Curriculum Debate

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

We can't increase every subject, unless you cut into Summer break.

I happen to think that the most important change we could make to improve public eductaion would be to do just that and go from the 180 day school year to a 200 day school year.  The original purpose of the long summer break, to let kids help out on the farm during the busy summer growing season, is long gone for almost all kids and four less weeks of inactivity would mean that less time would need to be spent getting kids back up to speed on skills that atrophied because of lack of use during the summer.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I happen to think that the most important change we could make to improve public eductaion would be to do just that and go from the 180 day school year to a 200 day school year.

I see your point, but do you realize how much that would cost? We have to buy more teacher hours, find stuff for kids to do for an extra twenty days, and the camp organizations would be ticked about losing millions of dollars and would offer resistance.

Personnel costs would increase by about 20% I figure, as since it would cut into the ability of teachers to do the required continuing education during the summer, they would need to take some quarters off.  Building costs would be about the same, as there would be no need to build new facilities, as schools lie largely unused during the summer months.  Other groups that depend upon the long summer break would also be unhappy.  The Myrtle Beach area merchants are already unhappy that as a result of when the year-end exit exams are given, most schools in the state start up in early August so they can get in as many teaching days as possible in before the test day.  They definitely don't like school starting before Labor Day.  However, it has definitely been shown that going to a 200-day school year would help children to learn better, and isn't that what is really important?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I do not know, but I would vote for anyone who gets me out of a class with people who can't seem to understand that 3.0 is the same number as 3 even after 15 minutes of explanation.

(@%&)(&

But 3.0 has a dot and a zero after it!

And in some applications 3 and 3.0 are not the same thing as 3.0 indicates a greater degree of precision.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

What you propose, Avelaval, is hardy unique or new.  It's a concept called open schools that was at one time hailed as the next great advance in education.  Like most such great advances, while it works well for some, it doesn't for others.  As an alternative to traditional education for a child that has a well-developed interest in a particular field of endeavor for which appropriate teachers can be provided, it works well.  But if the child doesn't have a well-developed primary interest, it doesn't work very well.  If the school doesn't have a teacher or teachers with the necessary skills to develop that interest, it doesn't work at all.  It's a great concept for schools, either public or private, that accept only those students that have interests that the faculty can nuture.  For an attendence-area based public school where every kid must be accepted, it just doesn't work.