Shortened school week a good idea?

[1069]

First, there is the additional recess to combat "childhood obesity." I seriously think I've only seen 2-3 fat kids in my son's school of 900.

I don't know your income bracket, Chuck, and I wouldn't ask, as it would be inappropriate.
For some reason, however, I think you're somewhere in the middle-class to affluent range.
It's true that at many schools in affluent communities, you won't see too many obese children.
But in communities where most families subsist below the poverty line, obesity is rampant.
For one thing, immigrant parents still cling to old-fashioned ideas about how the way to show love to children is to cram them with food until they're fat as a Thanksgiving goose.
For another thing, parents in these communities are largely ignorant about nutrition, and may not make the wisest food choices when grocery shopping.
And for a third, these communities often have few places where it's safe for little kids to run free and be active.

I think for some schools, more physical education is definitely a good idea. For others, perhaps its unnecessary. Perhaps it should be taken on a school-by-school basis.
For instance, they could say, if ____% of the students in this school are clinically obese (let's say 20%), then the school should have a longer recess period/ more phys ed.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

The ful article can be found here

The idea is that cutting a day out of an American student's school week is a good stopgap measure for townships that are hemorrhaging money.

Just wanted to hear your opinions.

I'm sure it's less stressful for the students and teachers. . . but for the parents who have children in childcare I can imagine it making finances just that much more difficult and stressful.

 

[samsmart]

I'm sure it's less stressful for the students and teachers. . . but for the parents who have children in childcare I can imagine it making finances just that much more difficult and stressful.

Well, maybe only certain grades should get this 4-day school week. I'd suggest keeping 5-day school weeks for Pre-K, Kindergarten, and elementary at the very least, and probably for middle school too. For middle school and high school, I'd give them a 4-day school week but try to arrange them to either get a job, an internship, or volunteer for a charity for that 5th day. That way those kids can still do something constructive and educational without the government paying for it, and it keeps the youngest kids still in school.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Well, maybe only certain grades should get this 4-day school week. I'd suggest keeping 5-day school weeks for Pre-K, Kindergarten, and elementary at the very least, and probably for middle school too. For middle school and high school, I'd give them a 4-day school week but try to arrange them to either get a job, an internship, or volunteer for a charity for that 5th day. That way those kids can still do something constructive and educational without the government paying for it, and it keeps the youngest kids still in school.

That makes a bit of sense - having the 5th day be vocational in some way for older students.

 

[Layla_Z]

Do you actually know that the kids are at their desks learning in those 7 hours? From what I've seen, they're not.

First, there is the additional recess to combat "childhood obesity." :roll: I seriously think I've only seen 2-3 fat kids in my son's school of 900.

Then there are the half days so the teachers can have some sort of meeting in the afternoon. These happen once, sometimes twice a month.

Don't forget that the month of September is generally dedicated to reviewing the stuff learned the previous year and lost over the 2 and a half month summer holiday.

Field Trips are all day. I appreciated the field trip to the state capital, but the all day snow boarding was kind of a joke IMO. It's great for my kid who is ahead of the game academically, but I have no idea why that's important to the student body as a whole.

Don't forget for every crappy or not-so-crappy holiday, there has to be a classroom party complete with cupcakes, soda and all sorts of garbage I'd never feed my kid.

Before every week off (and there are 4 full ones during the school year), there's a Friday off and a Thursday half day. Because it's a shortened week before a vacation, the kids and teachers aren't into a full workload, so it's a puff week. There's usually no homework that week.

I liked the 2 week computer rotation where the big project was having the kids draw pictures with a mouse.

And then there was the half day dedicated to watching a dress rehearsal of the high school play.

IMO the public school systems (all of 'em) have problems with money because they mismanage funds. Threatening to cut the school week down to 4 days is just posturing IMO.

The issues you list have not been my experience.

Grades K-2 have 2 15 or 20 minute recesses a day. Grades 3-6 have one.

The half days you mention happen once a month and at the time the teacher are provided training. This training is usually very practical useful information.

