[SupaNova]

Shorter summers, longer hours.

Is it just me, or is this one of his worst ideas yet? Perhaps I am simply ignorant of the issues, but it seems like extending the school year and tacking on extra hours is kind of pointless if the quality of the education kids are receiving doesn't improve.

[thesteve]

It's interesting that the article quotes Obama as saying that kids need more school to catch up with other industrialized nations, yet the major Asian nations that consistently outrank the US in math and sciences have few school hours (up to 200 fewer hours) than students in the US.

In light of this, if the plan was to go into effect, I don't know how some states would pay for it. California cuts education every time there's a budgetary shortfall, and I have my doubts that teachers are going to work more days and longer hours for the same pay.

[Kentl]

what i find fuuny is the idea that it whold be "safer" also well most teens get in to things by freinds or others at school
and that even if that worked the teachers whold not like it the kids whold not like it and i bet a lot of parents wont like it

[thesteve]

Originally Posted by Kentl

what i find fuuny is the idea that it whold be "safer" also well most teens get in to things by freinds or others at school
and that even if that worked the teachers whold not like it the kids whold not like it and i bet a lot of parents wont like it

Actually, I think it would make things easier for parents and that kids would be safer. Yes, most teens get into things from friends they meet at school, but they're doing those things between the time the get out of school (2:30 or 3) and when their parents get home from their 9 to 5 job (5:30 or 6).

[Bryan]

Originally Posted by thesteve

It's interesting that the article quotes Obama as saying that kids need more school to catch up with other industrialized nations, yet the major Asian nations that consistently outrank the US in math and sciences have few school hours (up to 200 fewer hours) than students in the US.

In light of this, if the plan was to go into effect, I don't know how some states would pay for it. California cuts education every time there's a budgetary shortfall, and I have my doubts that teachers are going to work more days and longer hours for the same pay.

whether we are trying to keep up with other nations or not, at some point, we will need to extend school in order to keep up with all the scientific and technological enchancements that keep coming. At some point, we'll have to make calculus part of the standard high school curriculum and some college level science courses will need to become part of high school curriculum.

I also wonder if the ~1200 hours kids spend in school each year includes things like sports practice, choir, band, etc.

I'd be interested to see an average breakdown of a Asian students school day compared to a American student's school day.

[Ethan.Bassist.]

Statistics and other arguments aside, this is a terrible idea for the sole fact that no one likes going to school for 5-8 hrs in the first place! Much less longer! When you vote, think of the children...

[BillSPrestonEsq]

Originally Posted by Bryan

whether we are trying to keep up with other nations or not, at some point, we will need to extend school in order to keep up with all the scientific and technological enchancements that keep coming. At some point, we'll have to make calculus part of the standard high school curriculum and some college level science courses will need to become part of high school curriculum.

I also wonder if the ~1200 hours kids spend in school each year includes things like sports practice, choir, band, etc.

I'd be interested to see an average breakdown of a Asian students school day compared to a American student's school day.

In other words, we remove the concept of childhood.

[thesteve]

Originally Posted by Bryan

whether we are trying to keep up with other nations or not, at some point, we will need to extend school in order to keep up with all the scientific and technological enchancements that keep coming. At some point, we'll have to make calculus part of the standard high school curriculum and some college level science courses will need to become part of high school curriculum.

I also wonder if the ~1200 hours kids spend in school each year includes things like sports practice, choir, band, etc.

I'd be interested to see an average breakdown of a Asian students school day compared to a American student's school day.

Honestly, I don't see that being necessary, nor do I agree that if it is necessary that it will require a lengthening of the school day or year.

That being said, I believe the 1200+ hours are just for classes. When I was in high school I believe I was in class from 7:30AM to 2:30PM. The school year was supposedly 180 days. The math works out to 7 hour school days 180 days a year...1260 hours.

[ICTHUS]

Originally Posted by Bryan

At some point, we'll have to make calculus part of the standard high school curriculum..

It isn't already?

I have experiece/knowledge with two education systems: British Columbia Math 12 and Queensland Year 12 Mathematics B both include single-variable differential calculus. I'm surprised it doesn't in the US.

