4 ms·

Last I dug into the studies, the 'problems' in US education seemed most-tightly correlated to social problems revolving around social-economic class, available

by roc 14y ago

Last I dug into the studies, the 'problems' in US education seemed most-tightly correlated to social problems revolving around social-economic class, available services, etc. Which is to say: the low-scoring kids in the US are living in poverty, living with high-crime neighborhoods, living in one-parent homes, don't have access to health-care, may not have food security, etc. The schools have zero control over those factors. Yet the "more school" they can throw at these kids, the more they can isolate them from those factors. That is: extending the school day to the point that it becomes reasonable to offer breakfast provides an opportunity to actually get breakfast into these kids. Which does impact test scores. Providing "study hour" type classes after a traditional school day not only provides a safe and equipped place for these kids to actually do their homework, it also keeps them off the streets and lowers the risks that come from no child care. And that also does impact test scores. So there's this really horrible bind that American educators find themselves in. They know damn well that more hours of instruction doesn't really increase test scores. But they also know the best approach available to them -- to improve not only scores, but outcomes -- is to trump up "more hours" to ameliorate the risks and challenges facing these children that society-at-large is refusing to address.

king_jester 14y ago
More school doesn't isolate people from poverty, crime, health care access issues, food security problems, etc. No matter how long the school day is, those schools exist in communities with those issues and the staff, parents, and children in those communities have to deal with the realities of those problems every day. > That is: extending the school day to the point that it becomes reasonable to offer breakfast provides an opportunity to actually get breakfast into these kids. Which does impact test scores. Breakfast food programs originate with the Black Panther Party running breakfast programs for poor children, not with school systems. > Providing "study hour" type classes after a traditional school day not only provides a safe and equipped place for these kids to actually do their homework, it also keeps them off the streets and lowers the risks that come from no child care. And that also does impact test scores. The solution to this is to provide access to child care in a way that is useful for the community, not provide de-facto child care by keeping children in school as long as possible each day. > They know damn well that more hours of instruction doesn't really increase test scores. But they also know the best approach available to them This is a contradiction, if hours of instruction don't increase test scores, then the approach of increasing the length of the school day will have nothing to do with providing better test score outcomes. Also, test scores are not a reliable way to gauge student learning and success. You are right that social instability and poverty play a big part in keeping US education from being successful, both those issues need to be addressed in a direct way rather than try to provide band aid fixes via a school system that already does things in a way that does not work for a substantial amount of the students in the country.
- w1ntermute 14y ago
  > This is a contradiction, if hours of instruction don't increase test scores, then the approach of increasing the length of the school day will have nothing to do with providing better test score outcomes. It's not a contradiction. Increasing the hours of instruction incidentally decreases the amount of time spent outside of school, which does increase test scores. You suggested having more accessible child care as an alternative, but that would have to be carried out by the HHS, right? The educational establishment is solving the issue using what tools they have available (namely, longer school hours).
  - droithomme 14y ago
    "decreases the amount of time spent outside of school, which does increase test scores" Do you have evidence of that or is it something you assume should be true? Internationally, more school hours is weakly correlated with lower achievement, not strongly correlated with higher. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/dec/13/more-school-hours-dont-guarantee-better-test-score/?page=all http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/dec/13/more-school-... For example, Poland has 595 hours of instruction, far less than most countries, and has very high academic achievement. Finland, Norway, Australia all have below average hours and yet do better than average. Mexico mandates 1058 hours and has among the worst scores internationally. Based on actual empirical evidence I have seen over the years, the claim that more hours in school increases scores is false and unsupported by evidence.
    - w1ntermute 14y ago
      No, I have no evidence. I'm just basing it on common sense. If you spend any time in American inner cities, you will quickly learn that it is not a place that you would wish any child to have to grow up in. The more time you can keep them away from that environment, the better, even if it is by mandating longer school hours. The subculture of urban America is fundamentally broken. It is not really comparable to other countries' subcultures, with the possible exception of Gypsies in Europe.
      - 14y ago

by roc 14y ago

king_jester 14y ago

More school doesn't isolate people from poverty, crime, health care access issues, food security problems, etc. No matter how long the school day is, those schools exist in communities with those issues and the staff, parents, and children in those communities have to deal with the realities of those problems every day. > That is: extending the school day to the point that it becomes reasonable to offer breakfast provides an opportunity to actually get breakfast into these kids. Which does impact test scores. Breakfast food programs originate with the Black Panther Party running breakfast programs for poor children, not with school systems. > Providing "study hour" type classes after a traditional school day not only provides a safe and equipped place for these kids to actually do their homework, it also keeps them off the streets and lowers the risks that come from no child care. And that also does impact test scores. The solution to this is to provide access to child care in a way that is useful for the community, not provide de-facto child care by keeping children in school as long as possible each day. > They know damn well that more hours of instruction doesn't really increase test scores. But they also know the best approach available to them This is a contradiction, if hours of instruction don't increase test scores, then the approach of increasing the length of the school day will have nothing to do with providing better test score outcomes. Also, test scores are not a reliable way to gauge student learning and success. You are right that social instability and poverty play a big part in keeping US education from being successful, both those issues need to be addressed in a direct way rather than try to provide band aid fixes via a school system that already does things in a way that does not work for a substantial amount of the students in the country.

w1ntermute 14y ago
> This is a contradiction, if hours of instruction don't increase test scores, then the approach of increasing the length of the school day will have nothing to do with providing better test score outcomes. It's not a contradiction. Increasing the hours of instruction incidentally decreases the amount of time spent outside of school, which does increase test scores. You suggested having more accessible child care as an alternative, but that would have to be carried out by the HHS, right? The educational establishment is solving the issue using what tools they have available (namely, longer school hours).
- droithomme 14y ago
  "decreases the amount of time spent outside of school, which does increase test scores" Do you have evidence of that or is it something you assume should be true? Internationally, more school hours is weakly correlated with lower achievement, not strongly correlated with higher. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/dec/13/more-school-hours-dont-guarantee-better-test-score/?page=all http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/dec/13/more-school-... For example, Poland has 595 hours of instruction, far less than most countries, and has very high academic achievement. Finland, Norway, Australia all have below average hours and yet do better than average. Mexico mandates 1058 hours and has among the worst scores internationally. Based on actual empirical evidence I have seen over the years, the claim that more hours in school increases scores is false and unsupported by evidence.
  - w1ntermute 14y ago
    No, I have no evidence. I'm just basing it on common sense. If you spend any time in American inner cities, you will quickly learn that it is not a place that you would wish any child to have to grow up in. The more time you can keep them away from that environment, the better, even if it is by mandating longer school hours. The subculture of urban America is fundamentally broken. It is not really comparable to other countries' subcultures, with the possible exception of Gypsies in Europe.
    - 14y ago