Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1) Texas tried it and found that year-round school had very little effect on educational achievement.
2) It's more expensive. Run industrial strength air conditioners in the Deep South during the Summer, and there goes your education budget.
3) Parents need a break from school, too. Between homework, school activities, and the constant assault of nonsensical bureaucratic requirements inflicted on us by schools, two-income parents, it's nice having a 10-week break from all that.
4) Year-round school makes it IMPOSSIBLE to find child care. During a long, 10-week break, it's possible to line up day camps, summer camps, and college kids. But with year-round school, they chop up breaks into a half-dozen two-week breaks throughout the year.
Now, mind you that works fine in the Alice-In-Wonderland universe of educators, because they're off work as well. But in the real world, that means working parents have to cobble together two weeks of child care at a time, often at times when college is in session. What's more, who wants their kids to be out of school in the middle of February for two weeks? What on earth are they going to do?
1) Texas tried it and found that year-round school had very little effect on educational achievement.
2) It's more expensive. Run industrial strength air conditioners in the Deep South during the Summer, and there goes your education budget.
3) Parents need a break from school, too. Between homework, school activities, and the constant assault of nonsensical bureaucratic requirements inflicted on us by schools, two-income parents, it's nice having a 10-week break from all that.
4) Year-round school makes it IMPOSSIBLE to find child care. During a long, 10-week break, it's possible to line up day camps, summer camps, and college kids. But with year-round school, they chop up breaks into a half-dozen two-week breaks throughout the year.
Now, mind you that works fine in the Alice-In-Wonderland universe of educators, because they're off work as well. But in the real world, that means working parents have to cobble together two weeks of child care at a time, often at times when college is in session. What's more, who wants their kids to be out of school in the middle of February for two weeks? What on earth are they going to do?
Most school districts don't choose year around school because of it's benefit in "educational achievement". They produce it as an option for overcrowded school systems which is the case here. I'd much rather have my daughter in a year around school with 25 kids in her class than to shove her in an overcrowded traditional school and have 40 kids in her class.
Child care in year around school districts is certainly not impossible at all. Practically every day care here, including the YMCA, has what they call "track out camps" for exactly this purpose.
You asked: What are they going to do in February? I would say that they'll probably do the exact same thing they'd do if they were in day care in July.
FYI - year around school in NC is not required - it is an option you can choose if you want.
Most school districts don't choose year around school because of it's benefit in "educational achievement". They produce it as an option for overcrowded school systems which is the case here. I'd much rather have my daughter in a year around school with 25 kids in her class than to shove her in an overcrowded traditional school and have 40 kids in her class.
Child care in year around school districts is certainly not impossible at all. Practically every day care here, including the YMCA, has what they call "track out camps" for exactly this purpose.
You asked: What are they going to do in February? I would say that they'll probably do the exact same thing they'd do if they were in day care in July.
FYI - year around school in NC is not required - it is an option you can choose if you want.
Yes, thanks for all that. But you just made part of my point for me. The proponents of year-round school shoved it down everybody's throat with the rationale that kids would do better in schools--not because of other factors. Yet that turned out to be nothing more than a canard.
Second, it's not an effective cost-saving measure. Part of it is the fixed costs of keeping a school open for 12 months a year rather than 9. Quite frankly, given that this country's expenditure per student after inflation has doubled in the past twenty years, it begs the question: How are we still having overcrowded classrooms? The ratcheting up of school spending since 1985 was supposed to take care of all that.
Sure, you can warehouse your kids at a YMCA for two weeks in February and have them stew inside like hothouse plants in July. But having an extended time during summer when kids can actually spend a great deal of time outside swimming, running, hiking, and the host of other outdoor activities is a much better option than spitting out the school breaks in two week drabs throughout the year. And, of course, you haven't addressed the needs of parents to have a little time off themselves. With three kids in a very demanding school system, it's a good thing to have a layoff. Trust me on that.
What's more, making year round school optional seems pretty insane to me. Because, suddenly, a school district must keep tabs on two different sets of kids--those who go year-round, and those who adhere to the traditional schedule. At a time when educators whine about the complexity of their task, why make things even more complicated with a two-track system?
I think the reason why I hasn't worked is because in the areas that have tried it, it has been split up. So if you have more than one child it proves to be very difficult, can't say I blame them for not likeing the idea.
Now if EVERYONE was in year round school, there wouldn't be a problem with the different schedules. Schools still go the same amount of time so teachers would still have the same amount of time off. Daycares and camp schedules would adjust. If you only have a handful of schools on a year around schedule, then of course childcare proves difficult. If everyone was on the same schedule, then childcare wouldn't be an issue.
Most year rounds chools that I have looked into, have a whole month at a time off. Crime by children increases in the summer and unless that statistic has changed recently, those numbers are fact. One month to me is the perfect amount of time off. Three months is way too long. I have read studies that indicated that kids lose up to 80% of what they learned through the summer break. If you could reduce that to just losing 30%, that would be worth that, IMO. One month still gives you plenty of time to do long vacations (not too many people go away for a month or more), go on those hikes, swim, etc. Actually I would venture to guess that kids would be a lot more active if they had those three months spread out throughout the year. As it is now, the first month is usually full of fun and vacations but then the kids get bored and stay indoors the last two months beyond the occasional camp or vacation. Here it gets so darn hot that it is almost too hot to swim. Kids would be outside a whole lot more if they were off in the spring and fall.
The only negative I can see is the cost of airconditioning the building, particularly in the south. I don't see the need to add airconditioning in every area of the country. I know people in the NE that don't have air conditioning in their homes and they get along just fine. But honestly doubt that Minnesota, the Dakotas, Montana, WY and all those surrounding states need airconditioning. I realize they have plenty of 90 degree days but there are not many and you could have off during the hottest, statistically, month of the year.
