<p>The schedule was tweaked? Students who have countless ECs and countless leadership positions are quite impressive because they are definitely great with time management. The average schoolday for an American high school student is about 6-7 hours long. This is due to the amount of subjects that must be covered in one day. The constant shift does not really emphasize focus. I understand that we should not be in one place ALL day in order to maintain focus and stability, but what if the system was slightly changed?</p>
<p>Let's say that for each of the 5 days in a school week, one subject was taught for about 3 hours or so, of course breaks would be taken. And then after each core class, an elective period would be in the schedule for about an hour or so. This could seriously emphasize focus and we would go through the material much faster without so much pressure. Students would have a week to complete their assignments for a certain class, while being exposed to their chosen passion every day. This would definitely make AP classes less stressful and students would not have go through a pressure cooker. In AP English classes or any English class, discussions could be more meaningful and the class could delve deeper into which ever work they are studying at the moment. This 4 hour school day could also leave time for extra-curriculars as well as significant study time. Students would walk out of the classroom learning more. I understand that a problem would be lazy teachers who are unmotivated to teach for even 20 minutes, but this process could eliminate horrible teachers. Let me know what you think. Would this be better, worse, or would it have very minimal or effects on students?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t think participating in a million things is all that impressive, at least not by itself.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My high school has block scheduling, which means we have four classes each day and then we get a completely different schedule second semester (so that we end up with eight classes per year all the same).
I like it a lot better than regular scheduling, and I think I’m really fortunate that my school had it while I was there. Unfortunately, they’re getting rid of it in the 2014-2015 school year, but I will have graduated by then. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>High school students shouldn’t be expected to know what their passion is.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Academics > extracurriculars.
Colleges are academic institutions. Extracurriculars are what colleges use to differentiate between students after they have chosen the students who are academically qualified. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If a teacher wasn’t willing to teach for 20 minutes, they wouldn’t be doing well in the current school system either. How is this relevant?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t like the four-hour-day thing, unless you’re proposing that we get rid of summer vacation. I don’t see how spending 15 hours less in school per week helps anyone.
Understand that most students aren’t really in a “pressure cooker” academically. A lot of kids are taking regular classes (and probably honors classes, in some cases) that ultimately amount to nothing more than free daycare. For some kids, school is just a way to keep them off the streets. You seem to be making the false assumption that everyone is CCer-like or at least close, and that isn’t the case.</p>
<p>@halcyonheather
“If a teacher wasn’t willing to teach for 20 minutes, they wouldn’t be doing well in the current school system either. How is this relevant?”
This is relevant because many tenured teachers actually do not teach and even after going through the lengthy evaluation to fire them, they still are not fired, obviously the teacher’s union has a significant amount of power. In my school, there is a science teacher who pretty much allows anyone to goof off all period and she is just on her cell phone or reading a magazine during the entire period. This different system could seriously emphasize the fact that certain teachers are doing absolutely nothing. Their laziness would be more noticeable if the class period was longer.</p>
<p>Also, would this have a negative impact on teachers’ salaries since their normal hours are being slashed in half?</p>
<p>They’re not paid by the hour, so logically it shouldn’t. But the public would probably complain about how the teachers were only teaching for 20 hours a week, and that would probably lead to their salaries diminishing. (People don’t think all that highly of teaching and this probably wouldn’t help.) But I’m still not sure why it’s necessary to shorten the day. Just have fewer classes.
(As an aside, I do think we should go in a couple hours later, though, and stay until 5 p.m. or so until of 2:30.)</p>
<p>^i agree to the above proposition, especially for the middle and elementary school levels. It makes sense for the school times to correspond with parent’s work times so daycare isn’t needed.</p>
<p>I get out at 2:45 while the elementary students get out at 4. I think this is the case because the school district doesn’t have enough buses to fit the whole district (elementary, middle and high school). Also their 9-4 school day is supposed to fit the schedule off adults. The world is made for adults.</p>
<p>Schools in China, S. Korea, and probably many other countries end at around 5. I’m definitely not saying this is better, but the U.S. education system would look even worse to foreign countries.
That being said, Finland has a four-hour day school day, and their system is incredible. Of course, its drastically different but in a good way.
[Finland’s</a> Education System Best In World - Business Insider](<a href=“Finland's Education System Best in World”>Finland's Education System Best in World)</p>
<p>Or they could homeschool and set their own schedules.</p>
<p>I personally prefer focusing on one thing for a long time over moving from thing to thing, so I would probably prefer this schedule over the status quo if I had to go to a high school.</p>