Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Children and teachers need rest. Plus long summer holidays are a great part of child hood for many.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Private schools have longer holidays and yet manage better results. The 6 weeks holidays were the best part of my childhood.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I'm surprised that there's so much criticism of this. I mean, not really, Everyone Hates Michael Gove(tm), but if you believe that education is a really good thing because more of it makes people earn more and be more intelligent, why wouldn't you want this? It's investing in our future and will improve the entire population's life outcomes in the long term.

    Unless you don't believe more education does any of that... which would be an awkward stance for the teachers' unions to take.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I have chronic fatigue syndrome so by the end of term I am completely exhausted (it's usually the time that I have days off). The holidays are precious recovery time for me so if they were shorter I would probably struggle more during term time.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think that we should have shorter school days and less holidays. At my school (in France) we have way more holidays, but normally have school from 8:30 am - 5pm each day, though I know some people who normally have 8 am - 6 pm and it's really annoying because you get home and you're too tired to do anything, really. It would be better to only have school in the mornings or only in afternoons, because then we would be more productive by ourselves for the rest of the day. Long holidays just get boring after a while and I end up procrastinating loads.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    The standards in any bureaucratic system do not improve if left alone. At best they stay the same and more probably they deteriorate.

    The problem with and for Gove is that essentially this is his agenda and not that of the government. He is a rushing everything because he knows that if he loses this job, education policy is likely to go off on another tack entirely.
    Of course, I was merely advocating a more laissez faire style of governing, where those with experience have more power to set and control the curriculum, rather than having to meet endless targets.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Observatory)
    I'm surprised that there's so much criticism of this. I mean, not really, Everyone Hates Michael Gove(tm), but if you believe that education is a really good thing because more of it makes people earn more and be more intelligent, why wouldn't you want this? It's investing in our future and will improve the entire population's life outcomes in the long term.

    Unless you don't believe more education does any of that... which would be an awkward stance for the teachers' unions to take.
    I can see your point, but longer hours <> more/better education. It's a quality/quantity thing, I think.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SocksRock)
    I can see your point, but longer hours <> more/better education. It's a quality/quantity thing, I think.
    Why do you think that providing more education will make it so much worse that it outweighs the benefit of having more of it?

    And why isn't this a reason for shortening the current school day and terms? The current times don't seem to be constantly reviewed in light of empirical evidence; mostly they are based on when the school system was founded in the 19th century in an agricultural economy, so why should they be optimal?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by biggie)
    But one could argue that we elected Gove as an MP, not as education secretary?

    Several international studies have shown that excessive government interference in education causes far more problems than it could ever solve. Gove needs to shut his mouth and leave well alone, then standards might improve if, God forbid, teachers were actually allowed to teach.
    This is a rather silly criticism to make of Gove most of whose programme is about reducing the central control of the state over schools. Teachers don't like this because it puts parents and governors (who may or may not be the same) in charge rather than them and their LEA friends (a classic example of 'regulatory capture').

    I'm not really sure what this policy is about; like I said previously it's the result of him taking his opponents beliefs to their logical conclusions (although again, hurting only the teachers unions who have to work more to deliver more education) rather than something consistent with the rest of his policies. But for the reason the criticism is hard to understand. If you support extending compulsory education to 18, why not support lengthening the school day? It's exactly the same principle and this approach has a lower opportunity cost.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Observatory)
    Why do you think that providing more education will make it so much worse that it outweighs the benefit of having more of it?

    And why isn't this a reason for shortening the current school day and terms? The current times don't seem to be constantly reviewed in light of empirical evidence; mostly they are based on when the school system was founded in the 19th century in an agricultural economy, so why should they be optimal?
    This proposal rather reminds me of what happened with Foot and Mouth Disease more than a decade ago. The Ministry of Agriculture, as is was, panicked and said "don't go to the countryside". It simply had no clue that most economic actively in the countryside wasn't linked to livestock farming and it did immense damage.

    This suggestion by Gove looks as though it has been devised solely thinking about schools with no thought to the extent that the English and Welsh economies (Scotland has different school holidays) and society have spent the last 100 years orientating themselves around the present school year and school day.

    It may be that a change would be an improvement, but he won't have done an economic impact assessment. It will be complete tunnel vision looked at solely from the perspective of schools.

    If you want an idea of what I mean, just think how many public bus timetables outside of the big cities have buses that are "schooldays only".
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    This proposal rather reminds me of what happened with Foot and Mouth Disease more than a decade ago. The Ministry of Agriculture, as is was, panicked and said "don't go to the countryside". It simply had no clue that most economic actively in the countryside wasn't linked to livestock farming and it did immense damage.

    This suggestion by Gove looks as though it has been devised solely thinking about schools with no thought to the extent that the English and Welsh economies (Scotland has different school holidays) and society have spent the last 100 years orientating themselves around the present school year and school day.

    It may be that a change would be an improvement, but he won't have done an economic impact assessment. It will be complete tunnel vision looked at solely from the perspective of schools.

    If you want an idea of what I mean, just think how many public bus timetables outside of the big cities have buses that are "schooldays only".
    One of the main purposes of this seems to be line up schools with daycare rather than leaving that gap between when most kids finish school and when most people finish work.

    Personally I don't have a lot of faith in central planning to produce good economic outcomes no matter how many knotted mountains of red tape sophisticated econometric studies are produced in the process. Which is why I'm a bit surprised by this. A true Govian policy should be to put the schools under the control of parents and let them set their own opening hours.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    School holidays are fine as they are, end of.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Observatory)
    One of the main purposes of this seems to be line up schools with daycare rather than leaving that gap between when most kids finish school and when most people finish work.

