Extending the School year?

[Swimmy]

Is Extending the School Year A Good Idea?

I agree that public education needs a major overhauling. However, in an age where studies have proven that american teens spend more time on celebrity gossip, scoring home runs under the bleachers, and partying, it is essential that we find some way to re-inspire kids to be academically powerful and productive. Many Asian schools send their children to school full time. In order for our teens to compete on a global level, or even at a local level, it is critical to provide them with the same educational opportunities our foreign friends provide their own future.

The summer break is so long that many kids often forget how to read or do the basic skills they acquired in the previous school year. Consequently, much of the beginning part of the school year is wasted on re-teaching what the students should have mastered in the previous year. Couple that with the trend of parents who are not involved in their children's academics and it's amazing we're not being run by a bunch of idiots... scratch that.

[dgriffin]

Scratch that, indeed. Hahahaha!

Of course, we'll have to give all the teachers and other 10 month employees a TWENTY PERCENT raise for their efforts. (That'll push the salary of the highest paid teacher in New Hartford to around $125 K or more per year.) We'll have to install air conditioning in school buildings that currently don't have it (a lot, I think,) All that to provide a state controlled baby sitting service for working couples. There will be increases in truancy, at least for the first decade or so. And we'll be contributing to the trend to keep children from their parents and under control of the state. We'll be raising children who are busy all the time and have never been bored enough to get creative. This last aspect may do the most damage to our nation.

[frankcor]

Dave, I agree that education spending would increase if we had year-round schools. But if we didn't have non-representing representation that is incapable of prioritizing needs, it wouldn't necessarily have to cost us more. A true representative government would identify less important government spending and divert those funds to education.

[dgriffin]

Apr 13, 2009 9:05:03 GMT -5 frankcor said:

Dave, I agree that education spending would increase if we had year-round schools. But if we didn't have non-representing representation that is incapable of prioritizing needs, it wouldn't necessarily have to cost us more. A true representative government would identify less important government spending and divert those funds to education.[/quote]

I'm not sure we need more money for education. I'm not sure we're getting the best our money can buy when it comes to teacher compensation now. Our schools are asked for and provide many more services than education, and that has left the picture confused. It might be a good idea to first separate the products.

Frankly, I wouldn't educate a student beyond the 6th grade. What with the availability of on-line study materials and information, librares, any dope should be able to learn on his own after age 11. At age 12 he or she should start contributing. The young adolescent could be babysitting (for free, as part of a public program) those younger than him or her. He can be visiting a "teacher" once each each day or even week for help in his self-studies. He can be aiding in one or more of the many social service programs the government could organize ... as in government leading rather than spending. Seniors could be donating time in return for social security checks. Everyone would pitch in.

Am I a communist? No, I'm a realist, and the United States trying to live a culture acceptable to Andrew Jackson will no longer work with this many people.

Don't think we can do it? Well, then you're not very hopeful about the future, because that's exactly what we'll all be doing some day when we run out of wealth. If Mexico executed all of its criminals, they'd be doing it now.

.... just off the top of my head.

[frankcor]

Do you really think kids could learn physics or thermodynamics on their own?

I also think it's unrealistic to ask people to work 2 months longer without expecting to pay them for the time. That's not to say we should just jump up their salaries by a corresponding amount but it is reasonable to expect to pay more.

You'll get no argument from me about whether or not the salaries are justified or earned. I'm just think I'm being realistic.

[dgriffin]

It's not only unrealistic to ask teachers to work an extra 2 months without proper compensation, it's wrong. I wasn't complaining about it, just stating it as a fact. Teacher salaries would increase 20%. That's what I'd want if someone asked me to work 20% longer.

Do I really think kids could learn physics and other advanced subjects on their own? Very definitely, yes. I was writing "programmed instruction" for an international corporation in the 1960's and it was being used with young students in the 1970's. We covered some pretty high level theory and complicated stuff. You might be surprised what students can learn on their own. In fact, young students are often given self-instruction sessions (stuff better than the old P.I, thank goodness) when classroom teaching proves difficult for them. Going at your own pace tremendously expands the horizons of what one can learn.

You can teach a youngster all he will ever need to live a productive life in six years. Reading, basic math, life skills and most importantly, learning skills. You will not need to take up his full time after that on each weekday for him to continue his studies right up through what we call "college level" curriculum.

You will need to guide and supervise him and to help him or her with choices. But let's be careful to distinguish between teaching and guidance and understand exactly what the learner needs are. They are not what we today call "education," except in the broadest sense. Today, we have "education factories" where the successful students pick their way through the field of landmines placed there by "the system."

Finally, we are never going to get responsible adults unless we demand responsibility from those who will accept it, no matter their age. Not all will, and they will fall by the wayside. But they do now.

Hey .... Dewey had ideas about revising the educations system, why not us? In fact, there are a lot of very good ideas out there worth trying. But guess who stands firmly in the way?
Teacher unions.

[frankcor]

That is a good idea Dave. I saw a few programmed learning projects being done by the Air Force back in the 80s. At the time, it seemed they would work for many kids but programs would need to be developed for alternate learning styles -- once size doesn't fit all.

But thanks for giving me a "snap out of it" smack (picture Cher in Moonstruck). I'm okay now.

[dgriffin]

You're correct that the stuff isn't perfect. In fact, some of the old stuff was lifted bodily from the old materials, put in PC format and called, "New Computer Learning!!" Turns out it was worse on the PC than in a book.

But I would argue for more experimentation and implementation of instructional ideas than has been seriously tried in the last one hundred years. Trouble is, unless a new idea can be quickly mastered by a stand-up teacher and not measurably impact the status quo, it won't happen while creativity is under a lock-down.

I think it's telling that people successful in their professions and businesses often use their higher incomes to send their children to schools that teach with the same standard tests in mind, but with dramatically different methods and results.