If they want to improve performance, they need to change the quality of the programs, not quantitiy. Schools that are beating our socks off in math and science are spending less hours overall per year than the United States. Longer days/years are not the answer.

 

I was under the impression that those countries do spend more time in the classroom, either by longer school days or longer school years.

In a wild turn of events, Hoopboy and I are in agreement... at least superficially. :lol:

 

IMO, this is less about genuine education than it is radical social engineering.

 

The last sentence of the article comes as close as anything to revealing the underlying reason for this proposal...

 

"Those hours from 3 o'clock to 7 o'clock are times of high anxiety for parents," Duncan said. "They want their children safe. Families are working one and two and three jobs now to make ends meet and to keep food on the table."

 

O is less interested in increasing job skills and test scores than he is in providing state funded day care for parents of school aged kids.

 

There is already way too much downtime in a typical 7 hour school day. Most of the core curriculum could be covered effectively in four hours a day... especially with smaller class sizes segregated into similarly gifted and talented student intellect pools.

 

Adding two to four hours to the school day and two to three months to the school calendar is absurdly pointless in terms of genuine education. Such increases in time would however increase the likelihood for secular social indoctrination and experimentation... as well as increasing a voting base of thankful absentee parents willing to let the state do a significant chunk of parenting and programming their children.

 

If genuine education and improvement is the goal. It would make far more sense to divide the day into morning and afternoon sessions of four to five hours each, with separate groups of students attending one or the other. Kids get in their five hours a day and get on with other things in their lives... the problem is, very few families still have stay at home moms (or dads) to supervise the kids the rest of the day.

 

This is simply one much more direct way for the state/government to gain increased control over our independence.

 

How's that for an unpopular opininon. :thumb:

In a wild turn of events, Hoopboy and I are in agreement... at least superficially. :lol:

 

IMO, this is less about genuine education than it is radical social engineering.

 

The last sentence of the article comes as close as anything to revealing the underlying reason for this proposal...

 

"Those hours from 3 o'clock to 7 o'clock are times of high anxiety for parents," Duncan said. "They want their children safe. Families are working one and two and three jobs now to make ends meet and to keep food on the table."

 

O is less interested in increasing job skills and test scores than he is in providing state funded day care for parents of school aged kids.

 

There is already way too much downtime in a typical 7 hour school day. Most of the core curriculum could be covered effectively in four hours a day... especially with smaller class sizes segregated into similarly gifted and talented student intellect pools.

 

Adding two to four hours to the school day and two to three months to the school calendar is absurdly pointless in terms of genuine education. Such increases in time would however increase the likelihood for secular social indoctrination and experimentation... as well as increasing a voting base of thankful absentee parents willing to let the state do a significant chunk of parenting and programming their children.

 

If genuine education and improvement is the goal. It would make far more sense to divide the day into morning and afternoon sessions of four to five hours each, with separate groups of students attending one or the other. Kids get in their five hours a day and get on with other things in their lives... the problem is, very few families still have stay at home moms (or dads) to supervise the kids the rest of the day.

 

This is simply one much more direct way for the state/government to gain increased control over our independence.

 

How's that for an unpopular opininon. :thumb:

 

I propose mandatory vocational training for those children who show no college-bound aptitude, beginning at the 7th grade.

 

My opinion's more unpopular than yours.

I propose mandatory vocational training for those children who show no college-bound aptitude, beginning at the 7th grade.

 

My opinion's more unpopular than yours.

That's because it makes even more sense than mine... :lol:

Tough luck.

 

Some of us riff-raff have to work year-round....you can do it, too.

 

I won't get into that debate with you. I do essentially work year around. I also work Saturdays and Sundays and late each night.

 

I doubt that you are going to convince your bus drivers and cooks, in addition to teachers, that increasing their time on the job doesn't need to come with increasing their pay.

I was under the impression that those countries do spend more time in the classroom, either by longer school days or longer school years.

 

Not the Asian countries who dominate high performance in Math and Science, they spend considerably less time in the classroom.

I won't get into that debate with you. I do essentially work year around. I also work Saturdays and Sundays and late each night.

 

I doubt that you are going to convince your bus drivers and cooks, in addition to teachers, that increasing their time on the job doesn't need to come with increasing their pay.

This is no different than raising taxes on the rest of us to pay for more and more government/social services.

 

I'm already working five to six months a year essentially for free (no immediate gain to me or my family) just to hand my income to the federal, state and local government... and I don't get three months off in the summer.

 

I'm not bashing teachers here at all. I'm ticked that so few seem to see how intrusive our government "saviors" who want more and more of us to be miserable and needy so we need them looking out for us.

I propose mandatory vocational training for those children who show no college-bound aptitude, beginning at the 7th grade.

 

My opinion's more unpopular than yours.

 

 

As a teacher I agree.

 

 

School day should be 7-11 and 12-4.

 

After a person turns 15, if they show no want to go to college they go to mandatory VoCo training.

This is no different than raising taxes on the rest of us to pay for more and more government/social services.

 

I'm already working five to six months a year essentially for free (no immediate gain to me or my family) just to hand my income to the federal, state and local government... and I don't get three months off in the summer.

 

I'm not bashing teachers here at all. I'm ticked that so few seem to see how intrusive our government "saviors" who want more and more of us to be miserable and needy so we need them looking out for us.

 

I don't get three months off either. I also work nights and weekends.

 

Since I use resources that the state and federal governments provide (roads, schools to teach/train the workforce, etc), I don't see it as purely turning money that belongs to me over to "them".

I don't get three months off either. I also work nights and weekends.

 

Since I use resources that the state and federal governments provide (roads, schools to teach/train the workforce, etc), I don't see it as purely turning money that belongs to me over to "them".

Not my point at all...

 

I understand the need for basic taxes that provide common infrastructure, defense and security.

 

I'm not against teachers. I know too many of them and I'm married to one.

 

More could be done in fewer more focused hours a day. Separating the unmotivated/troublemakers from those children who are or could be motivated to learn and accomplish more would be huge.

 

Like it or not, not people are not wired equally. It's foolish to pull down the achievers to try to equalize things for the unmotivated. This applies to schools, taxes and many area of life.

It's hard enough keeping kids attention now...it will be even worse with longer school days and fewer breaks.

 

So it is the KIDS fault?:confused:

As a teacher I agree.

 

 

School day should be 7-11 and 12-4.

 

After a person turns 15, if they show no want to go to college they go to mandatory VoCo training.

 

So if your stupid in the 7th grade your stupid for life; come on lets at least be realistic. Very disappointing comments...

So it is the KIDS fault?:confused:

 

:rolleyes:

Not the Asian countries who dominate high performance in Math and Science, they spend considerably less time in the classroom.

 

Those who are ALLOWED to spend time in the classroom. The Asians have made it an honor and a privilege to go to school, not a right that can't be taken away unless a kid pulls a gun.

 

I'm all for amping up vocational training in this country for those that have no interest in going to college. The entire curriculum could be so much more practical for everyone.

Those who are ALLOWED to spend time in the classroom. The Asians have made it an honor and a privilege to go to school, not a right that can't be taken away unless a kid pulls a gun.

 

I'm all for amping up vocational training in this country for those that have no interest in going to college. The entire curriculum could be so much more practical for everyone.

 

What I'm not for, is making the school day and year longer for programs that just do not work. Why make kids suffer a longer school day/year, when they're still going to get their socks knocked off by other countries.