I happened to read in Time magazine the other day about a case for making the school year all year-round. The argument is that the ~3 months off that American schoolkids get is too long a gap that causes forgetfulness during those lazy shut-down months (especially in math and science, areas the US is falling behind compared to other industrialized countries that have longer school years).
"Summer vaction" is a relic from the past when we were more of a farming society in which the kids were needed at home to tend to the fields. Now, not so much.
I've often heard this being proposed and the following arguments against it...
Con: Cash-strapped states would find it hard to increase pay for the teachers.
Counterpoint: The teachers would still being getting roughly the same amount of time off, so I'm not sure the salary would need to change. The school year would be (for example) something like 6 weeks work, 2 weeks vacation, 6 weeks work, 2 weeks vacation, repeat, repeat. If I were a teacher, I'd like this schedule better. Breaks up the flow a bit more, and I wouldn't always have to take my trips during "peak" season and busy holidays.
Con: Businesses that depend on summer vacation crowds, like amusement parks and so on, would have their business hurt if school was still in session.
Counterpoint: Not necessarily. Each city would have a different schedule pattern, so there'd still be trips to Disney World and Six Flags during those two week breaks. Plus, whatever crowds the touristy attractions lose during June, July and August, they would gain more in May and September. There'd be no huge post-Labor Day dropoff.
I'm sure there are other good pros/cons out there.
Thoughts?
i do think it would probably be better for the students and isn't that what counts?
(08-08-2010 07:28 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote: [ -> ]i do think it would probably be better for the students and isn't that what counts?
I don't. They'd burn out in 2 years.
I think Motown is referring to a school calendar that consists of days relatively equal to those that students currently attend. However, the vacations are broken up throughout the school year instead of lumped together as a 2-1/2 month summer vacation.
Negative. Give the kid some time to BE A F*CKING KID. Damn.
It's a great idea, if you're a parent who wants the kids out from under foot all summer long. And it's a good bet these constitute a good percentage of the folks promoting this idea...
Promoting this as a way to have American educated kids catch up to the rest of the world ignores the fact that most of our schools have geared themselves for educating people so that everyone moves along, whether they're ready or not, and is now churning people with just enough skill to barely get by in the world. That's the real problem. Making them go to school all summer wouldn't educate them any better. Home schooled kids do far better on standardized tests than kids from our public schools...
I think they already do this in some of the Phoenix area schools.
(08-09-2010 10:10 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]Negative. Give the kid some time to BE A F*CKING KID. Damn.
Agreed. However, should there be a point where this ends? Maybe shorter breaks for high schoolers?
(08-09-2010 07:13 AM)Rebel Wrote: [ -> ] (08-08-2010 07:28 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote: [ -> ]i do think it would probably be better for the students and isn't that what counts?
I don't. They'd burn out in 2 years.
This!
(08-09-2010 02:22 PM)UT Ceng Owl Wrote: [ -> ] (08-09-2010 10:10 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]Negative. Give the kid some time to BE A F*CKING KID. Damn.
Agreed. However, should there be a point where this ends? Maybe shorter breaks for high schoolers?
Sadly, in many areas, that is happening. It screws around with the economy when you shorten the kid's summer time. It stops family's vacations from happening. It takes kids out of summer jobs early, reducing the cheap work force that also needs to learn about the responsibilities of a job.
Labor day to Memorial day should be the school year. If colleges can get it done in that time frame, why can't high schools?
Funny, Summer breaks aren't exactly a new thing, yet we used to be at the top on the educational pyramid. Now, you guys want to blame the kids and punish them by longer years? Who is it that's the problem here? The kids? That's like blaming the clay when you fk up a sculpture. This is a parent/teacher problem. Fix them. We didn't start school until after Labor day. They just started today in Columbia County. It's already a shorter break, and the educational standards are getting worse. This argument for a longer year makes no sense.
how would the kids get burned out? they'd be able to offset some of the long runs of school days. From january-the end of march kids are in school without any break. it would make things flow a lot better. As someone who's only 5 years removed from high school, i remember how much time we wasted at the beginning of every year just trying to re-learn the knowledge we had forgotten. Knowledge that was to serve as the foundation of what we'd learn in that new school year. I'm not blaming the kids for anything, but i really think it would help kids learn better and forget less of what they'd learned. And don't worry, they'll have time to be kids. It's not like they're chained to the desks. And it's not like kids spend a ton of time outdoors anyway. Those days are over. Some of you seem to have forgotten that
Long runs? 8-3, M-F? Don't make me laugh.