[Epaphras]

I'm torn. I agree with the President that the way we educate students needs to change to reflect the 21st century job market. Up until somewhere in the early 80s you could do pretty well for yourself on just a high school diploma. Those jobs are gone, and never coming back (except when coupled with a skilled trade or vocation like plumbing, electrician, etc.). So we either need to enhance what a diploma can get you (making it more like a college bachelor degree), or re-think the entire system.

Science- and math-education is lagging behind India and China, and this is where the new middle class jobs will be situated in the next half-century. It used to be, "Suzy, finish your meal; there are starving kids in India and China"; now it's "Suzy, finish your homework; there are kids in India and China that are starving for your future job". Nothing short of a sea change in kids and educators needs to occur to get them to realize this. Not everyone (very few in fact) can become rappers, sports stars, American Idols, or make it in a band or any form of the entertainment industry (which seems to be the fixation of this newest batch of middle- and high-schoolers). Kids need to get interested in real careers, not fantasy ones.

On the other hand...

Summer vacation is part of childhood. I never had a problem retaining information over the summer, and neither did any of my classmates as far as I can remember. I also remember we had multiple opportunities to do educational things in the summer, such as week-long science camps or things like that. Even regular summer camp is educational in many ways. So in that sense, I wonder how much of the problem is summer vacation itself, and how much of the problem is parents/students not taking advantage of every opportunity available to them. Or, if they opportunities aren't available, isn't that one solution right there?

My wife also makes a good point about summer being the time for family, especially family vacations. If all schools everywhere have only three or four weeks available to go on vacation, can you imagine the pandemonium of traveling to Disneyland, or simply camping at the state park? It's hard enough getting some time off your job in the summer to go on a family vacation -- now everyone in your office would be requesting the same three or four weeks off for vacation.

I'm also disturbed by the fact that a lot of the middle- and early-high school kids I interact with (and their parents corroborate) seem to have a TON of homework, more than I ever remember (and I've only been out of HS only a little more than four years). They are in school for 8-9 hours and then have two hours of homework every night. How is that not training them to be workaholics? Even in college, my total hours in class and reading/writing papers/doing assignments for class didn't equal that many hours in a week. Granted, in HS I was able to get 90% of my assignments done while at school, either on lunch or during slow times in class (especially if we had a sub or watched a film). But still, it just seems more intense these days.

So maybe the answer isn't "more school" but "better school". We sure wasted a lot of time with useless worksheets and endless movies that had some random connection to the subject matter, even if the teacher just surfed the web the entire time.

[SupaNova]

Originally Posted by Steve

In light of this, if the plan was to go into effect, I don't know how some states would pay for it. California cuts education every time there's a budgetary shortfall, and I have my doubts that teachers are going to work more days and longer hours for the same pay.

This was my first thought as well. Even if he can convince most people that this is a good idea (which I doubt he can), there's no way teachers are going to stand for it.

Originally Posted by Bryan

whether we are trying to keep up with other nations or not, at some point, we will need to extend school in order to keep up with all the scientific and technological enchancements that keep coming. At some point, we'll have to make calculus part of the standard high school curriculum and some college level science courses will need to become part of high school curriculum.

I don't see how dumping college level science courses into the cirriculum is going to help high school students at all. I assume you're saying that doing such a thing would make way for newer developments to be taught in college, but I still don't see that affecting anybody except for university students who are going into the specific fields that will deal with these technologies.

Originally Posted by Epaphras

Science- and math-education is lagging behind India and China, and this is where the new middle class jobs will be situated in the next half-century. It used to be, "Suzy, finish your meal; there are starving kids in India and China"; now it's "Suzy, finish your homework; there are kids in India and China that are starving for your future job". Nothing short of a sea change in kids and educators needs to occur to get them to realize this. Not everyone (very few in fact) can become rappers, sports stars, American Idols, or make it in a band or any form of the entertainment industry (which seems to be the fixation of this newest batch of middle- and high-schoolers). Kids need to get interested in real careers, not fantasy ones.

I agree with this, especially the bolded part. Longer hours in a classroom means nothing if the student isn't already interested in learning. Obama is hitting on a big problem, but his solution is coming from the wrong angle.

