A three month long summer vacation from public school seems stupid

[sevensages]

Japan has public schools in session year round. There is no summer vacation in Japan. And in Japan, students have to attend class six days per week. Japanese people tend to be much better educated than Americans. There is far less poverty in Japan than in America. There is far less crime in Japan than in America. Year round schools work for the Japanese.

 

[DaveC426913]

It is stupid because there is no need for students to be out of school during the summer.

Stupid does not mean what you seem to think it means.

It is stupid because it wastes over two months that could be used productively to better people's educations.

Is that the goal? Productivity? Not, say, work/life balance? or happiness?

Are you comfortable deciding that for others?

Are you cognizant of the fact that life tends to get harder and more stressful once one leaves school (for example: trying to find activities to keep their school age children from getting bored because they wont entertain themselves)? And that maybe you're not in a very good position to judge what's stupid for others?

If you personally find the summer break boring, why not spend it in a way that's more productive for you? How many books did you read? How often did you visit the library? Did you use the time to learn a new language, or get ahead on your math?

Wouldn't it make more sense for everyone to have individual freedom, so that those who want quality time with their children can do so and you, who want to keep learning, can do so?

What have you done this summer to achieve your own goals?

 

[jbriggs444]

What would help those students would be to put them in special education. We have had special education for students who cannot learn the curriculum in regular academic classes for decades in America. Those students learn more in special education.

It would be easy to read this as saying that unproficient students is a solved problem. That the solution is called "special education" and that this solution has been in place for decades. But I know that you stopped short of calling special ed a solution. You only characterized it as an effective approach.

You may be right. Perhaps the best we can do is Individualized Educational Programs and short busses. Perhaps this is orthogonal to the choice between 6 week and 12 week vacations. Though the idea of remedial 12 week summer school is attractive.

 

[sevensages]

Stupid does not mean what you seem to think it means.


Is that the goal? Productivity?

Yes.

Not, say, work/life balance? or happiness?

Yes. A 2 week summer vacation would be a much better work/life balance than a 12 week summer vacation. There is an enormous amount of poverty in the world. This enormous amount of poverty in the world causes an enormous amount of human suffering. An educated workforce will be a far more productive workforce than an uneducated workforce. The better people are educated, the more productive they will be at work. The more money that a workforce generates, the more money that that workforce can afford to give to poor people to help alleviate their suffering caused by poverty. This should be the priority, not a work/life balance. We should put our humanity before being Americans (or whatever nationality that you are).

Are you comfortable deciding that for others?

Yes.

Are you cognizant of the fact that life tends to get harder and more stressful once one leaves school (for example: trying to find activities to keep their school age children from getting bored because they wont entertain themselves)?

Yes.

And that maybe you're not in a very good position to judge what's stupid for others?

It's common sense . When I was in elementary school, the first month or two of a school year would be wasted just trying to catch up on the material that everyone forgot over the ridiculous three month long summer vacation.

If you personally find the summer break boring, why not spend it in a way that's more productive for you? How many books did you read? How often did you visit the library? Did you use the time to learn a new language, or get ahead on your math?

I'm a trucker, not a student.

Wouldn't it make more sense for everyone to have individual freedom, so that those who want quality time with their children can do so and you, who want to keep learning, can do so?

Nope. It's kind of an all or nothing thing if we are talking about public schools.

What have you done this summer to achieve your own goals?

I worked all summer as a long distance truck driver.

 

[PeterDonis]

Are you comfortable deciding that for others?

Yes.

You shouldn't be. All human history shows that we humans are very poor at deciding things for others. There are cases where it has to be done (for example, parents about things their children aren't yet old enough to understand, or caregivers of people who are either temporarily or permanently incapacitated), but those cases are very limited in scope. You're basically saying you know better than everyone else how society should educate people. I don't buy it.

 

[PeterDonis]

It's kind of an all or nothing thing if we are talking about public schools.

So maybe the answer is to not have a one-size-fits-all public education system, but let different people with different preferences work out what suits them best.

 

[PeterDonis]

There is an enormous amount of poverty in the world. This enormous amount of poverty in the world causes an enormous amount of human suffering. An educated workforce will be a far more productive workforce than an uneducated workforce. The better people are educated, the more productive they will be at work.

