Obama Proposes Longer School Days, Extended School Year

[Foxrac]

As a future educator I must say that I agree with the decision to cut breaks or extend school days. Of course not without increasing teacher pay though.

Kids in the U.S. are significantly behind and I don't think it's the class size to blame. It's a number of factors: number of vacations, parents having to work with no time to spend continuing the schools education at home, large class sizes etc etc. However, I don't think larger class sizes plays that big of a role. I sat in overcrowded classrooms where there were so many of us there weren't enough desks so the rest of us had to sit at the computers with our backs to the teacher and this was an Honors class but we passed. Depending on the college/university you will probably see these large classes also but students succeed there as well.

It seems as if everytime you turn around American students are on some kind of break for even the smallest of holidays. College students don't get Columbus Day yet elementary, middle and high school do. Why not eliminate those smaller days that higher eduation doesn't get out of the public school holidays? I tutor 7-12th graders everyday who are barely reading on 3rd grade levels. My mom is a reading teacher and she teaches students who are in high school who are reading below the 3rd grade level that they need to be on to pass the state standardized test. I think that even if they just tested this theory on a small school they would find some significant improvements in grades and academic level.

If you think unemployment is high now just wait until our children can't compete in a global market and businesses start going overseas to hire better educated people. There won't be any jobs left for Americans if we can't compete globally or have some kind of leg up on countries like China and Japan especially when alot of American companies are already setting up shop in these places.

That's not true.

High unemployment is major reason because of economy downturn and global economy is in recession as well, look at UK, UK has better school system than America but they are facing negative as America does during recession time, also economy in Japan is facing negative as well since they are longest school ever and recession has nearly permanent for Japan because of not much growth and almost no inflation since 90's.

We have alot of Americans are educated, also remember about back in 1950's, we had high score on reading and math score but school days are shorter as today but only problem is overcrowded, increase of government interfere and issue with low salaries.

I just want federal's control out of public school and let individual state to control it, including with school district, I'm strongly oppose NCLB Act and any regulated thing by federal but define in basic thing, such as require to provide an education for children is ok but any additional regulation is really unnecessary.

Most jobs goes oversea has nothing with our education system, it's part of Bush admin that made totally unregulated for any job goes oversea and they don't pay taxes either, even Bush admin gave a tax cut or any awards to jobs in oversea.

Remember about Clinton admin, economy was in great shape and create alot of new jobs, much as 23 millions.

 

[Foxrac]

I don't know, I blame it on pop culture. People just quit caring about education and cared more about cussing and slangs and tv. (hey, if you got tv, why need to read newspaper?)

btw, Autism is on the rise too. Do you think that's a problem as well? Because back in those days, it was unheard of, and now it seem like a few of my cousins have autistic children.

And then I keep hearing it from my friends as well. that they have autistic children.

Yup, you got right.

I remember about situation with autism that has affect our education system.

 

[Lighthouse77]

I've wonder if too much education is going to make people clashed. but there's always something new to learn all the time that have to be added as a part of education.

 

[Foxrac]

I do support stricter regulation for any students who want drop out from high school, I believe that they are supposed to stay in school until they passes the classes in 12 grade and passes the state exam as needed, it would be maximum at 21 years old, it means students couldn't drop out without pass the classes or state exam or reach the 21th birthday.

For any students with LD or have problem with learning then they could have alternative classes for extra assistance and there's no guarantee about when it would finish but stay until between 18-21 years old.

I just want drop out from high school to be outlaw or they wouldn't deserve to get any freedom, even no jobs for anyone who don't have high school degree.

I'm just got enough with one employee at my workplace that he can't read or write because he dropped out from high school when he was 14 years old and he's just writing like preschool level, that's embarrassing me and he don't have any LD or low IQ.

 

[Lighthouse77]

Some drop out because they rather get a GED. A friend of mine dropped out because she got tired of kids picking on her. So she went and got a GED instead. Some may seem like they are dropping out, but decided they wanted their parents to do homeschooling. Or some got pregnant and want to take care of her child. So be careful about dropping out restriction. Personally, I would just leave them alone. We can't force them to stay in school if they are not motivated to do so. They would just won't bother trying their best in school

 

[Foxrac]

Some drop out because they rather get a GED. A friend of mine dropped out because she got tired of kids picking on her. So she went and got a GED instead. Some may seem like they are dropping out, but decided they wanted their parents to do homeschooling. Or some got pregnant and want to take care of her child. So be careful about dropping out restriction

If there's any reason about want quit from public school because of private school or homeschooling then it's fine.