(08-09-2010 11:54 PM)Rebel Wrote: [ -> ]Long runs? 8-3, M-F? Don't make me laugh.
first they were just kids, now they can handle it? you can't have it both ways. the length of the school day isn't at question here
(08-10-2010 07:22 AM)flyingswoosh Wrote: [ -> ] (08-09-2010 11:54 PM)Rebel Wrote: [ -> ]Long runs? 8-3, M-F? Don't make me laugh.
first they were just kids, now they can handle it? you can't have it both ways. the length of the school day isn't at question here
50's standards seemed to work out, didn't they? ..and no, I don't mean 50's education, I mean 50's educational practices.
(08-10-2010 07:51 AM)Rebel Wrote: [ -> ] (08-10-2010 07:22 AM)flyingswoosh Wrote: [ -> ] (08-09-2010 11:54 PM)Rebel Wrote: [ -> ]Long runs? 8-3, M-F? Don't make me laugh.
first they were just kids, now they can handle it? you can't have it both ways. the length of the school day isn't at question here
50's standards seemed to work out, didn't they? ..and no, I don't mean 50's education, I mean 50's educational practices.
you're right, they did. but kids' attention spans are worse than they are now, what with video games and the facebook. I completely agree that the current school year was fine in the 50's, but that doesn't mean new ways won't work. Different doesn't necessarily mean worse. As a student i'd probably complain about a year round school year, but i can tell you i'd definitely forget less of the pertinent material. Just my .02
I've never heard that teachers would get paid more money by going to year around school... in Ohio, the big issue is that very few schools are air conditioned. Having kids in a school that is 90+ degrees in the middle of the summer is a terrible solution. Until they have the money to pay to upgrade all the facilities I don't think you'll see any big trend towards year around school.
(08-10-2010 02:09 PM)mlb Wrote: [ -> ]I've never heard that teachers would get paid more money by going to year around school... in Ohio, the big issue is that very few schools are air conditioned. Having kids in a school that is 90+ degrees in the middle of the summer is a terrible solution. Until they have the money to pay to upgrade all the facilities I don't think you'll see any big trend towards year around school.
don't have air conditioning? wow
Just want to mention again what I and GRPunk pointed out... The number of school weeks and vacation weeks would be roughly the same in either scenario. It's either a 2.5 block of time off, or a series of 2 week increments throughout the year. It would add up to about the same.
The point about high school summer jobs is a good one. There'd be a considerable shift in labor planning. And it'd sure put a damper on those big 'Back to School Sale' advertisements.
I don't think it'd have such a negative impact on family vacations. Your summer selection might be more limited, but now you have more choices during spring and fall.
For those interested in reading up on the article that made me think about it...
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/...54,00.html
(08-10-2010 06:10 PM)Motown Bronco Wrote: [ -> ]Just want to mention again what I and GRPunk pointed out... The number of school weeks and vacation weeks would be roughly the same in either scenario. It's either a 2.5 block of time off, or a series of 2 week increments throughout the year. It would add up to about the same.
The point about high school summer jobs is a good one. There'd be a considerable shift in labor planning. And it'd sure put a damper on those big 'Back to School Sale' advertisements.
I don't think it'd have such a negative impact on family vacations. Your summer selection might be more limited, but now you have more choices during spring and fall.
For those interested in reading up on the article that made me think about it...
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/...54,00.html
Other than it's "different" I'm not sure I see a downside.
Labor planning for teen summer jobs? Teens have some of the highest unemployment as it stands. I doubt this will be a problem, may actually be a blessing.
Vacations? As a homeschool parent, I can tell you that it's
great not being at the mercy of schedules. We went to OC, NJ a few years back, the week following Labor Day. Paid about 1/3 the summer rate for a beach house, the beaches and boardwalk had no crowds, and traffic was light. Figure that families will be able to go to Disney World w/o fighting a nation of people who all have spring break at the same time. They'll love it.
Also, parents won't have to find daycare for 2.5 months in the summer, again at the same time as everyone else. Daycares won't have the feast or famine times either. They'll be able to get facilities and staff and use them at a steady pace.
And the schools themselves will be used more efficiently.
Honestly, if it's tough on anyone it's the teachers and admin, b/c they'll have to coordinate space w/ other classes...think of the "hoteling" concept that some companies are doing w/ their office space.
It will also throw a wrench into various exams. ACT and SAT might not be so bad, some people may like it b/c they can study exclusively for them. But those taking competitive exams, like the AHSME, might have some complaints. it also might affect those playing sports. Football teams may not be able to have 2/days.