It seems incredibly ironic, but in the same May 16 Ed Week issue that talks about California reducing the number of school days, there is a blog on the topic of extending the school year. This blog reports that the bipartisan Time For Innovation Matters in Education Act was proposed in both Houses of Congress. If this act is passed, it would create a grant program for which states can compete in order to add 300 hours to the academic year in schools that are "underperforming". This translates into 10 additional weeks of school! Please see my previous blog on California and shortening the school year. If states are in such dire financial straits that they are considering reducing the number of school days, won't all of our schools end up becoming "underperforming" schools? By creating a grant competition, won't this then create a situation where some schools have extended school years and others disappearing school days? Does this not just increase and promote inequity? If Arne Duncan estimates that as many as 82% of U.S. schools will not meet AYP this year (see my blog called "Thoughts on Testing"), is this bill really going to help? Which schools do the children of these Congress folks attend? Do they realize the difficulties that school districts, teachers, parents, and students are grappling with all around the country? I do not have all the answers. I do not understand exactly how we as a country got to this place, but things like Race to the Top and competitive grants for extended school days are definitely not making things better. All students need extended instructional time, and education needs stable, reliable funding.
No comments:
Post a Comment