For GED, it should applies to anyone whoever are 21 years old or over after unable to pass the classes or state exam.

Have you check my last paragraph about one employee at my workplace?

For pick on others, bullying need to be stop and school need consider bullying so seriously.

 

[Lighthouse77]

Well, she did drop out (I think her mother taught her but she had a GED degree) and she was glad she did. She just could not handle it well and was very emotionally sensitive. She is a nurse today believe it or not.

If he dropped out at 14 with preschool level, are you sure he didn't have any reading disability? My brother seem intelligent too.. you look at him and think he doesn't have low IQ but guess what, he is a high school grad and have trouble writing himself (which see like a preschool level to me) even to this day. A 14 years old suppose to write like 14 years old, not a preschool. I wouldn't judge him harshly.

 

[jillio]

As I recall, most people here complained about Bush's support of NCLB. If it was wrong for Bush to be involved in education, then it is equally wrong for Obama to be involved in education. It's not the President's job.

I didn't want Bush to control American schools, and I don't want Obama to control American schools. I don't want any President to control American schools.

It wasn't wrong for Bush to be involved in education. It was wrong of him to insitute a policy such as NCLB that has caused an escalation of the problems already faced by the educational system.

 

[Steel X]

Just because he said something while campaigning doesn't make it one of the presidential duties. Please show me in the U.S. Constitution where the President has authority to get involved with determining school years, curriculum, etc.

Americans don't need the Federal government taking even more control of the schools, and by extension, the children.

If schools become the providers (school breakfast, lunch, and medical care), caretakers (longer school days and years), and recreation (school organized sports), of what use will the parents be to the children? On whom will the children depend and put their trust? The schools, i.e., the government?

Who will pay for the extra salaries, transportation, facilities, utilities, etc.? If poor schools have trouble maintaining their facilities for nine months of the year now, how will they maintain them an additional three months of the year?

Actually all the schools are taken under control by the government because of tax money. They help build schools, roads, and so on so they actually do have the right to be involved because they paid them with taxes so its partly their property in a way. They take education with children very seriously than you would think.

So of course the President has the right to get involved with education...it's not that much different even when Bill Clinton was involved with education as well. ALOT of presidents were.

It's true that there are poor schools, good schools, and rich schools...*shrugs* but still the government paid taxes for building those schools and all.

If you mention George W. Bush, I'm gonna stab a fork in my eye.

 

[Reba]

Gee, I wish someone had told Bush that education wasn't any of his concern before he royally messed things up with the worst thing that has happened to education in the last 100 years.....No Child Left Behind.

People did tell him and Ted Kennedy but they didn't listen. So should Obama perpetuate the problem by getting himself involved?

And, where, exactly, do you think the funding for education comes from, Reba?

Taxpayers. That means an increase in taxes.

I don't know what century you are in, but for several years now schools have been the the providers of breakfast, lunch, and recreation.

I know that. The problem is, they will be providing those things for even more children than before. More influence, more dependence, more taxes.

Get No Child Left Behind out of the picture, equalize the funding, and there won't be any more "poor schools." There may be schools in poor areas, but without the idioacy of programs like No Child Left Behind that actually takes funding away from the poorest schools, opportunity for all children will be equalized.

So prior to NCLB opportunities for all children were equalized?

 

[Reba]

Actually all the schools are taken under control by the government because of tax money. They help build schools, roads, and so on so they actually do have the right to be involved because they paid them with taxes so its partly their property in a way. They take education with children very seriously than you would think.

And the children become property of the state....

So of course the President has the right to get involved with education...it's not that much different even when Bill Clinton was involved with education as well. ALOT of presidents were.

Where in the Constitution do they get that authority?

It's true that there are poor schools, good schools, and rich schools...*shrugs* but still the government paid taxes for building those schools and all.

No, the government did not pay taxes for building schools. Taxpayers, "we the people," paid for building those schools.

If you mention George W. Bush, I'm gonna stab a fork in my eye.

Why would I mention him?

 

[Jolie77]

I don't know, I blame it on pop culture. People just quit caring about education and cared more about cussing and slangs and tv. (hey, if you got tv, why need to read newspaper?)

btw, Autism is on the rise too. Do you think that's a problem as well? Because back in those days, it was unheard of, and now it seem like a few of my cousins have autistic children.

And then I keep hearing it from my friends as well. that they have autistic children.

You're correct about Autism - It was not recognizable back then. However, Is autism a problem that causes the educational system to be a mess as a whole? No. There are different levels of Autism. Some of them are able to function very well but then, some aren't able to.

