Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it doesn’t work but for very different reasons than what you’re stating. I think far too much time is lost to transitions and having every kid in the class wait for the very slowest or worst behaved kid. My DD could accomplish everything she does at school with two mornings of 3 hours’ of work. We send her to socialize and have fun opportunities, like learning new sports in PE and doing art projects that we wouldn’t be able to help with.

And she’s at a fancy private school.

My public elementary in the 80s worked far better than anything I’ve seen lately. Unfortunately I think it’s because it had standalone ESL classes, standalone special education classrooms, and leveled classes for reading and math plus entire semesters of pull-out work for gifted kids. Modern schools cannot do all of that without pushback from parents and legal issues. Nevermind that the 80s were probably the last years of truly professional, trained teachers. Many people who would have gone into education when I was growing up have been exposed to far more opportunity than there was back then, and they’re making other career choices. With occasional exceptions, my DD’s teachers have been not-bright and not talented at the art of teaching children or classroom management.

Your dig at the quality of teachers is gross.

But many of your other points are good. Standalone services MUST have been more effective than the crap we have now.

My kids are in high school, and from what I can tell, inclusion-for-all means that some kids get to high school unable to adequately read, write, and reason, then get understandably frustrated when they're shoehorned into the same "gotta go to college" classes that everyone else is.

Anonymous wrote:I think it doesn’t work but for very different reasons than what you’re stating. I think far too much time is lost to transitions and having every kid in the class wait for the very slowest or worst behaved kid. My DD could accomplish everything she does at school with two mornings of 3 hours’ of work. We send her to socialize and have fun opportunities, like learning new sports in PE and doing art projects that we wouldn’t be able to help with.

And she’s at a fancy private school.

My public elementary in the 80s worked far better than anything I’ve seen lately. Unfortunately I think it’s because it had standalone ESL classes, standalone special education classrooms, and leveled classes for reading and math plus entire semesters of pull-out work for gifted kids. Modern schools cannot do all of that without pushback from parents and legal issues. Nevermind that the 80s were probably the last years of truly professional, trained teachers. Many people who would have gone into education when I was growing up have been exposed to far more opportunity than there was back then, and they’re making other career choices. With occasional exceptions, my DD’s teachers have been not-bright and not talented at the art of teaching children or classroom management.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need less "least restrictive environment" and back to separate classes and more of them. 27 kids in class is nuts. With 15 there is less sickness exposure and more time for material over transitions. Disruptive (truly disruptive kids who are violent) students need more care, separate classrooms etc etc. but that is all astronomical $$ and no state/county has funds for that. My diligent DD would do a lot better without the 2 kids who wander around class all day, interrupt everyone and one gets violent and throws objects. How can anyone learn in that environment.

Do schools employ full inclusion models because evidence shows that kids who have learning differences have better outcomes when they learn alongside their peers? Or do school systems no longer have the funding for separate classrooms or both?

Anonymous wrote:We need less "least restrictive environment" and back to separate classes and more of them. 27 kids in class is nuts. With 15 there is less sickness exposure and more time for material over transitions. Disruptive (truly disruptive kids who are violent) students need more care, separate classrooms etc etc. but that is all astronomical $$ and no state/county has funds for that. My diligent DD would do a lot better without the 2 kids who wander around class all day, interrupt everyone and one gets violent and throws objects. How can anyone learn in that environment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many trolls on DCUM these days.

There's the thread on the College Forum about whether kids will have a normal college experience, given current politics. There's a thread about Elon turning off Teslas remotely.

And then there's you, generalizing your kids' sickness in to a screed about the uselessness of schools.

My kids are in high school and college, and at no point, even in daycare, were they, or any other kid I know (and I know so many after 20 years of parenting), constantly sick. And one of my kids is immuno-depressed!!!!!!

You need to upgrade your family's hygiene routine, OP.
And if it doesn't get better, ask their ped about immune issues. They could have an autoimmune disease you don't know about if they're constantly sick. THat is not a. normal state of affairs.

Also, look into tutoring and learning disorders. A neurotypical child should be able to catch up academically in between bouts of illness. My kid who isn't immuno-depressed has ADHD/ASD/low processing speed, and he's in college now, after graduating with a stellar GPA. It's possible to be successful in school, even with special needs.

Schools will always be useful. What needs to change is YOUR attitude.

To answer your actual question, I would have year-round school: a shorter summer break to eliminate summer brain drain, and larger breaks at other times to allow kids to de-stress at multiple points in the year. It would be great for tourism as well: you could travel in every season (if funds and PTO allow), instead of restricting your big vacation to the dog days of summer. For working parents, it would be easier to schedule camps at 4 points in the year, instead of stringing together care for a huge summer break.

