will end up in China?

Now, we have dug the hole so deep, China has ended up here!

[A Big Kid]

I can't see how it would cost any more money... aren't teacher's salarys based on 12 months? They are here in Ontario, but they are paid out over 10 months. We have several year round schools in our region, and the idea of several shorter breaks through the year is far more appealing to us than the long summer break. Unfortunately, the programs our children need are only available during the mainstream program. My brother's children in England go to school in a "year roundish" schedule too. It means opportunity for travel in off times as well.

I agree with the whole idea. If the information is kept fresh in the child's mind, then less time will be needed to review, remind and reteach.

How about the costs for busses, gas, maintenance, janitors, heating and cooling, etc etc?

[tyandskyesmom]

If my dd could get art taught by an actual teacher instead of a parent volunteer, have PE more than one time a week, and have music, and a foreign language taught during the week, then I'd be all for a longer day. I wouldn't even mind having fewer weeks of summer vacation, if it would mean that my dd was getting a better education. Right now, she is only attending half day for Kindergarten and IMHO should be attending full day. I'm one of those involved, active parents, and she is bored silly, but because of the odd age requirements is almost 6 and in class with kids that are 4. I also feel that we need to raise the bar as far as what we should expect our kids to accomplish. I get letting kids be kids, but what about letting them be smart well rounded kids too!


I agree with you all too much!

I think the problem with where the US places among the world as far as education goes has a lot to do with what we push our kids to do. I have a lot of friends who think I am to intense with my kids. If thinking that doing your best all the time and working hard to get there is a bad thing then I'm guilty. Hard work can be fun and the sooner they learn that the better off they will be in the long run!

I think schools are too willing to teach down to the lesser able kidslevel than try to make those kids reach up to the higher. My son (now almost 11 and in 5th grade) was also almost 6 when he was allowed to start KG...even though he was ready at 4. He has never in our area been able to get into a class that was working at his level and in fact I have been told that I should not worry about it bacause "eventually all the other kids would catch up."...well, that is not acceptable to me and he no longer goes to that school! He now is reading at a 7th grade level and is a straight A student.

We see the same thing in sports. My daughter (now 5 1/2 and in KG) is in her 3rd year of gynmastics and ballet classes, her first year for tap and cheerleading (even though she cheered unofficially with the jr high girls last year) and she is very good at what she does. I encourage her to be good. She practices at home. She has fun doing it. She wants to do it. But becasue of her age, she cannot get into classes with older kids that are at ther level so she has to spend her limited class time with girls who are not ready to even be there withough mommies sometimes.

I think in the US we have become soooo "politically correct" that we are not allowed to acknowledge the good kids, the smart kids, the well behaved kids, the strong kids...becasue that might make someone else's kid feel bad. Well, I'm sorry but that is when a parent needs to step up and be a parent!

[tyandskyesmom]

Re: Public Funding for the Arts:
There are many studies that suggest a foundation in the arts (music, art, drama) enhance a students understanding in core areas. Music helps with math, knowledge of art helps with the study of history, and so on. I think suggestions that the public should not fund these subjects for a "few" students are short sighted. Are you making the same suggestion for sports, vocational training, foreign language, etc.? A well-rounded curriculum exists because students learn in different ways. Having different activities available gives you the best chance of hitting a students learning style. As has been pointed out, one-size-fits-all does not work in schools. We should be expanding the program offerings as much as we can afford, not contracting them.

Unfortunately, I think a lot of schools, at least in our area, use a "cookie cutter", "one size fits all" method of teaching. The picture I am being painted looks too much like the exceptional kids are getting left to wait for the less achieving.

Re: longer school days and longer calendar year
There are indeed studies that show students who attend school for longer than the 180 days currently used by the American school system do better than many of our students. But I'd be happy if we hit the 180 days. School districts allow teacher in service days/parent-teacher conference days, and half days to count. Studies show that most school districts get in somewhere between 150 and 170 actual instruction days. I know our school district sits at about 164. Take out testing days as well and I would bet, most kids are getting less than 160 days of instruction per year. Let's change that. 180 full days in the classroom plus a week for testing. Teachers should get their in service days, but not at the expense of a teaching day.

I agree with you here but just to add...the day needs to be much more educationally sound also...

