Longer School Year Nationwide On The Horizon???
Mar 1, 2009 at 9:29 PM Post #31 of 59
Quote:

Originally Posted by taylor /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Computerpro3, +1 on high school being a waste of time.

They don't make provisions for people who are really smart. I could have walked out of that place halfway through my Junior year and never looked back.

I've been an avid reader since about age 8, so I could barely get through my English classes, because the stuffy old "classics" they taught were terrible. There were only a handful of novels I actually enjoyed that I was forced to read in high school. Unless the teacher picked a good selection of books, I did poorly in it.

I slept and/or played calculator games through every single math class. I was able to consistently score >90% on tests, then get a B- because I didn't do any homework.

Science class? Introductory Chemistry and Physics just 'clicked' for me. The teacher explained something, and I was like okay, I get it. Now give me the test. I don't want to do a homework on it, or sit through three classes worth of example problems.

That's why I liked standardized tests. I was one of the really smart kids, languishing in "advanced" high school classes well below my intelligence level. I had decent grades, because I beat down every test, but I never did homework, so I never got an A. If you looked at GPA, I was ~250th out of a class of 550, barely top 50%. Dumber kids had to work a lot harder to learn what I did. They did that by completing homework, participating in class, meeting with the teachers, the kind of stuff that boosts your grade. When it came to SATs, I scored in the highest 5% of high school students.



Well my friend..you sound like an epic failure
biggrin.gif
Being at the bottom 55% while claiming you are 'smart' is pathetic, particularly in high school.

You are practically unable to compete on the most basic level; I predict your failure in college (if you can even get into any decent one with your crappy class rank ... whatever you say is decent...Rutger? SUNY? For reference the median GPA/SAT at Michigan engineering is 3.9GPA/1400 SAT for incoming students; I would characterize UM as decent, and MIT/Stanford/CalTech as great.) and beyond unless you change your paradigm about what means to be competitive and what it means to be smart - you are NOT smart by any means...yet.

I do agree with you that public high school is not really a place for truly gifted students (not you - top 5% on SAT is not that gifted by any means...merely smart). I went to a public high school and I was able to rack up somewhere around 40 AP credits by the time I was done and a friend of mine racked over 70 AP credits. If you wanted challenge you could have been more proactive.

GL with your 'decent' college.

Oh and more importantly proclaiming yourself as 'smart' on headfi is not that great of a practice
wink.gif
you have no idea how many EE/scientist/researcher/lawyer/doctor this site attracts. I am sure we have a few that have gotten 1600 on their SAT while getting a 4.0GPA in high school.

sorry about the mild EECS and engineering school trolling
biggrin.gif
 
Mar 1, 2009 at 9:33 PM Post #32 of 59
Quote:

Originally Posted by mrwinick /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I don't think an extra hour per day or an extra month per year would be equivalent to prison. I think we'll just have to agree to disagree there.
I don't think the kids in the affluent suburbs of Chicago are in a bad situation. I'd imagine the kids in OC are not either. (sounds like at least one class has a great teacher....) There are, however, millions of American kids that are in a bad situation. I think this country needs to find a way to address that issue. (I wish it weren't a political discussion. It is too important and would be easier to resolve.)
I think your suggestion that not everyone needs to go to college is absolutely correct. A track for people who want to be highly trained for a good job that doesn't require psychology 101 (or any of the freshman seminar classes....) is absolutely appropriate and is, for some reason, under-valued in the U.S.



Actually, the kids over here are pretty...dense. They seem to have a knack for the stupidest things. For example, my college friends had a Capture the Flag thing set up during some nights. It was fun until the high school kids came over and it seemed that they were stoned/drunk, so it messed up the game completely. A few weeks ago I also got lost on the streets of Orange, and I saw some schools; they all looked pretty sad in their condition, and security cameras covered every other corner of the building.

