Quote:
Originally Posted by CliffFletcher
Tell that to all the people who post in these threads remarking that teachers have a uniquely difficult job.
It's sort of how we run education in North America. The rest of the world does not take an 8 week break from school in the summer, and students are typically in school many more days than North American students. And studies are clear that the 8-week break (and the low number of instructional days) is detrimental to the academic progress of students.
The Underworked American (student)
No doubt part of that is just a cultural expectation in North America about kids having the whole summer off. But it's naive to think the fact Canada and the USA have the strongest teachers' unions in the world doesn't play a part. It would be interesting to have a public debate on the merits of year-round schooling, or increasing the length of the school day. Of course, the stance of teachers unions ensure we wouldn't even get to square one.
Anyone who informs themselves about the hours teachers work and how they're compensated in the rest of the world, and persists in the belief that the way things are done in Canada are in the interests of anyone but the teachers, is delusional. |
The 10 month school year was instituted long before any teacher's union existed and was at least partially designed to accommodate kids who lived (and worked) on farms. I don't think we can pin it on them.
And I don't think the teacher's union is quite so powerful that they can stop us, society as a whole, from changing the school calendar. They may (or may not) be too powerful, but they don't control everything.
Anyway, is there any reason you can think of why we might not put children as young as five in school for 49 weeks a year? Any reason at all? Because if you can, it just might poke a hole in that "in the interests of anyone but the teachers" theory.