Yes, students review the previous year's material but that is necessary. I do think a shorter summer break but with more short breaks throughout the year would be good.

Each grade takes one major field trip a year. While this is not always strictly educational it is a great experience for the students.

As for holiday parties they have Halloween, Christmas, Valentines Day. I don't think this is excessive.

When we have shortened weeks the kids work harder because they still have their weekly spelling and math tests.

It does sound like there is a problem with this computer class but I don't think that problem exists in every school in the country, which is my point. There are varying qualities of schools and teachers so you cannot determine the quality of all schools but experience with one.

 

[Alastor]

Students don't spend enough time in the classroom? I don't know about other states but in Maryland I believe the average school day is about seven hours a day.

Actually, the person that responded to you is right. There are all kinds of things that go on inside a school.

Even in an ideal day, the students have 7 classes at most. Many students have a study hall or a free period.

Once in a classroom, even under ideal conditions, the teacher actually gets their brains for about 22 minutes out of a 50 minute class period.

There is not enough time in the classroom.

There should be more classroom time, not less, and extra-curricular activities should also not be affected. I agree with Orion, Education should be the absolute last place cuts should occur

True.

I agree with this, but if the school system is going to be targeted, it is better that extra-curricular activities are targeted first, before the education system's core functions.

"Lesser of two evils."

It's a sad reality, but I agree. I also agree that certain sports create revenue - which is why those sports don't get cut and others do.

It should be pointed out that many elite private schools, with a high percentage of graduates who go on to Ivy League colleges, have shorter school days than the average public school.
Most of the upper-tier private schools, at least in my city, get out at noon on Fridays (I believe this is to allow for weekend travel), have many more days off/ holidays than public schools, and also let out for summer a couple of weeks earlier than public schools.

They also have parents that give a damn.

Good answer.

Many schools can't give homework because the students don't have the ability (environment outside of the school) that it takes.

A lot of modern work is done on the Internet as well. The home environment matters too. In inner-city or rural school districts especially, this can be a significant issue. Massive, actually.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

I agree with this, but if the school system is going to be targeted, it is better that extra-curricular activities are targeted first, before the education system's core functions.

And were in the school I attended years back. . . there were no basic school-sponsored sports programs that extended into "extracurricular" like football and soccer in which the students would compete against others. There was, though, a special after school sports program that had a grade-level requirement to enter and participate in. It was various things like archery, gymnastics and volleyball.

Relevance? :shrug:
But it was the only school system I ever attended which operated that way.

In the south it's quite opposite. I attended several schools in my state and sports are *the* thing for everyone to be involved in. They take priority.

 

[digsbe]

I think they shound instead just go through the budget and cut out all the waste. I'm posting from my phone so I don't have time to verify this yet, but I once heard that each public school student roughly costs around $12,000 per year. They shouldn't cut out another school day. I think one of the biggest issues with our education in America is that kids have no discipline and don't spend enough time learning/studying in the classroom. I'm against cutting out a school day, there are better alternatives and we can't afford another hit to education.

 

[Alastor]

I think they shound instead just go through the budget and cut out all the waste. I'm posting from my phone so I don't have time to verify this yet, but I once heard that each public school student roughly costs around $12,000 per year.

You heard wrong. It's actually $6,000 - which is pretty damned cheap. Compare it to a daycare program - you can't find that kind of value, and the daycare program won't educate a child.

There's an awful lot of misinformation out there about education systems. There's an awful lot of money at stake and there are some pretty powerful organizations that want it.

Schools may have wasted some resources in times past, but that is certainly not how it is today. If anything, most schools are in dire need of funding. I can't think of any major school system in my region that isn't at least in the danger zone of collapse.

Which by the way, is probably exactly what the corporations behind these kinds of misleading tales want.

They shouldn't cut out another school day. I think one of the biggest issues with our education in America is that kids have no discipline and don't spend enough time learning/studying in the classroom. I'm against cutting out a school day, there are better alternatives and we can't afford another hit to education.