[tlj009]

I'm torn. I agree with the President that the way we educate students needs to change to reflect the 21st century job market. Up until somewhere in the early 80s you could do pretty well for yourself on just a high school diploma. Those jobs are gone, and never coming back (except when coupled with a skilled trade or vocation like plumbing, electrician, etc.). So we either need to enhance what a diploma can get you (making it more like a college bachelor degree), or re-think the entire system.

What were those jobs in the 80s that allowed a person to do pretty well with just a high school diploma? All of them that I can think of (welding, carpentry, electrician, plumbing, etc.) are skilled trade type of jobs. The
"hands" were poor then and are poor now. And I don't believe that those jobs have gone away.

Science- and math-education is lagging behind India and China, and this is where the new middle class jobs will be situated in the next half-century. It used to be, "Suzy, finish your meal; there are starving kids in India and China"; now it's "Suzy, finish your homework; there are kids in India and China that are starving for your future job". Nothing short of a sea change in kids and educators needs to occur to get them to realize this. Not everyone (very few in fact) can become rappers, sports stars, American Idols, or make it in a band or any form of the entertainment industry (which seems to be the fixation of this newest batch of middle- and high-schoolers). Kids need to get interested in real careers, not fantasy ones.

Science and math are great but are only part of the equation. GPA is a very small part of the equation after you actually get a job. In fact, a good many employers will hire someone who worked through college over a 4.0 student. Unless you are in some kind of R&D field, average is likely good enough. I have been a civil engineer for five years now and have not used differential equations or even calculus a single time.

I simply don't see these jobs that require geniuses to fill them.

[BillSPrestonEsq]

I am just going to pose this question...

How has high school level education prepared you for a job? I have held a few jobs and frankly, none of them were really touched on in high school.

On the job training, or rather specialty skills developed through specialized training seem to be key to most jobs.

Lets throw out an example. My dad is working on the engineering side of getting rid of nuclear waste. He does his job well and is an excellent employee. However, I happen to know he does not know calculus, and while he knew how to perform various trigonometric formulas for his job, I taught him trig when I was in precalc at college. He is a very smart man, but I guarantee you, his high school education does not have anything to do with how he does his job.

My grandfather is a well read, intelligent, highly adaptable man who had to drop out of school at 3rd grade. He was quite skilled in car electronics, which was self taught, and he worked as a mechanic into his 80s. He learned to program car computers as a means of keeping working longer as his body got frailer. He kept abreast with technology from the model t era to the present just fine.

Kids have already lost childhood, and what has it accomplished? Are kids more astute technologically than they were 50 years ago? Better ingenuity? I work with kids in Jr. High/High school age, and while the hours are up, the level of critical thinking, (which is infinitely more important than a basic knowledge of facts) is definitely not getting better. Kids are like middle management in a cubicle already, and further we sink.

Adding hours and increasing the amount of time in a sinking ship is not helping get their heads above water. frankly, I plan on teaching my kids at home when I have them, simply because the state of education is so bad and turns out drones. I want a kid to have problem solving abilities and to be able to adapt, because the world will change, and what they learn in high school will most likely be largely useless to them.

[Epaphras]

Originally Posted by tlj009

What were those jobs in the 80s that allowed a person to do pretty well with just a high school diploma? All of them that I can think of (welding, carpentry, electrician, plumbing, etc.) are skilled trade type of jobs. The
"hands" were poor then and are poor now. And I don't believe that those jobs have gone away.

I'm from the Detroit area, and so it used to be that people could graduate high school and work on the Ford or GM line and make a decent income, enough to support a family on. By the time my dad graduated high school (1977) you could either do a co-op your senior year and graduate with a diploma plus some skilled trade (he trained as a draftsman), or go on a year or two after HS and learn a vocational skill, and do fine (he was fine with just draftsmanship training all through the 80s -- he started night school in the 90s and that enabled him to get into middle-upper management in the late 90s in the auto manufacturing industry). When I started high school in 2001, all that was available was a skilled trade (nothing wrong with that, and in fact if that trade is "anchored" in the community, it can't be outsourced -- you can't have a guy in India fix your toilet -- maybe a droid someday though lol), the military, or college. Nothing between a skilled trade and a professional-type job. When I graduated college in 2008, it was apparent that a simple bachelor degree would not suffice, even with two years of continuous volunteer and internship experience directly related to my field (some part of this was related to the Michigan and national economic climate at the time). This may be purely anecdotal, but then again it is continually reinforced in what I read about employment trends.