You're assuming that the primary cause of world poverty is lack of education. I don't think that's true. I think the primary cause of world poverty is misgovernment--that countries whose people are mostly poor are governed poorly, and their governments are not held accountable for that. I think that even with the current state of education, people who are poor because they are unable to be productive aren't that way because they aren't educated well enough, but because there are political barriers in the way of them being productive. (In many underdeveloped countries, the barrier is obvious: anything a private person produces, the government takes away. There's no incentive to produce under those conditions, even if you're the most productive worker in the world.)

 

[PeterDonis]

The better people are educated, the more productive they will be at work.

Even leaving aside the political issues, I'm not sure this is true either. At least, not if "education" means what you are using it to mean in this discussion, attending public schools throughout your entire childhood and adolescence. Much of what is taught in public schools (and in colleges) has little or no relationship to productivity. Nor is it taught for the purpose of making people more productive. It's taught for a variety of other reasons, including a vague idea that "general knowledge" about a variety of subjects is a good thing, and also to induce conformity. (If that last bothers you, bear in mind that the people who designed the US public education system in the late 19th and early 20th centuries explicitly gave as a goal that the schools would indoctrinate children to be compliant citizens who obeyed the government.)

 

[BillTre]

You're assuming that the primary cause of world poverty is lack of education. I don't think that's true. I think the primary cause of world poverty is misgovernment--that countries whose people are mostly poor are governed poorly, and their governments are not held accountable for that. I think that even with the current state of education, people who are poor because they are unable to be productive aren't that way because they aren't educated well enough, but because there are political barriers in the way of them being productive. (In many underdeveloped countries, the barrier is obvious: anything a private person produces, the government takes away. There's no incentive to produce under those conditions, even if you're the most productive worker in the world.)

Interesting perspective.
I would add that people having a motivated attitude to do things themselves would be an important component. This may be wrapped up in the political barriers what the government does.
Without motivation, nothing will happen.

 

[PeterDonis]

people having a motivated attitude to do things themselves would be an important component.

Yes, I agree. And I would argue that our public school systems not only do not encourage this, they actively discourage it. Which would be another reason to be skeptical of the OP's belief that more public school education improves productivity.

 

[Bandersnatch]

Japan has public schools in session year round. There is no summer vacation in Japan

Japanese schools have about two/two and a half months of total vacation time, usually split between a month/month and a half in summer - duration depending on region - and around a couple weeks each in spring and winter. The three breaks separate the three terms that tend to make up the school year.

I don't know where you got that year round idea from.

 

[sevensages]

You're assuming that the primary cause of world poverty is lack of education.

No. You're assuming that I am assuming that the primary cause of world poverty is a lack of education. But I am not assuming that. I am assuming that PART of the cause of world poverty is a lack of education. Furthermore, a better educated workforce in America can make more money to give to the Third World.

I don't think that's true. I think the primary cause of world poverty is misgovernment--that countries whose people are mostly poor are governed poorly, and their governments are not held accountable for that. I think that even with the current state of education, people who are poor because they are unable to be productive aren't that way because they aren't educated well enough, but because there are political barriers in the way of them being productive. (In many underdeveloped countries, the barrier is obvious: anything a private person produces, the government takes away. There's no incentive to produce under those conditions, even if you're the most productive worker in the world.)

I think that the primary cause of world poverty is misgovernment too. That doesn't change the fact that if America made more money due to a better educated workforce in America, America would be able to generate more money to donate to the Third World.

 

[Janus]

I got burnout on summer vacation after about two weeks.

So basically, you are using "I'm cold, put on a coat." reasoning.

 

[PeterDonis]

You're assuming that I am assuming that the primary cause of world poverty is a lack of education.

I'm inferring it from your posts.

if America made more money due to a better educated workforce in America

I've already said I don't think lower productivity is due to poor education. So I don't agree with your premise here. We already have lots of well educated people in America who can't find jobs because the market for labor is so inefficient, for reasons which have nothing to do with education.

America would be able to generate more money to donate to the Third World.

But we already know what happens to most of the money America donates to the Third World: it gets stolen by corrupt governments there. That's why, even though we've been donating money to the Third World for decades, the Third World is in no better shape now than it was then (and arguably is in worse shape in many ways).

I think that the primary cause of world poverty is misgovernment too.