The problem is noone has really tried to make it work, at least nationwide. It is my understanding that there are certain cities that have. I think Denver has made it work and don't they have a great school system? I haven't looked it up myself but I think that is what I was told.
I just don't understand the argument that summers are for fun, vacations and camps. A month is still plenty of time to do those things.
TEACHERS
got used to 3 months off with with pay or unemployment why would they give that up
Teachers are NOT paid for the time off in the summer nor can they collect unemployment.
The school calendar was designed around the agricultural schedule, not the teacher schedule. Ask most teachers and they would LOVE a 45/15 calendar. I would prefer that schedule myself since we could then take our vacations at off times of the year and not have to pay the higher costs .
In our old town the school switched it's schedule to incorporate a late start Monday once/month. The town stepped up scheduling day care at various places for kids not really old enough to stay home that long but too old to be in a regular day care, the buses picked them up at these sites. Towns will adapt and programs will be offered if schools change schedules.
"Sure, you can warehouse your kids at a YMCA for two weeks in February and have them stew inside like hothouse plants in July. But having an extended time during summer when kids can actually spend a great deal of time outside swimming, running, hiking, and the host of other outdoor activities is a much better option than spitting out the school breaks in two week drabs throughout the year. And, of course, you haven't addressed the needs of parents to have a little time off themselves. With three kids in a very demanding school system, it's a good thing to have a layoff. Trust me on that. "
Not sure I understand this statement. Unless you are a teacher, your children will still be "stewing" whereever they go to daycare. ??? And if you go to a good daycare or the YMCA they don't "stew" anywhere. They probably have more activities lined up for them than their parents.
I wonder why you personally are so against this? Instead of stating an opinion, you sound like you are rather angry about it? Maybe not, maybe I am just reading it wrong.
"Sure, you can warehouse your kids at a YMCA for two weeks in February and have them stew inside like hothouse plants in July. But having an extended time during summer when kids can actually spend a great deal of time outside swimming, running, hiking, and the host of other outdoor activities is a much better option than spitting out the school breaks in two week drabs throughout the year. And, of course, you haven't addressed the needs of parents to have a little time off themselves. With three kids in a very demanding school system, it's a good thing to have a layoff. Trust me on that. "
Not sure I understand this statement. Unless you are a teacher, your children will still be "stewing" whereever they go to daycare. ??? And if you go to a good daycare or the YMCA they don't "stew" anywhere. They probably have more activities lined up for them than their parents.
I wonder why you personally are so against this? Instead of stating an opinion, you sound like you are rather angry about it? Maybe not, maybe I am just reading it wrong.
I think the reason why I hasn't worked is because in the areas that have tried it, it has been split up. So if you have more than one child it proves to be very difficult, can't say I blame them for not likeing the idea.
Now if EVERYONE was in year round school, there wouldn't be a problem with the different schedules. Schools still go the same amount of time so teachers would still have the same amount of time off. Daycares and camp schedules would adjust. If you only have a handful of schools on a year around schedule, then of course childcare proves difficult. If everyone was on the same schedule, then childcare wouldn't be an issue.
Most year rounds chools that I have looked into, have a whole month at a time off. Crime by children increases in the summer and unless that statistic has changed recently, those numbers are fact. One month to me is the perfect amount of time off. Three months is way too long. I have read studies that indicated that kids lose up to 80% of what they learned through the summer break. If you could reduce that to just losing 30%, that would be worth that, IMO. One month still gives you plenty of time to do long vacations (not too many people go away for a month or more), go on those hikes, swim, etc. Actually I would venture to guess that kids would be a lot more active if they had those three months spread out throughout the year. As it is now, the first month is usually full of fun and vacations but then the kids get bored and stay indoors the last two months beyond the occasional camp or vacation. Here it gets so darn hot that it is almost too hot to swim. Kids would be outside a whole lot more if they were off in the spring and fall.
The only negative I can see is the cost of airconditioning the building, particularly in the south. I don't see the need to add airconditioning in every area of the country. I know people in the NE that don't have air conditioning in their homes and they get along just fine. But honestly doubt that Minnesota, the Dakotas, Montana, WY and all those surrounding states need airconditioning. I realize they have plenty of 90 degree days but there are not many and you could have off during the hottest, statistically, month of the year.
The problem is noone has really tried to make it work, at least nationwide. It is my understanding that there are certain cities that have. I think Denver has made it work and don't they have a great school system? I haven't looked it up myself but I think that is what I was told.
I just don't understand the argument that summers are for fun, vacations and camps. A month is still plenty of time to do those things.
You are so funny--you have never been north in the summer have you . We spend pretty much every day from late May to October in the upper 80's and 90's with a spattering of 100's in July. Add the 60+% humidity and you can NOT get by without air conditioning in MN, especially in the schools with little to no air flow. Now, this year has been extremely cool and we have only had a handful of 90° days so far but it is still too warm to go without A/C in the schools. More often then not it is hotter and more humid in Minneapolis then it is in Orlando, Fl (not this year since they are having record heat and we are not but generally overall it is).
3) Parents need a break from school, too. Between homework, school activities, and the constant assault of nonsensical bureaucratic requirements inflicted on us by schools, two-income parents, it's nice having a 10-week break from all that.
4) Year-round school makes it IMPOSSIBLE to find child care. During a long, 10-week break, it's possible to line up day camps, summer camps, and college kids. But with year-round school, they chop up breaks into a half-dozen two-week breaks throughout the year.
So true!
Plus, how about running a park such as a Six Flags or even your local mini-golf course when you can't hire teen-agers to work during the day?
Lots of tourist-type places - beaches, etc. - and summer camps are suffering from short summers and from year-round school.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