Basically, any physical or digital process that can be compartmentalized, packaged, and transmitted (in short, out-sourced) will be, over the next two decades at least. We've already witnessed the "race to the bottom" of physical processes like manufacturing, etc., and some technical/digital processes like data entry, technical/customer service, and other routine processes (if they haven't been fully automated). But as long as Indians and Chinese universities are churning out skilled, educated workers who work for 1/4 or less the cost of an equivalent American worker, companies will use them, patriotism be damned. Of course, as their consumer demand rises with their incomes and standards of living, America will be in a unique position to market to them and make a ton of money selling American goods manufactured in the third world to developing countries' upwardly-mobile middle class.

Read the book The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the 2st Century by Thomas Friedman. It'll blow your mind.

[tlj009]

I'm from the Detroit area, and so it used to be that people could graduate high school and work on the Ford or GM line and make a decent income, enough to support a family on.

I don't live in the Detroit area, but I can see where they pay their workers more. At the same time, I do live in an area with many lumber mills and I can't see working on the line being much different than working on a line in a lumber mill or running some of the machines in a paper mill. You can support your family on the income but you are still part of the working poor.

By the time my dad graduated high school (1977) you could either do a co-op your senior year and graduate with a diploma plus some skilled trade (he trained as a draftsman), or go on a year or two after HS and learn a vocational skill, and do fine (he was fine with just draftsmanship training all through the 80s -- he started night school in the 90s and that enabled him to get into middle-upper management in the late 90s in the auto manufacturing industry).

I think that you still can do just fine with some of that training. But sadly some of the programs have been eliminated. I really think that more of this kind of training should be offered rather than telling people that their only option is college.

When I started high school in 2001, all that was available was a skilled trade (nothing wrong with that, and in fact if that trade is "anchored" in the community, it can't be outsourced -- you can't have a guy in India fix your toilet -- maybe a droid someday though lol), the military, or college. Nothing between a skilled trade and a professional-type job.

I really wish that you would give specifics because I am having a hard time wrapping my head around something between a "skilled trade" and a "professional-type job". I would count draftsman as a skilled trade. And if you mean associate degree stuff, they are still available.

When I graduated college in 2008, it was apparent that a simple bachelor degree would not suffice, even with two years of continuous volunteer and internship experience directly related to my field (some part of this was related to the Michigan and national economic climate at the time). This may be purely anecdotal, but then again it is continually reinforced in what I read about employment trends.

I guess that it depends on what your field is. I graduated in Mechanical Engineering. At the time, there were absolutely no mechanical engineering jobs in the area that I wanted to live. However, I did interview for supervisory positions in mills, and actually had a job in the oil industry that I turned down because I didn't want to move. I ended up with a surveying job for 6 months until I got a good Civil Engineering position. I say all of this to say that yes, some jobs are competitive, but there are still jobs out there. And lack of education doesn't seem to be the problem with getting a decent job.

Basically, any physical or digital process that can be compartmentalized, packaged, and transmitted (in short, out-sourced) will be, over the next two decades at least. We've already witnessed the "race to the bottom" of physical processes like manufacturing, etc., and some technical/digital processes like data entry, technical/customer service, and other routine processes (if they haven't been fully automated). But as long as Indians and Chinese universities are churning out skilled, educated workers who work for 1/4 or less the cost of an equivalent American worker, companies will use them, patriotism be damned. Of course, as their consumer demand rises with their incomes and standards of living, America will be in a unique position to market to them and make a ton of money selling American goods manufactured in the third world to developing countries' upwardly-mobile middle class.

Read the book The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the 2st Century by Thomas Friedman. It'll blow your mind.

Of course, when jobs leave the area that you want to work in (the US), it doesn't matter how educated that you are. You still won't get the job. Then it is time to move to a different field.