Then you should be focusing on fixing that, since until it's fixed other efforts are doomed to failure. See above. How to fix that would be a separate discussion for a separate thread.

 

[pinball1970]

I guess that's debatable. When I was at school, the summer break was about six weeks.

Spoken like a Brit, Robson Crusoe, White Horses and Banana splits.
EDIT: I remember getting homework from being about 12 so it was not all fun and games.

 

[PeroK]

Spoken like a Brit, Robson Crusoe, White Horses and Banana splits.
EDIT: I remember getting homework from being about 12 so it was not all fun and games.

Belle and Sebastian; The Flashing Blade (I still remember the theme song!).

 

[JT Smith]

Do you agree with me?

No.

I agree that making children go to school more continuously (and for longer hours as well) will result in some sort of increase in measured scholastic achievement and likely success and productivity as adults. But I don't agree that that's the most important thing in life.

I think that adults should have at least 6 weeks of continuous vacation each year. More would be better.

Consider that your disdain for summer vacation as a child made you an outlier.

 

[TensorCalculus]

I personally am a big fan of summer break, even as a pretty big nerd who DOES enjoy school, and who lives outside of the city by school is in and thus can't really see my friends very often even during summer (and yes, I do enjoy being around my friends very much):

• Summer break is a great time for us to go abroad to visit family or just to go as tourists somewhere, for a long time. If I want to see my family on the other side of the world, I would want it to be for more than a week, no? Also if I'm paying that much for a plane ticket, might as well stay awhile. I don't know how it is in other places but in Britain it's a criminal offence to take your child out of school for a holiday. Seriously. The fine is over £100 per parent, per child.
• It gives me time to work on my own projects rather than having to worry about what work is going on in school at the same time: which is great for pursuing my own passions and goals or taking on programmes which run in the summer
• And even if I didn't do that, I got a break during the scorching weather to go and be the kid I am, rather than have to sit in a classroom hearing my teacher go on about history or whatever. Children get hot and bothered in the summer in a stuffy classroom: I seriously doubt that the extra 3 months would even make that much of a difference in the long run. The lack of the break will probably cause them to burn out, I can see that happening with some of my class (and probably myself to be honest, studying Latin without breaks sounds like a nightmare)
• Plus, no summer would make it a lot harder to define rigidly when one school year starts and one ends no?

 

[sevensages]

No.

I agree that making children go to school more continuously (and for longer hours as well) will result in some sort of increase in measured scholastic achievement and likely success and productivity as adults. But I don't agree that that's the most important thing in life.

It's more important than vacations.

I think that adults should have at least 6 weeks of continuous vacation each year. More would be better.

Consider that your disdain for summer vacation as a child made you an outlier.

I did not look at summer vacation per se with disdain. In my childhood, I always got excited about the summer vacation. The problem is that the summer vacation is way too long. Two weeks would be a lot more appropriate than three months.

 

[sevensages]

I personally am a big fan of summer break, even as a pretty big nerd who DOES enjoy school, and who lives outside of the city by school is in and thus can't really see my friends very often even during summer (and yes, I do enjoy being around my friends very much):

• Summer break is a great time for us to go abroad to visit family or just to go as tourists somewhere, for a long time. If I want to see my family on the other side of the world, I would want it to be for more than a week, no? Also if I'm paying that much for a plane ticket, might as well stay awhile. I don't know how it is in other places but in Britain it's a criminal offence to take your child out of school for a holiday. Seriously. The fine is over £100 per parent, per child.

I think that two weeks is a proper amount of time for a summer vacation. The summer vacation's lasting three months is a tradition that started with the advent of public schools in the 19th century. With the advent of modern airplanes in the early 20th century, one can travel anywhere in the whole world and back in two weeks.

• It gives me time to work on my own projects rather than having to worry about what work is going on in school at the same time: which is great for pursuing my own passions and goals or taking on programmes which run in the summer

You can work on your own projects during a two week summer vacation, and then you can work on your projects on the weekends during the school year.

• And even if I didn't do that, I got a break during the scorching weather to go and be the kid I am, rather than have to sit in a classroom hearing my teacher go on about history or whatever. Children get hot and bothered in the summer in a stuffy classroom: I seriously doubt that the extra 3 months would even make that much of a difference in the long run. The lack of the break will probably cause them to burn out, I can see that happening with some of my class (and probably myself to be honest, studying Latin without breaks sounds like a nightmare)

That is what air-conditioning is for.