This I agree with. We need for the teachers to have more time with the kids, and with the resources to actually teach them.

 

[samsmart]

I think they shound instead just go through the budget and cut out all the waste. I'm posting from my phone so I don't have time to verify this yet, but I once heard that each public school student roughly costs around $12,000 per year. They shouldn't cut out another school day. I think one of the biggest issues with our education in America is that kids have no discipline and don't spend enough time learning/studying in the classroom. I'm against cutting out a school day, there are better alternatives and we can't afford another hit to education.

If it's so difficult to get kids to study, then we should start paying kids to go to school. That help them give them the initiative to succeed, and they'd be performing a service for pay, which is what happens in the real world.

 

[1069]

If it's so difficult to get kids to study, then we should start paying kids to go to school. That help them give them the initiative to succeed, and they'd be performing a service for pay, which is what happens in the real world.

I've always thought so.
Part of the reason I lost my motivation to do any schoolwork whatsoever around the third grade (and subsequently dropped out of school after 8th) was the lack of any tangible reward for doing so.

It's not that I was a greedy, materialistic little ****; it's just that around that age I observed that work that is valued by society is compensated.
I knew about volunteerism. My dad did a lot of volunteer work, and I volunteered too, from sixth grade on, primarily in nursing homes. I understood this work was valuable because it helped people, and made me feel good. It made a positive difference.
But I couldn't see any reason to do homework- rote memorization, most of it.
It didn't make me feel good. It didn't teach me anything I wanted to know. It didn't help anybody. I wasn't compensated for it, except with a grade on a report card that nobody, including me, cared about.
Maybe money or prizes would've made a difference. Maybe they would've served as some sort of incentive, at least for a little while.

I recently read about a school that was using "pizza parties" and drawings for prizes (such as Ipods) as incentives for students to do well on standardized tests.
I believe this school was penalized for doing so, but before they were, their students managed to do very well indeed on their tests.

I don't see the problem with rewarding kids monetarily for doing schoolwork.
The work itself is not particularly rewarding or fulfilling, and many kids don't see the purpose of it (especially those who are smart enough to already know the material).
Kids know that when society holds work to be meaningful, it compensates workers for doing it.

I don't know, maybe there's something I'm missing, but i don't think it's a bad idea. :shrug:

 

[NolaMan]

The question is, however, what will those kids do on that fifth day while their parents have to go to work? The parents are going to have to either pay babysitters to watch those kids, which will put a financial burden on those parents, or take them to more public programs, such as Boys and Girls Clubs, which will stretch the limits of those resources, and so they'll likely demand more public money.

The school system's mandate is the provide an education, not provide childcare.

 

[1069]

The school system's mandate is the provide an education, not provide childcare.

Well then, we need government-funded childcare, like every other developed nation.
Women and single parents have the right to work- in fact, our economy would collapse if they didn't- and many of them can't afford to pay eight hundred dollars a month for private child care.

 

[NolaMan]

Well then, we need government-funded childcare, like every other developed nation.
Women and single parents have the right to work- in fact, our economy would collapse if they didn't- and many of them can't afford to pay eight hundred dollars a month for private child care.

Don't see how that is the government's problem or responsibility. People would figure it out, and they would not quit their jobs over this issue.

 

[1069]

Don't see how that is the government's problem or responsibility.

If you "can't see" how the economy collapsing is the government's responsibility, I can't help you.
The government has made it illegal to leave children at home unsupervised until their mid-teens.
Therefore, the 'latchkey kid' solution of the 1980s is no longer available to today's parents.
They are forced to pay someone to supervise their children while they work, for the period of time their children are not in school.
Many can't afford the fees that for-profit childcare centers charge for this service.

 

[NolaMan]

If you "can't see" how the economy collapsing is the government's responsibility, I can't help you.

Laughable. No one would actually quit their job over this scenario.

