Discussion Forums > Politics
Extending school time~
vicious796:
If the problem with our students was suspension soley, we'd be much worse off.
nates1984:
--- Quote ---Information:
If we reduce the number of students to 10 per class and increase teachers' pay by 20%, America would be spending 300~330 billion USD more for education each year.
That'll become around 1.3 trillion USD of budget in total.
Hm, too expensive?
--- End quote ---
You're not factoring out what we could save with (brace for the oxymoron) a more efficient bureaucracy; less than half of public school employees are actually teachers (check wiki for source). You could do other little things to trim the cost here and there. Four day school weeks to save on transportation and energy, removing the federal board of education so that it's operating costs can be directly funneled into schools, perhaps even the federal government could chip in 100-200 billion (we waste more than that regularly, and it barely contributes to school funding as it is now).
kostya:
--- Quote from: nates1984 on October 08, 2009, 10:21:45 PM ---
--- Quote ---Information:
If we reduce the number of students to 10 per class and increase teachers' pay by 20%, America would be spending 300~330 billion USD more for education each year.
That'll become around 1.3 trillion USD of budget in total.
Hm, too expensive?
--- End quote ---
You're not factoring out what we could save with (brace for the oxymoron) a more efficient bureaucracy; less than half of public school employees are actually teachers (check wiki for source). You could do other little things to trim the cost here and there. Four day school weeks to save on transportation and energy, removing the federal board of education so that it's operating costs can be directly funneled into schools, perhaps even the federal government could chip in 100-200 billion (we waste more than that regularly, and it barely contributes to school funding as it is now).
--- End quote ---
I agree that we can cut down on schools, but not by reducing the school week. I don't know where you're from, but cutting the school week will increase the heating costs in my old high school. The heat would need to be on anyways to stop the school from freezing (yes, we have had classrooms with ice patches). Also, there is a lot of crap that can be cut from schools. We had a full time athletic director. He was not a teacher. He wasn't even a gym teacher. His full time job was scheduling athletic events for the school and coaching the football team. I understand if this were a college where athletics are a source of revenue and free advertisement. School athletics already cost the school money, why do we need someone working full time to schedule more events for the school to pay for?
No, I am not advocating a cut in after-school sports. I am advocating reducing it down to a bit bigger then club status.
Klocknov:
--- Quote from: kostya on October 09, 2009, 03:56:41 AM ---
--- Quote from: nates1984 on October 08, 2009, 10:21:45 PM ---
--- Quote ---Information:
If we reduce the number of students to 10 per class and increase teachers' pay by 20%, America would be spending 300~330 billion USD more for education each year.
That'll become around 1.3 trillion USD of budget in total.
Hm, too expensive?
--- End quote ---
You're not factoring out what we could save with (brace for the oxymoron) a more efficient bureaucracy; less than half of public school employees are actually teachers (check wiki for source). You could do other little things to trim the cost here and there. Four day school weeks to save on transportation and energy, removing the federal board of education so that it's operating costs can be directly funneled into schools, perhaps even the federal government could chip in 100-200 billion (we waste more than that regularly, and it barely contributes to school funding as it is now).
--- End quote ---
I agree that we can cut down on schools, but not by reducing the school week. I don't know where you're from, but cutting the school week will increase the heating costs in my old high school. The heat would need to be on anyways to stop the school from freezing (yes, we have had classrooms with ice patches). Also, there is a lot of crap that can be cut from schools. We had a full time athletic director. He was not a teacher. He wasn't even a gym teacher. His full time job was scheduling athletic events for the school and coaching the football team. I understand if this were a college where athletics are a source of revenue and free advertisement. School athletics already cost the school money, why do we need someone working full time to schedule more events for the school to pay for?
No, I am not advocating a cut in after-school sports. I am advocating reducing it down to a bit bigger then club status.
--- End quote ---
That would be a great way to push it, though all my schools had like the P.E. or a different teacher coaching. I went threw four public high schools and got to know three others very well. Threw all of them I one didn't have after school clubs unless you considered band/choir a club. Past that the other six had an average of about five, again not counting sports and band/choir. Clubs would be a great thing to push on schools I would have to say, also it would give the kids a chance to focus on something without having to worry about problems with the home environment. Though it would probably be a slow start, but making the student council more active in high schools and bring about a solid club system I think we would have a lot more kids interested in school.
furuoshiki:
--- Quote from: nates1984 on October 08, 2009, 10:21:45 PM --- Four day school weeks to save on transportation and energy, removing the federal board of education so that it's operating costs can be directly funneled into schools, perhaps even the federal government could chip in 100-200 billion (we waste more than that regularly, and it barely contributes to school funding as it is now).
--- End quote ---
End the major offensives in Iraq and Afghanistan, and maybe we will have the funds for this. But the four-day a week thing would require teachers to actually be efficient in what they do.
But then again schools in Flushing, (Queens) New York have already reduced school time by approximately 80 minutes by removing physical education, art and music programs for non-art/music concentrated students in High Schools. Also the division of students into "Early morning and Late Afternoon sessions" has on the surface claimed to reduce over-crowding while in reality they are giving already misguided students more time to screw around on the streets and less time in the classroom. (Early Morning 7-12, Late Afternoon 12-5).
School used to be 6-7 hours and now on average it is 4-5 hours depending on the district in Queens. Not sure what the status is in other boroughs. However, when I was in Philly school times apparently weren't truncated at all, because they don't have an overcrowding problem like we do.
Either way the department of education is effectively turning: a) learning time b) students & c) teachers into commodities that are entirely dependent on the city or state budget planning commission. Transportation assistance for children commuting has been reduced 50% in some areas of Queens effectively as a "barter" between the Union representing transportation workers here and Teacher's Union in NY. Little-by-little cutbacks are being made that are not likely to be reversed for another 10 years. All in the meanwhile students will be the one shafted, and not taught much of anything except what they need to pass national state exams and the Regents exams* (only applicable in NY*).
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version