LittleSweetPeas
03-26-2007, 12:13 PM
So two articles were in my local paper. One was a national study indicating that children in full time daycare for a minimum of a year are shown to have more behavior problems, especially noted in a classroom setting. The second was an article reading that many (specifically low performing) schools are looking to extend the school day by as much as an hour.
Does anyone else see the disconnect here? I guess I will never ever get why parents/teachers/government think that somehow leaving your children somewhere longer will be beneficial to them. If teachers are already struggling with an increase in behavior problems why would you extend that day assuming learning would occur? And if learning isnt already occuring in classrooms in the six hours they are there then what in the world is an extra hour going to accomplish?
I thought about posting this elsewhere but just decided to stick it here so as not to offend mama's who are choosing PS.
I was a PS teacher and my students hardly learned a thing in the 100 minutes I had three sets of them for each day. I was too busy trying to control kids and deal with school related issues to teach much of anything and the variance in abilities led me to have to aim for somewhere below middle meaning more than 50% of my students were probably bored silly. But why worry about that 50% when I need to show an increase in assessment scores for the remaining 50%. :rolleyes The "on target" 50% would score just fine regardless of how much extra content was taught.
Ugh. Just venting. Its ludicrous.
Does anyone else see the disconnect here? I guess I will never ever get why parents/teachers/government think that somehow leaving your children somewhere longer will be beneficial to them. If teachers are already struggling with an increase in behavior problems why would you extend that day assuming learning would occur? And if learning isnt already occuring in classrooms in the six hours they are there then what in the world is an extra hour going to accomplish?
I thought about posting this elsewhere but just decided to stick it here so as not to offend mama's who are choosing PS.
I was a PS teacher and my students hardly learned a thing in the 100 minutes I had three sets of them for each day. I was too busy trying to control kids and deal with school related issues to teach much of anything and the variance in abilities led me to have to aim for somewhere below middle meaning more than 50% of my students were probably bored silly. But why worry about that 50% when I need to show an increase in assessment scores for the remaining 50%. :rolleyes The "on target" 50% would score just fine regardless of how much extra content was taught.
Ugh. Just venting. Its ludicrous.