The government has made it illegal to leave children at home unsupervised until their mid-teens.
Therefore, the 'latchkey kid' solution of the 1980s is no longer available to today's parents.
They are forced to pay someone to supervise their children while they work, for the period of time their children are not in school.
Many can't afford the fees that for-profit childcare centers charge for this service.

I would wager that the group with no viable alternative is actually quite small. Most will most likely have a family member that can help out, (ie older sibling, grandparents, etc). Certainly not all will.

There are cheaper alternatives as well for those who cannot afford it. When I was in high school I worked at a facility that had a "day camp". Children could be dropped off starting at 7 AM and picked up anytime until 7 PM, and the cost was $15 a day (which included lunch). That would be a total of only $60 a month to put your child in something like that. Obviously that cost will vary from place to place, but cheaper alternatives are in fact available.

Are you telling me that $60 a month (give or take a bit) will break most families?

 

[Alastor]

The school system's mandate is the provide an education, not provide childcare.

But the voters will make it so. That's why they dislike additional days off for the students or shortening the school year already.

They know what it costs to take care of a kid, and a public school does it at a very low cost.

 

[NolaMan]

Well then, we need government-funded childcare, like every other developed nation.
Women and single parents have the right to work- in fact, our economy would collapse if they didn't- and many of them can't afford to pay eight hundred dollars a month for private child care.

I just also want to point out the total absuridty of your statement. $800 a month in childcare? For only four Friday's a month that would be needed? So according to you, it costs $200 a day typically to watch a child? I need to get in on that racket apparently.

Also, the premise that it will hurt the economy is absurd. You want to claim basically that people would be unable to work due to this burden. I don't know about you, but if I was facing the prospect of being a little short on money in the upcoming months, my reaction would not be to quit my job and thus eliminate my source of income...

Your argument is just totally bogus and flawed.

 

[Alastor]

The school system's mandate is the provide an education, not provide childcare.

I just also want to point out the total absuridty of your statement. $800 a month in childcare? For only four Friday's a month that would be needed? So according to you, it costs $200 a day typically to watch a child? I need to get in on that racket apparently.

Also, the premise that it will hurt the economy is absurd. You want to claim basically that people would be unable to work due to this burden. I don't know about you, but if I was facing the prospect of being a little short on money in the upcoming months, my reaction would not be to quit my job and thus eliminate my source of income...

Your argument is just totally bogus and flawed.

You can afford child care then. Consider yourself fortunate.

Many can't.

 

[NolaMan]

You can afford child care then. Consider yourself fortunate.

Many can't.

$50-$60 is what it would arguably be as an increase in cost per month. How many cannot afford that? As I said, probably not many. Many who might claim they cannot afford it most likely could by cutting something elsewhere. Cancel cable for instance, thats the whole cost right there.

I am sorry if many people think they are entitled to maintain their lifestyle at the expense of the government (ie other taxpayers), but that is simply not accurate.

 

[Alastor]

$50-$60 is what it would arguably be as an increase in cost per month.

If you're getting child care for four days a month off of 60 bucks, be prepared for your daycare worker to be seen on television "taking a seat over there."

 

[Alastor]

Here's a PDF with the rates for a decent child-care facility.

It's not absurd, and it's a chain, but it's not some weird guy who has candy and puppies either.

This is the list of their rates. Note that there is no option for one day a week. "Edge rates" I think refers to just the daycare, while "tuition" is the rate for early learning enrollment.

Here are some of their rules:

• Minimum of two half days is required
• Days missed can not substituted.
• Payment is expected for sick days and personal vacations.
• Refunds will not be issued for closings due to weather.
• A one month notice for schedule changes and vacations is required.
• We require parents to pick up their children by 5:30 pm otherwise a late fee of $5.00 per quarter hour is paid directly to the teacher that stayed with your child.
• Once accepted into the program a $50.00 application fee is required for all programs. This is non-refundable, non-transferable and nonapplicable towards tuition.