It other news, I strongly disagree with you on the extra hour or month or whatever of school. No chance for kids to be themselves and have fun? Great, let's make them like some country and have them work their butts off their whole life, and if they die doing so? What will we remember them for? Nothing, great. Saves money on the funeral costs.

We need to find a better balance of school education and social experience, not overwhelm the latter with the former.
 
Mar 1, 2009 at 9:34 PM Post #33 of 59
Quote:

Originally Posted by nealric /img/forum/go_quote.gif
We need to distinguish between the education of relatively wealthy suburban kids and the seriously disadvantaged. Studies show that children in low income schools actually learn more quickly during the school year than their wealthy counterparts, but slip drastically over the summer. The achievement gap, which opens up during the summers, gets wider and wider until it gets to the point that you have kids who are four, five, even six years behind.

My girlfriend is a Teach for America HS teacher. The vast majority of her kids read significantly below grade level and struggle to do even the most basic arithmetic. In the same building as her school there is a charter school called Yes! prep. The charter school does near year round schooling and runs a full 9 hr school day. Even though it pulls from the same low-income community, Yes! has more than double the college matriculation rates. Most of the children meet or exceed grade level expectations. The main difference is length of time in school.

School doesn't feel like a prison camp when there are drive-by shootings where you live- it feels like a safe-haven.



What studies? I can't imagine that happening for any real reason. I'm a wealthy suburban kid, and I don't know anyone who goes around "keeping up to date" with his learning so that he doesn't slip. Does being surrounded by drug dealers and guns somehow make one lose memory faster?
 
Mar 1, 2009 at 9:34 PM Post #34 of 59
Quote:

School doesn't feel like a prison camp when there are drive-by shootings where you live- it feels like a safe-haven.


One problem is that schools (particularly in low income areas) often aren't that much better than the streets. Sometimes worse, since you technically have to show up every day. The local tech school has dismissed students due to possible drive-by's targeting it.

Quote:

Does being surrounded by drug dealers and guns somehow make one lose memory faster?


Good question, perhaps people in such areas have generally poorer home lives or tend to get into bad situations easier. This can distract them enough to forget about "inconsequential" things like learned academics.
 
Mar 1, 2009 at 9:41 PM Post #35 of 59
Quote:

What studies? I can't imagine that happening for any real reason.


Even if you were not doing anything during the summer, you were still surrounded by people who spoke more or less correct English. You were probably assigned summer reading- which your parents forced you to do. You had a computer, so you were probably reading stuff on the internet. Many suburban kids get shipped off to various enrichment programs during the summer (I know I was). There is quite a bit that you don't even think about.

By contrast, some kids will go three whole months without speaking a word of English and without having read or written a single word in any language.

Here is a study by John Hopkins University (among others):
http://www.asanet.org/galleries/defa...ASRfeature.pdf

It explains the reasons better than I could.

In any event, I can understand the hostility in this thread- especially by those who are currently in the public school system. I know I would have thrown a fit back in high school if they had extended the school year. My main point is that many of the justifications for a longer school year probably don't really apply to you.
 
Mar 1, 2009 at 9:42 PM Post #36 of 59
Quote:

Originally Posted by nealric /img/forum/go_quote.gif
My girlfriend is a Teach for America HS teacher. The vast majority of her kids read significantly below grade level and struggle to do even the most basic arithmetic. In the same building as her school there is a charter school called Yes! prep. The charter school does near year round schooling and runs a full 9 hr school day. Even though it pulls from the same low-income community, Yes! has more than double the college matriculation rates. Most of the children meet or exceed grade level expectations. The main difference is length of time in school.


I think it is great that your girlfriend is doing what she is. More people need to follow her path, but I have a question for you. What if all of the students in the charter school were put into the regular school and the students in the regular school were put into the charter school? Do you think the results would be exactly the same?

I personally think the results would be different. There is a reason why those students are in that charter school: their parents want them there. I bet those students receive more support at home. I think this is much more of a factor than the hours in class a day or the year round schedule.
 