 

[netrox]

Reba, please explain to us how you can improve education with less tax money. I am curious.

 

[webexplorer]

Yes, we pay taxes for our town and schools. Supposedly, more children are in my town, then we pay more taxes.

That's why I don't like a family with too many children. I remember one family has 14 children and some others have 8 children (these families are not adopted) - that's what this turns me off seriously.

If you want fewer taxes, then make sure that there are not many children and more conservation lands in your town. I probably think that a fewer numbers of children in schools would have a chance to have a better education.

 

[Jiro]

Reba, please explain to us how you can improve education with less tax money. I am curious.

simple. If you don't like what the government offers for you - just send'em to private schools. Same thing with police. If you don't like the quality of security provided for you (which is local police), simple - hire the security guards.

 

[Foxrac]

Well, she did drop out (I think her mother taught her but she had a GED degree) and she was glad she did. She just could not handle it well and was very emotionally sensitive. She is a nurse today believe it or not.

If he dropped out at 14 with preschool level, are you sure he didn't have any reading disability? My brother seem intelligent too.. you look at him and think he doesn't have low IQ but guess what, he is a high school grad and have trouble writing himself (which see like a preschool level to me) even to this day. A 14 years old suppose to write like 14 years old, not a preschool. I wouldn't judge him harshly.

Some states adopt new exam for writing, including essay, or add writing to state exam.

 

[LuciaDisturbed]

Yes, we pay taxes for our town and schools. Supposedly, more children are in my town, then we pay more taxes.

That's why I don't like a family with too many children. I remember one family has 14 children and some others have 8 children (these families are not adopted) - that's what this turns me off seriously.

If you want fewer taxes, then make sure that there are not many children and more conservation lands in your town. I probably think that a fewer numbers of children in schools would have a chance to have a better education.

So do you want to be like China with their dumb 1-child law? Thanks to China's 1-child law, many girl babies are either aborted or abandoned on the streets and many are dropped off at orphanages, and so are boy children who are Deaf or have any disabilities too, as only "perfect boy children" are preferred in the Chinese culture, as a friend of mine is adopting a Deaf little boy from China this upcoming summer, and this is what he told me about the situation in China. Very sad. The little boy was abandoned by his mother when he was 10 months old due to his being Deaf.

I grew up in Milwaukee, and have always been used to being in overcrowded public schools. I have been in classes with 60+ students in every classes. Some classes have even 80+ students, and even one class had 100+ students. That was in high school in Milwaukee. We are overcrowded because there just aren't enough classrooms and not enough schools.

 

[jillio]

People did tell him and Ted Kennedy but they didn't listen. So should Obama perpetuate the problem by getting himself involved?


Taxpayers. That means an increase in taxes.


I know that. The problem is, they will be providing those things for even more children than before. More influence, more dependence, more taxes.


So prior to NCLB opportunities for all children were equalized?

Like I said, it isn't the fact that the government is involved. The government has always been involved in public education. Government involvement is the whole idea behind public education. Ever noticed who pays the teachers and staff?

The problem is the so-called solution to the problem. Bush decided that NCLB was going to solve the problem. It made it worse. Obama has to be involved if NCLB is going to be reversed. And NCLB has caused more problems in our educational system than anything else in my lifetime.

Sounds like you are just like the grumpy old guy across the street who doesn't want to pay taxes that are used for education because his kids are all grown.:roll: Educating our youth is what determines the future for us all.

Nor do children become the "property" of the state as a result of public education. That is a real leap there. But I do find it interesting that you would use the word "property" in connection with children.

 

[jillio]

simple. If you don't like what the government offers for you - just send'em to private schools. Same thing with police. If you don't like the quality of security provided for you (which is local police), simple - hire the security guards.

That solution kind of goes against the "free and appropriate educational opportunity for all", doesn't it? Our public school system was founded to insure that everyone in this country have the opportunity for education. Would you deny that opportunity to the low income child?

 

[jillio]

And the children become property of the state....


Where in the Constitution do they get that authority?



No, the government did not pay taxes for building schools. Taxpayers, "we the people," paid for building those schools.



Why would I mention him?

They get that authority through the U.S. Department of Education. As a part of our federal government, it, like all government agencies, are under the direction of the leader of that federal government.

Your position is a bit contradicotry given the fact that you earn your living as an educational interpreter. An educational interpreter is there to facilitate equal opportunity for all students, yet you would deny that equal opportunity through the position you take regarding governmental involvement and the right to a free and appropriate education for all through our public school system. Or is equalization of opportunity only an important issue to you when you personally stand to profit from it?