• Rates are subject to change


Vacation Policy
Each child is permitted a maximum of one week vacation during the school
year (September to mid June). Vacation weeks must be submitted IN
WRITING two weeks prior to taking the vacation. Credit will be given in the
following month’s tuition.

It's really that affordable is it? Bear in mind, this is a low-rate chain. This isn't the MGM Grand program by any stretch of the imagination. Because they're a chain, their rates are lower than most.

Also bear in mind that if your child only does a half day, they still pay the full rate for that day. Note that they also don't let you take vacation time, or if they do you pay for their service anyway.

You could pop for that no problem, huh?

And so can everyone else?

Do you really believe that?

 

[1069]

This is the list of their rates. Note that there is no option for one day a week.

I was going to say, one does not pay for center-based childcare by the day, or by the hour.
And if you're looking at hiring a competent, adult sitter to watch your kids at home, the price is even more exorbitant.
The suggestion about having family members watch them for free is ludicrous; most people work well into old age these days. Grandma's not sitting at home baking pies. She's out busting her butt like the rest of us.
And even if she weren't, many families have moved far from their relatives. A lot of kids don't even live in the same state as their grandparents.
The days of relying on the help of extended family when it comes to raising your children are over.
It's offensive to me that this would even be suggested as an adequate solution.
For the vast majority of parents, it's not a possibility at all.

 

[NolaMan]

Here's a PDF with the rates for a decent child-care facility.

It's not absurd, and it's a chain, but it's not some weird guy who has candy and puppies either.

This is the list of their rates. Note that there is no option for one day a week. "Edge rates" I think refers to just the daycare, while "tuition" is the rate for early learning enrollment.

Here are some of their rules:

Have you called this company to ask about possible one-day rates? I would bet that there are other facilites that are not dumps that offer this service outright, and many others would most likely be open to working with you should this change actually take place in the school system.

No business is going to turn away a potential huge source of revenue by turning away a lot of people for 1 day a week. If the demand arises, expect the supply to follow.

It's really that affordable is it? Bear in mind, this is a low-rate chain. This isn't the MGM Grand program by any stretch of the imagination. Because they're a chain, their rates are lower than most.

Also bear in mind that if your child only does a half day, they still pay the full rate for that day. Note that they also don't let you take vacation time, or if they do you pay for their service anyway.

You could pop for that no problem, huh?

And so can everyone else?

Do you really believe that?

I am not overly concerned about ensuring that someone I don't know has access to childcare should this change take place. My point is that if people need to afford it, they will figure out a way to afford it, and it won't come in the form of massive quanitities of people quitting their jobs, like 1069 seemed to indicate.

 

[NolaMan]

I was going to say, one does not pay for center-based childcare by the day, or by the hour.
And if you're looking at hiring a competent, adult sitter to watch your kids at home, the price is even more exorbitant.

As I said, most places are open to working with you. Additionally, if the demand arises for this service, expect the supply to follow. That is simple economics.

The suggestion about having family members watch them for free is ludicrous; most people work well into old age these days. Grandma's not sitting at home baking pies. She's out busting her butt like the rest of us.
And even if she weren't, many families have moved far from their relatives. A lot of kids don't even live in the same state as their grandparents.
The days of relying on the help of extended family when it comes to raising your children are over.

In many cases kids do live in the same state as their grandparents, and in many cases the grandparents are retired, or another family member could be available to help out. I did not say this was going to solve the problem, but it would limit the amount of people who were actually in desperate need of childcare if the schools changed to this format.

It's offensive to me that this would even be suggested as an adequate solution.
For the vast majority of parents, it's not a possibility at all.

Well since I never suggested it as an "adequate solution" I see no reason you should be offended. My point that it would limit the overall number of people in desperate need of childcare stands.

Point is, this change will not adversly impact the economy, and the majority of those who cannot "afford" this care most likely could by making cuts elsewhere. I know many people probably don't want to do that, but that is not the responsibility of the government.

For the small remainder that actually cannot such care, I would be open to some form of subsidies or help, but that is it.