Mar 1, 2009 at 10:04 PM Post #37 of 59
Quote:

I personally think the results would be different. There is a reason why those students are in that charter school: their parents want them there. I bet those students receive more support at home. I think this is much more of a factor than the hours in class a day or the year round schedule.


I see your causation/correlation point, but I think there are compelling reasons why this would not be the case. For one, the school day is so long that the home environment doesn't effect them much. With the long school day they get all the academic support they need at school. They way it works, much of the afternoon is supervised tutoring/homework sessions- the kind of stuff a lot of suburban kids would be getting at home.

A lot of the parents at her school are very dedicated, but simply don't have the ability to help their kids with school. Many of them are working 70-80hr weeks in menial jobs and lack more than a 5th grade education. The same goes at the Yes! school.
 
Mar 1, 2009 at 10:09 PM Post #38 of 59
Quote:

Originally Posted by mark2410 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
erm dont all kids everywhere get massive amounts of holidays, like 6 month off a year?

btw i dont think school days need to be longer or have less holidays, they need to let kids progress at the rate that suits their abilitys not hold back the ones who can, thats all



No. In China, summer vacation starts in July; however, students are required to complete a set of homework during the days off (I can already hear wt@#$ ... ). This is in addition to returning to school on a regular basis, e.g. twice a month, so you can turn in your homework; oh..maybe a few quiz here and there to make sure the students still 'got it'

Oh...that system is most hated, I assure you
wink.gif
 
Mar 1, 2009 at 10:24 PM Post #39 of 59
Thats a funny thread name in that Swaaarttzzniigger the Gov of California wants to cut the school year by another week to save money in this recession. P.S. they cut summer school, which is only provided for special ed and remediation, a few years back by 1/3 of its time. The district was so far behind that they did it for an emergency. The school police bought all new cars that summer w/o telling the school board and used all the money that was saved. The cut was only for one summer, it never was reinstated to it's original amount.

I have to read the thread, maybe this is due to stimulus money or something.
 
Mar 2, 2009 at 2:27 AM Post #40 of 59
Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Well my friend..you sound like an epic failure
biggrin.gif
Being at the bottom 55% while claiming you are 'smart' is pathetic, particularly in high school.

You are practically unable to compete on the most basic level; I predict your failure in college (if you can even get into any decent one with your crappy class rank ... whatever you say is decent...Rutger? SUNY? For reference the median GPA/SAT at Michigan engineering is 3.9GPA/1400 SAT for incoming students; I would characterize UM as decent, and MIT/Stanford/CalTech as great.) and beyond unless you change your paradigm about what means to be competitive and what it means to be smart - you are NOT smart by any means...yet.

I do agree with you that public high school is not really a place for truly gifted students (not you - top 5% on SAT is not that gifted by any means...merely smart). I went to a public high school and I was able to rack up somewhere around 40 AP credits by the time I was done and a friend of mine racked over 70 AP credits. If you wanted challenge you could have been more proactive.

GL with your 'decent' college.

Oh and more importantly proclaiming yourself as 'smart' on headfi is not that great of a practice
wink.gif
you have no idea how many EE/scientist/researcher/lawyer/doctor this site attracts. I am sure we have a few that have gotten 1600 on their SAT while getting a 4.0GPA in high school.

sorry about the mild EECS and engineering school trolling
biggrin.gif



I'm 19, and I can graduate with my B.S. in optical engineering in 14 months.
 
Mar 2, 2009 at 2:56 AM Post #42 of 59
Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Well my friend..you sound like an epic failure
biggrin.gif
Being at the bottom 55% while claiming you are 'smart' is pathetic, particularly in high school.

You are practically unable to compete on the most basic level; I predict your failure in college (if you can even get into any decent one with your crappy class rank ... whatever you say is decent...Rutger? SUNY? For reference the median GPA/SAT at Michigan engineering is 3.9GPA/1400 SAT for incoming students; I would characterize UM as decent, and MIT/Stanford/CalTech as great.) and beyond unless you change your paradigm about what means to be competitive and what it means to be smart - you are NOT smart by any means...yet.

