http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/03/16/feinberg.longer.schoolday/index.html?eref=igoogle_cnn
So I posted this article on facebook, and my friend responded with this:
completely agree. our students spend less time in school than they would if they lived in almost any other developed country. then we complain about why they aren't keeping up, blame it on them, and pour money into schools to try to fix it. our school schedules are based on a time when students had to help their parents harvest crops. doesn't really make sense for people who live in New York City, and as of recently the population of the US has shifted from predominantly rural to predominantly urban.
keeping kids in school longer each day and for more days per year would solve the problems that families face when both parents work (or in single-parent households with one worker) and kids have nobody to look after them. and then there won't be a 2-month-long summer that necessitates camps and babysitters and other ways of keeping kids out of trouble. so keep them in school from 7 to 5, with recess so they don't get fat, 45-minute lunches so they can eat and socialize without feeling rushed (also helps with weight control), etc. etc. on top of all of that, they'll learn more and better retain what they've learned. and that's the end of my rant.
Here's my response:
Hmm... It's funny because I completely disagree. What about the kids who have it together (or who's families have it together)? What about extracurriculars? When are kids supposed to develop talents? I had dance, cheerleading or gymnastics rehearsals every day after school until 8 or 9 o'clock by the time I was in middle school. Couldn't have done that if I had school until 5! Also, 7am? Are you joking? Do you know that teenagers need 12-14 hours of sleep per night? That kind of schedule doesn't allow for life, at least not a healthy one.
Further, teachers get paid NOTHING and work like dogs (well the good ones do, anyway), although I'd argue that most teachers aren't great because few really awesome/inspiring people stay in an occupation where they are underpaid and under-appreciated. That's the problem with our school system. You can't extend the school day and school year without at least doubling the teacher's salary.
Lastly, we have the most stressed and depressed kids of any time period in this country. In the last year, 7 kids have committed suicide on the train tracks by my house! This is partially attributed to the pressure of the high school they attend/the community we live in. All these kids are expected to be geniuses and go to Harvard. Not everyone is meant to be academic.
Now if schools were changed to fit a "Multiple Intelligences" model, including excellent art and performing arts, and sports programs (akin to what parents pay for outside of school, since there would be no time for their kids to have it outside) as well as encouraging students to find what they are good at, be that math or car mechanics, fine. The odds of that actually happening are nonexistent.
I'm interested in seeing healthy, social, well-adjusted kids, and I don't feel like extending the school day or year promotes this, with the exception of some cases, such as inner-city kids with little opportunity or family support, but I feel like a specific population can be targeted, vs. the entire public school system.
That said, the public school system needs a complete overhaul.
What do y'all think?
4 comments:
This is interesting because Steve works for a charter school organization in Brooklyn (which also has schools in Connecticut) called Achievement First. It's very similar to KIPP (which is talked about in the article). I think you have to realize that the longer school hours are useful for kids in inner cities, the kids that are attending schools like KIPP and Achievement First. These aren't kids like you or me, who have always had a lot of opportunities available to us, and have somewhere to be when school ends. At Achievement First, the students are okay with staying longer because their other option is to go home and do nothing. They come from poor families and can't take dance classes, etc. because their parents can't afford to pay for it. Instead, their extracurriculars are incorporated into the school day.
Also, teachers at Achievement First (and KIPP, I've heard) are paid WAY more than public school teachers. Steve always talks about how well-treated the teachers are and how they get anything they want. They are highly valued by the organization and they get compensated VERY fairly. Also, because these charter schools are non-profits, teachers get benefits, like their college loans are forgiven.
Anyway, this is a long rant, but my point is--I agree with this system for the kids in inner cities who need it. I don't think it makes sense for the average public school, especially those in more affluent communities where kids won't need the extra attention. I for sure would have been mad to stay in school longer when I was in high school, because I was involved in a lot of activities after school, too!
p.s. Steve showed me this Achievement First video the other day. It's really sweet! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiiNgF2upXc&NR=1
Interesting. Yeah, I think it makes sense to do different schooling for urban children, but it IS sad how much of this is really driven by parent employment because I think unstructured time for kids is invaluable! My mom at times put me in less extracurriculars just so I could think, read, and have my own time. It's something I wish I had more of now because I think it makes one more emotionally and mentally stable.
Thanks for posting this!
@ Ghenet - I totally agree with you! My point is that for the average public school, particularly where I live, this isn't a good or feasible plan. I think organizations like Achievement First and KIPP are invaluable for the populations they serve, and I should have been clearer about that. I didn't like that the idea was, "Oh, look at what KIPP is doing, the entire American public school system should have school 7-5 and on the weekends." That's not feasible, and like Karren said, I think unstructured time for kids is really important. I liked being overscheduled because I enjoyed dancing and singing and everything I did so much, but I see so many depressed kids who don't even know how to imagine because their parents are trying to hard to get them to Harvard or Stanford that they've essentially beaten the child out of them. It's really sad.
I think for kids who need that help and support and the mentoring that it would provide, go for it, but I doubt either of us would have gotten the quality dance or music lessons in school vs. outside.
I'm rambling, hopefully you get my point! :)
Hey! I like the video/song! I'll be checking out the rest of their tunes.
By the way, I've been meaning to tell you....
you are going to be very proud of your cousin...
...I read the Harry Potter serious. Boom!
Post a Comment