11-20-2018, 05:43 PM
(11-20-2018, 10:22 AM)Spokes Wrote:Quote:Public school trustee Kathi Smith believes it would help to teach some children year-round, rather than have them take two months off in the summer.
This would help students forget less, and it would help kids whose families can't afford tutors, school camps and learning materials.
But the school board rejected her proposal to test year-round schooling at two elementary schools. In January, it handed her idea to an advisory committee that came to no conclusion and now proposes to spend $35,000 researching impacts.
On the heels of the WRDSB saying that it would cost $40 million to put air conditioning in all schools that don't have it, this is a non starter IMO
I think it would have been a terrific idea with one exception -- summer jobs. Many businesses (and local governments) depend on hires for summer, and it's a great learning experience. However, I think for JK-8 it would be really beneficial.
I dug around a bit because I was curious to see how the holidays worked, so rather than their 9 to 10 weeks off at summer, they had a schedule like this:
End of July, first day of school.
First two weeks in October, a 2 week fall break (includes Thanksgiving Day).
Christmas break is 3 weeks long, rather than 2 weeks.
Mid-winter break in February, for 1 week.
Spring break in March is 2 weeks, rather than 1 week.
School ends at the end of June, for a 5 week break (includes Canada Day).
If I was a kid, I think I would like the multiple short (but long) breaks. I'd gladly give up that 2 month summer break if it meant a break in October, February and extra time at Christmas and March Break. Though one change I'd do, is keep Christmas break to two weeks and add a 1 week vacation in May, during Victoria Day. I say this is because the time between the March Break and "summer" break is about 3 1/2 months, while typically all the other breaks are between 1 and 2 months apart.
Doesn't matter though, it's moot, as the region said "no".