I do agree with you that public high school is not really a place for truly gifted students (not you - top 5% on SAT is not that gifted by any means...merely smart). I went to a public high school and I was able to rack up somewhere around 40 AP credits by the time I was done and a friend of mine racked over 70 AP credits. If you wanted challenge you could have been more proactive.

GL with your 'decent' college.

Oh and more importantly proclaiming yourself as 'smart' on headfi is not that great of a practice
wink.gif
you have no idea how many EE/scientist/researcher/lawyer/doctor this site attracts. I am sure we have a few that have gotten 1600 on their SAT while getting a 4.0GPA in high school.

sorry about the mild EECS and engineering school trolling
biggrin.gif



Haha I was thinking the same thing... albeit not as harsh. 70 AP credits??? That's ridiculous. I just checked and our school has 15 AP classes. How do credits work? How many do you get per course? If it's 1:1... did he even need to go to college or did he just get accepted and graduate lol.
 
Mar 2, 2009 at 3:09 AM Post #43 of 59
I don't think that adding to the school year is the solution.
A longer school day would be a good idea for several reasons:

1. 45 min to an hour of PT a day would be beneficial.
2. Students might be able to get their homework done and be free in the evening for other activities or just doing some assigned reading.
3. As a working parent, it is rather difficult to pick up my kids at 2:45 PM. Many workers work from 8 to 5 or thereabouts. This means a sitter who will pick up my kid or a pay as you go after school daycare (which my kids' school no longer has).
4. One boon of our educational system in the US is that it is a great babysitter--longer hours would be appreciated.
5. Some extracurricular activities that would be before or after school could be handled during the school day.
6. More music and art classes could be accomodated (they tend to get short shrift as budgets get cut).

Enough for now. I've got to get back to my grading (college papers).

Cheers.
 
Mar 2, 2009 at 3:14 AM Post #44 of 59
Quote:

Originally Posted by Calexico /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Haha I was thinking the same thing... albeit not as harsh. 70 AP credits??? That's ridiculous. I just checked and our school has 15 AP classes. How do credits work? How many do you get per course? If it's 1:1... did he even need to go to college or did he just get accepted and graduate lol.


Passing the AP test gets you 3 credits in a CSU and 4 (or more depending on if you get a 3, 4, or 5 on the test) credits in a UC. It might be changing, as many things are in education, but that is what it as last I checked.


dallan: Monetarily, there will be no chance whatsoever for the extended school year to be put into effect, even with the stimulus package funding for education. That money is just to keep teachers from being RIFed (fired) for the most part.
 
Mar 2, 2009 at 3:30 AM Post #45 of 59
Quote:

Originally Posted by yashicaman /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I don't think that adding to the school year is the solution.
A longer school day would be a good idea for several reasons:

1. 45 min to an hour of PT a day would be beneficial.
2. Students might be able to get their homework done and be free in the evening for other activities or just doing some assigned reading.
3. As a working parent, it is rather difficult to pick up my kids at 2:45 PM. Many workers work from 8 to 5 or thereabouts. This means a sitter who will pick up my kid or a pay as you go after school daycare (which my kids' school no longer has).
4. One boon of our educational system in the US is that it is a great babysitter--longer hours would be appreciated.
5. Some extracurricular activities that would be before or after school could be handled during the school day.
6. More music and art classes could be accomodated (they tend to get short shrift as budgets get cut).

Enough for now. I've got to get back to my grading (college papers).

Cheers.



While it would be nice to have more time at work rather than pick up kids, teachers are not babysitters. It's flattering to think we are qualified to be such, but we get paid to educate students academically (and hopefully socially). There are many clubs for kids to join if they are older, and unfortunately, finding a place for younger kids to go after school is one of life's minor inconveniences. Now I have a question for you: if after the school day ends at 5PM, where will the young children of high school teachers go after school when it is getting dark in the winter months?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top