As for a longer school year, I think spreading those 180 days out over the calendar year would work well for retaining learning. All schools have to do it for it to work, however. There was a push to move the high schools to year round here, but they can't do it because it messes with the athletic schedule. Someone made the point that it would cause havoc with tourist economies. It would shift the timing of tourism, but I don't think it would hurt it in the long run.

And for a longer school day, I'm for that as long as it has an accompanying drop in homework. There are good studies that show that homework does more to widen the learning gap than eliminate it after third grade. If the student doesn't understand the problem/assignment and has no one to help at home, that homework isn't helping. It's hindering. Use that extra hour in the classroom to reinforce teaching for all students.

I like homework. That is what keeps me informed of what my kids are doing and learning and how they are learning it. It allows me to be able to help where needed, pick up where the teacher has left off, help my children maintain the excellent status at the top of their class.

Re: Tracking
I agree with the person that said tracking should be reintroduced, but you have to be really careful. A lot of schools with tracking systems were hit with lawsuits because minority students were more likely to be placed in lower tracked classes (regardless of ability). So I think tracking should be tied to ability, but testing needs to be done, not just the assignment whim of some teacher or administrator--or even a parent.

And I suppose here comes my "politically in-correctness" because I don't care what color you are, where you live, or what your parents do for a living...why should kids that do have parents at home (and I work full time and volunteer and drive my kids to 5 or six different activities a week and still make dinner, shop for groceries, clean the house, etc...and still make time for homework help) have to be brought down by kids whose parents may not be able to do that...and yes, I will feel sorry for those kids but I don't see why that should take away from my kids's education that we are working hard to advance. I think we need, need, need to seperate kids by reading level and math level specifically. I think we need to point out exceptional kids and give the other kids something to strive for. I think we need to reward kids who do well, once again giving kids something to strive for.

For example...around here, if you join a baseball or football team you play. If you mom and dad paid their money you ge tto play. It does not matter that you missed 3 of the 4 practices this week or that you cannot seem to learn to catch a ball, or whatever. You play. We do not put any emphasis on winning or (God forbid!) losing...that would be bad! So what has this done? Has it made the poorer players better? Has it made the good kids better? Has it encouraged either? I propose that it has lowered the moralle of the good players. I propose it has given the poorer players absolutely no incentive at all to try harder...to learn more...to get better. We don't even have All-Star teams becasue that would be saying that these are the best players and that would be BAD. Someone's feelings may get hurt. A parent may have to actually parent!

The kids aren't cookie cutter, but too many teachers teach like they are. Differentiated education needs to be the norm, not the exception so that all kids progress each year. We need to test how much each kid has learned individually (What did he know on day 1? What does he know on day 180?) or it's not meaningful.

That would be a wonderful thing but then we get back to who is doing what and someone is going to have their feelings hurt because Johnnie was ranked higher that Sammy and rather that Sammy's parents encouraging and helping Sammie to catch up to Johnnie they will just go complain to the school or the government and we'll change everything to be easier for Sammy...that's the way it works these days!

Parent Involvement:
This is one of the most frustrating aspects of our education system. Parents are stretched thin, too. Many were failed by the education system themselves and don't know how to advocate for their child. No question that kids with involved parents do better. Some parents don't have that luxury, however, as they are working two or three jobs to meet basic needs: food and shelter.

I get this...however, when you made that choice to become a parent, didn't you also make that choice to help your child be the best he/she can be? Even if that means you suffer a little? I certainly did! And because I did, should my child have to suffer becasue someone else didn't? Becasue in the long run, that is what my child will do...the child who is not getting the help at home is getting taught to at the level he is at...my child, on the other hand, who is well above that level is having to sit back and do busy work until everyone is all caught up. In the long run this worse for my kid than making the other work up I think.


So how do we combat that?
It's up to us to step up when we can and get involved. Mentor someone else's kid. Stop thinking only about what is right for "my" kid. Education is everyone's concern.

We can spend 13 years educating kids--at taxpayer expense--so that they become productive members of society, either via a trade or a profession. Or we can spend 60 years supporting people--at taxpayer expense--because they can't find work because they aren't literate, aren't engaged in society, aren't employable.

Unfortunately, this is easier said than done these days. Everything is so sensitive to people that you are not allowed in as easily as you might have been 30 years ago. People get insulted easier. In a perfect world...

Frankly, I know which I'd rather do!

