Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Learning Environments Extended School Year

I'm curious how the this community feels about the extended school year concept?

I know that in our family, DS learns more and enjoys learning more over the summer vacation since he has time to go beyond the mandated class assignments. So my thoughts are that it would depend on the school environment and the child, but in the reading I've done so far on the idea, it seems that the idea is to reduce the time spent on review so this could be good. Although, if we are going to make major changes to the factory school model, I think there are better options than extending the existing school environment.

I think the regular longer breaks during the year would be better than the way it is now, with all the time off in one block in the summer. That's for all students, not just the advanced ones.

I'm hugely in favor of year-round school, although I hate the current short mid-year breaks enough that I'm not in favor of a schedule with more / longer mid-year breaks. I'd much rather see mixed-age classrooms with self-paced work, and the ability to take kids out of school for whatever reason (including parental whim) within limits, but no school-mandated breaks.

I also think elementary school ought to run from 8am to 5 or 6pm, and include multiple rest / free play periods, as well as daily music / art / sports activities (rather than the rotation that gets PE in once or twice a week).

Caveat that I live in a state where homeschooling is constitutionally protected, and "whatever the parent feels is appropriate" is all you're required to do as far as homeschooling, and see childcare as way up on the list of benefits provided by public elementary schools.

From next year, when he'll be rising 8, DS's day will run from 8.30am to 6pm and will include multiple rest and free play (/club/music group) periods, and daily sport. (Can't help with the parent-chosen holidays though!)

Why should a child spend 9 to 10 hours at school each day? I don't really see the point. We expect adults to put in 8 hour days. Why do you expect more for a child? When would the kids get to play and participate in out of the school activities?

I highly suggest looking at the number of hours kids spend at school in Europe (significantly less than here) and the scores they achieve (significantly more than here). More is sometimes less.

Yeah, but marginal utility is really a whole 'nother issue - I figure as long as I'm willing for my kid to be in school, it may as well be at times convenient to me. And "the hours I'm at work" is as convenient as it gets.

We could do aftercare at the school now, but it consists of sitting in the cafeteria reading a book while the kids around you shriek. I suspect she'd have a better opportunity to learn if she were doing just about anything else, including sitting in her usual classroom.

The kid has to be *somewhere* during those hours. Two years ago, my neighbor's 6yo and 8yo were unsupervised in their house for an hour before school and two hours after school, because their single parent worked 8 hour days.

They'd get to play at school - which doesn't happen now, but could, if the day went longer. They'd participate in those activities at school, so kids whose parents didn't care / couldn't coordinate transportation / didn't have money would have a chance.


I dunno - I remember Saturday school from my year in Germany as an exchange student. Along with tracking that started in the 4th grade, so if you weren't identified as a high performer then, you had no ability to get into college (or even trade school, in some cases). Taiwanese schools go long hours / long year / lots of homework, and get higher scores than we do. Colin'sMum's in the UK, and her day looks a lot like I suggested.

I couldn't disagree more! The first paragraph sounds like an instructional nightmare. I'm not a teacher, but I can see why even having small groups helps the students, too. And having people gone randomly would be difficult if the class was doing a certain module at that point. And, you know this country. No mandated breaks would equal no breaks.

As for a longer school day, the only time that is good is when there's a bad home environment. I would die (overly melodramatic) if my child was away from me from 8 until 6. That would leave no time whatsoever for any family time.

That's what before and after school care does.

Well, you can't have it both ways. If you accept that many people use before and after school care now, then there's a second way an 8-6 school day could be better: if it worked out better overall than say a 9-4 school day with before and afterschool care taking the time away from home up to 8-6 anyway. Maybe you think mothers shouldn't work, but many have to and others choose to for a variety of reasons. *If* my child is going to be away from me for around that length of time anyway, it absolutely makes sense to me that his time gets planned as a whole, so that, for example, he gets both a morning and a lunchtime break that are long enough to put optional clubs and music rehearsals into, and gets sport every afternoon, with lessons spaced out over the whole day in such a way that his concentration doesn't fray for lack of movement. The way it works here is that schools that work on this kind of pattern offer an enormous range of activities inside the school day - you don't attempt to have them do lots of activities after school as well.

Right. We do. I wasn't arguing it was practical for schools to suddenly start doing it; I was just objecting to the idea that it was necessarily a bad thing for the children. (Defensively, of course, since I'm choosing it for mine!)