It’s already been tried as a pilot in the DMV and failed. No evidence of all these purported “gains.” Not going to happen.

Anonymous wrote:So many trolls on DCUM these days.

There's the thread on the College Forum about whether kids will have a normal college experience, given current politics. There's a thread about Elon turning off Teslas remotely.

And then there's you, generalizing your kids' sickness in to a screed about the uselessness of schools.

My kids are in high school and college, and at no point, even in daycare, were they, or any other kid I know (and I know so many after 20 years of parenting), constantly sick. And one of my kids is immuno-depressed!!!!!!

You need to upgrade your family's hygiene routine, OP.
And if it doesn't get better, ask their ped about immune issues. They could have an autoimmune disease you don't know about if they're constantly sick. THat is not a. normal state of affairs.

Also, look into tutoring and learning disorders. A neurotypical child should be able to catch up academically in between bouts of illness. My kid who isn't immuno-depressed has ADHD/ASD/low processing speed, and he's in college now, after graduating with a stellar GPA. It's possible to be successful in school, even with special needs.

Schools will always be useful. What needs to change is YOUR attitude.

To answer your actual question, I would have year-round school: a shorter summer break to eliminate summer brain drain, and larger breaks at other times to allow kids to de-stress at multiple points in the year. It would be great for tourism as well: you could travel in every season (if funds and PTO allow), instead of restricting your big vacation to the dog days of summer. For working parents, it would be easier to schedule camps at 4 points in the year, instead of stringing together care for a huge summer break.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it doesn’t work but for very different reasons than what you’re stating. I think far too much time is lost to transitions and having every kid in the class wait for the very slowest or worst behaved kid. My DD could accomplish everything she does at school with two mornings of 3 hours’ of work. We send her to socialize and have fun opportunities, like learning new sports in PE and doing art projects that we wouldn’t be able to help with.

And she’s at a fancy private school.

My public elementary in the 80s worked far better than anything I’ve seen lately. Unfortunately I think it’s because it had standalone ESL classes, standalone special education classrooms, and leveled classes for reading and math plus entire semesters of pull-out work for gifted kids. Modern schools cannot do all of that without pushback from parents and legal issues. Nevermind that the 80s were probably the last years of truly professional, trained teachers. Many people who would have gone into education when I was growing up have been exposed to far more opportunity than there was back then, and they’re making other career choices. With occasional exceptions, my DD’s teachers have been not-bright and not talented at the art of teaching children or classroom management.

It worked terribly for students warehoused in those classrooms, effectively denied an education because society didn't think they were worth educating.

Anonymous wrote:I think it doesn’t work but for very different reasons than what you’re stating. I think far too much time is lost to transitions and having every kid in the class wait for the very slowest or worst behaved kid. My DD could accomplish everything she does at school with two mornings of 3 hours’ of work. We send her to socialize and have fun opportunities, like learning new sports in PE and doing art projects that we wouldn’t be able to help with.

And she’s at a fancy private school.

My public elementary in the 80s worked far better than anything I’ve seen lately. Unfortunately I think it’s because it had standalone ESL classes, standalone special education classrooms, and leveled classes for reading and math plus entire semesters of pull-out work for gifted kids. Modern schools cannot do all of that without pushback from parents and legal issues. Nevermind that the 80s were probably the last years of truly professional, trained teachers. Many people who would have gone into education when I was growing up have been exposed to far more opportunity than there was back then, and they’re making other career choices. With occasional exceptions, my DD’s teachers have been not-bright and not talented at the art of teaching children or classroom management.

Anonymous wrote:I think it doesn’t work but for very different reasons than what you’re stating. I think far too much time is lost to transitions and having every kid in the class wait for the very slowest or worst behaved kid. My DD could accomplish everything she does at school with two mornings of 3 hours’ of work. We send her to socialize and have fun opportunities, like learning new sports in PE and doing art projects that we wouldn’t be able to help with.

And she’s at a fancy private school.

My public elementary in the 80s worked far better than anything I’ve seen lately. Unfortunately I think it’s because it had standalone ESL classes, standalone special education classrooms, and leveled classes for reading and math plus entire semesters of pull-out work for gifted kids. Modern schools cannot do all of that without pushback from parents and legal issues. Nevermind that the 80s were probably the last years of truly professional, trained teachers. Many people who would have gone into education when I was growing up have been exposed to far more opportunity than there was back then, and they’re making other career choices. With occasional exceptions, my DD’s teachers have been not-bright and not talented at the art of teaching children or classroom management.

Anonymous wrote:I’m all for year-round school, with 2-3 week breaks throughout the year rather than a long summer break.