Off my soapbox now. . . . Thanks for reading my long list of points. . . .

For us, it seems we are always fighting for less equality. As bad as that sounds. It is probably an easier place to come from when your children are on the top of things but truthfully i come at it from both sides. Tyler is a brilliant young boy. School work is nothing for him...it never has been. I have begged at two different schools for extra work for him, for advanced placement, even for moving him up a grade all to no avail...and so he sits there without being pushed to his full potential. However, physically, he has to work at everything. He is a black belt in Tae-kwan-do (and it took him longer than a lot of other kids), he plays baseball and football (middle of the road), he just learned to ride his bike this past summer at 10 years old. Skye is just entering KG (first class of all day KG so that's a good start) so I am not sure what I will find educationally with her but physically, things come easy for her but this is where I feel she is not pushed hard enough by her coaches.


I know my view on things is not a popular or politically correct one but I see a lot of trying to help the under-priviledged. In our schools we spens a lot of money on English as a second language. We have a lot of help for pre-school aged kids with learning disabilities. But we have nothing to help the advanced kids stay that way or to encourage others to get to that point. NOTHING! Why is that ok?

I think we have made things too easy for kids...everything.

[Melanie]

And I suppose here comes my "politically in-correctness" because I don't care what color you are, where you live, or what your parents do for a living...why should kids that do have parents at home (and I work full time and volunteer and drive my kids to 5 or six different activities a week and still make dinner, shop for groceries, clean the house, etc...and still make time for homework help) have to be brought down by kids whose parents may not be able to do that...and yes, I will feel sorry for those kids but I don't see why that should take away from my kids's education that we are working hard to advance. I think we need, need, need to seperate kids by reading level and math level specifically. I think we need to point out exceptional kids and give the other kids something to strive for. I think we need to reward kids who do well, once again giving kids something to strive for.

For example...around here, if you join a baseball or football team you play. If you mom and dad paid their money you ge tto play. It does not matter that you missed 3 of the 4 practices this week or that you cannot seem to learn to catch a ball, or whatever. You play. We do not put any emphasis on winning or (God forbid!) losing...that would be bad! So what has this done? Has it made the poorer players better? Has it made the good kids better? Has it encouraged either? I propose that it has lowered the moralle of the good players. I propose it has given the poorer players absolutely no incentive at all to try harder...to learn more...to get better. We don't even have All-Star teams becasue that would be saying that these are the best players and that would be BAD. Someone's feelings may get hurt. A parent may have to actually parent!

Here, here!!!!

My oldest son has just entered middle school, and thank goodness where we are here in Florida they do seperate according to math/science and reading/language levels. Sadly enough, in Dept. of Defense schools where my kids have gone all their school lives up until this year, they did not.

The sports thing is a whole other issue/thread (and off-topic here) but I couldn't agree with you more. I understand how you are tying it into your school argument.

[tyandskyesmom]

Here, here!!!!

The sports thing is a whole other issue/thread (and off-topic here) but I couldn't agree with you more. I understand how you are tying it into your school argument.

Sorry...I just thought my point was easier explained using sports than education...but I think it works the same way...seperate kids into groups they can learn best in and rather than worry that kids in the "lower" (or whatever you want to call it) group may be upset that they are not in the "higher" group, use it to encourage the "lower" kids to get to the point of the "higher" kids...give them something to work for and to be proud of.

I think that is what is wrong with schools today...not the time in class but what is being done in class.

[HollyB]

Hi Sherry:

I don't disagree with you at all about the need to challenge kids at the top. I've sat on the "Gifted Advisory Board" in our local school district for the last 7 years and it can be like pulling teeth to get them to do anything. (No, we can't add honors Science to honors Math and Reading, that would be de facto tracking. Blah. Blah. Blah.) I get it because both my kids have taken every "honors" class the districts offers and they are still bored.

That said, a couple of their best teachers have not been in their honors classes, but have been trained in differentiated education techniques. So their "regular" social studies teacher last year did a good job of letting the kids test out of units and then work on other related projects (same or related subject matter, but more in depth) meanwhile the kids who didn't have a basic grasp (on the Constitution, for example) still got the regular lessons. I thought it worked really well, and it let all the kids in the class work at their own level.

That's the kind of training our teachers need across the board. Because believe me, even in gifted and talented classrooms, there is a huge range of abilities.