    Personally I don't have a lot of faith in central planning to produce good economic outcomes no matter how many knotted mountains of red tape sophisticated econometric studies are produced in the process. Which is why I'm a bit surprised by this. A true Govian policy should be to put the schools under the control of parents and let them set their own opening hours.
    An economic impact assessment isn't a piece of central planning. It is device to spot breaches of the most pervasive of all laws, the law of unintended consequences.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Observatory)
    This is a rather silly criticism to make of Gove most of whose programme is about reducing the central control of the state over schools.
    New policies on a regular basis is not a reduction in central control. For instance, radical changes in the curriculum at short notice have given very little time for teachers to prepare for said changes. Giving OFSTED the power to more forcefully implement an already flawed target based system is also increasing central control.

    A number of my relatives, including my dad, are teachers, and they say government interference has never been higher.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Observatory)
    Why do you think that providing more education will make it so much worse that it outweighs the benefit of having more of it?
    I wouldn't say SO MUCH WORSE - I think you're exaggerating my position to try for a win, tbh - but I can't see the point of cooping kids up for longer, either. It'll be more expensive, assuming we plan to pay teachers and assistants more for the extra time, and I'm not convinced that it'll do much good, particularly for those who aren't especially academic.

    (Original post by Observatory)
    And why isn't this a reason for shortening the current school day and terms?
    See above

    (Original post by Observatory)
    The current times don't seem to be constantly reviewed in light of empirical evidence; mostly they are based on when the school system was founded in the 19th century in an agricultural economy, so why should they be optimal?
    I'm not a huge believer in "empirical evidence" when it comes to measuring the achievements and potential of human beings, it's too fluffy a thing to measure properly. It ain't broke, don't break it.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    An economic impact assessment isn't a piece of central planning. It is device to spot breaches of the most pervasive of all laws, the law of unintended consequences.
    I doesn't seem to me that those two are mutually exclusive at all. The point is states are terrible at this even if do they start up the red tape factories rather than following ministers' whims. The reason is that in the private sector a business plan is only a starting point and a speculative one at that; the feedback mechanism of the market is what is really in control and it contains more information - and information that is constantly changing - than any individual can collect or analyse.

    (Original post by biggie)
    New policies on a regular basis is not a reduction in central control. For instance, radical changes in the curriculum at short notice have given very little time for teachers to prepare for said changes. Giving OFSTED the power to more forcefully implement an already flawed target based system is also increasing central control.

    A number of my relatives, including my dad, are teachers, and they say government interference has never been higher.
    That depends what those policies are. If the policies are "Reduce direct government control of schools by founding more academies" then that is a reduction in central control. Merely enforcing the existing OFSTED system in a not so obviously corruptible manner seems to be keeping the existing interference as it was intended to be all along.

    (Original post by SocksRock)
    I wouldn't say SO MUCH WORSE - I think you're exaggerating my position to try for a win, tbh - but I can't see the point of cooping kids up for longer, either. It'll be more expensive, assuming we plan to pay teachers and assistants more for the extra time, and I'm not convinced that it'll do much good, particularly for those who aren't especially academic.
    If lengthening the day doesn't make education so much worse that it outweighs the benefit of having more of it then the policy is a net positive, right? Teachers are salaried workers so it's not clear they will be paid more for more hours - but again what's the left's problem with spending more on education to make it better? Isn't that what they've been saying they want to do for decades?

    If they're saying education actually isn't as useful as a lot of people think, then I personally agree, but where were they on that issue 5, 10, 20 years ago where they kept putting in more money to decrease class sizes (empirically has little or no effect on outcomes) extend compulsion to 17/18 (worthless credentialing rat race) and paying the most marginal students EMA to stay in school (a statistically preferable alternaitve to the dole)? It seems they suddenly reversed the whole basis of their educational ideology for little more reason than they hate Michael Gove.

    I'm not a huge believer in "empirical evidence" when it comes to measuring the achievements and potential of human beings, it's too fluffy a thing to measure properly. It ain't broke, don't break it.
    Isn't it broke? Who knows? Without some kind of empirical evidence, no one.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Taking away the child hood of all those young kids isn't going to really be beneficial. I do understand where he's coming from when he says the jump from GCSE to a-level/uni is major and that kids need to be prepared better. However, I don't believe extending school hours would be the correct way to go around this.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    He's clearly not heard of Bowlby or Maslow
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by physicso)
    we are having no problem producing highly skilled graduates - in fact we are producing more than we ever had.
    Clearly we are producing more graduates than ever before, but that is by allowing less able people onto degree courses, which devalues the meaning of a degree to follow up the already-devalued A-level. One major problem is that even graduates are emerging with inadequate numeracy and skills in the use of written English.

    http://www.qub.ac.uk/directorates/Ac...,157084,en.pdf

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...cy-skills.html
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The best thing to do for schools is move the school day by an hour.

    The school day as it is, is best suited for parents and not the students who have to go to learn. This is unfair and seriously needs to be changed. You can't complain that the school day is unproductive for students when it wasn't designed around them in the first place.

    Some schools have done this and they have found that students have better concentration when they start school later and end later. GCSE results improved, bad behaviour in class fell, in general, it was good for the school.

    Anyway, Mr Gove will most certainly not listen to anyone other than himself.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up sugar, or salt?
    Useful resources
    Uni match

    Applying to uni?

    Our tool will help you find the perfect course

    Articles:

    Debate and current affairs guidelinesDebate and current affairs wiki

    Quick link:

    Educational debate unanswered threads

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.