• Plus, no summer would make it a lot harder to define rigidly when one school year starts and one ends no?

Nope. The summer vacation could be from July 16 to August 01 every year. The school year rigidly starts on August 01, and the school year rigidly ends on July 16. Nope, no confusion there.

 

[DaveC426913]

Nope. The summer vacation could be from July 16 to August 01 every year. The school year rigidly starts on August 01, and the school year rigidly ends on July 16. Nope, no confusion there.

And this happens magically?

As someone who works as support staff in education, I can tell you that the work put in at graduation and the work required to start the new year are both quite a lot. 160 programs: faculty, syllabus, fees etc. all get updated. The workload can't overlap.

And remember, grade school, high school and college are in lockstep. You can't change onec without othout changing them all.

Staff need more than two weeks to wrap up the old year and refurbish everything for the new year. There's a little more to the cycle than ticking a desk calendar over from 2025 to 2026.

This is what the summer is for.

You are speaking about things you do not understand.

 

[BillTre]

You are speaking about things with great conviction you do not understand.

 

[PeterDonis]

It's more important than vacations.

Maybe for you. But not everyone shares your preferences. And there is no reason why your preferences should override everyone else's.

I think that two weeks is a proper amount of time for a summer vacation.

When I was in school, two weeks was barely enough time for me to get into the swing of summer vacation. I would have hated going back to school at that point.

 

[JT Smith]

It's a question of balance and clearly there is disagreement about that. Fortunately one person's preference doesn't decide.

If I were King many of you would not be happy with many of my decisions. If I were God I would probably be hated.

 

[TensorCalculus]

I think that two weeks is a proper amount of time for a summer vacation. The summer vacation's lasting three months is a tradition that started with the advent of public schools in the 19th century. With the advent of modern airplanes in the early 20th century, one can travel anywhere in the whole world and back in two weeks.

Even if 2 weeks of travel wasn't a bit too short anyway, that would make plane tickets extremely expensive during those 2 weeks. They're expensive enough when the holidays are months long.

You can work on your own projects during a two week summer vacation, and then you can work on your projects on the weekends during the school year.

I think I can speak for a large group of students when I say I get home at 5:30pm (if I have a club, that's 6:30), and sleep at like 10, and in the time in between I have to do basic things like shower and change and eat dinner but I also have to do my homework and I have to practice my instrument and prepare for tests and olympiads and do chores and also practice things like maths and physics so that really doesn't leave much time for any projects during the week, and the weekends are always busy...
Depending on the project, 2 weeks might not be enough. And what if my family wants to go abroad during those two weeks? After all, there's no other time they can go abroad. What time would I have to relax or to work on things other than schoolwork? What about summer programmes or work experience which can be highly beneficial to students' progress and learning, but operate in the summer holidays?

That is what air-conditioning is for.

Yeah... so that's not really a thing in Britain... like I have never been to a school with AC, and most houses here don' have AC either. There are better things for the schools to spend their money on, not to mention the pain it would be to install AC in every classroom and the extra cost associated with running them.

The idea is in goodwill, but 2 weeks is far, far too short in my opinion.
Maybe America switches from 3 months to Britain's 1.5ish months. Don't know.

 

[martinbn]

Maybe America switches from 3 months to Britain's 1.5ish months. Don't know.

1.5 months in the summer, but you (in the UK) have one week off after every six weeks of school. He will not like that.

 

[TensorCalculus]

1.5 months in the summer, but you (in the UK) have one week off after every six qeeks of school. He will not like that.

Wait, Americans don't have that?

Gods, I don't think I could survive without a Christmas/Easter holiday, and half term of course

Nevertheless I would argue that having a 1.5 month summer and then lots of smaller holidays is favourable to one big holiday.
2 weeks is too short though.

 

[martinbn]

Wait, Americans don't have that?

Gods, I don't think I could survive without a Christmas/Easter holiday, and half term of course

Nevertheless I would argue that having a 1.5 month summer and then lots of smaller holidays is favourable to one big holiday.
2 weeks is too short though.

I don't know about the Americans, but I had 2.5 to 3 months in the summer, Christmas and spring breaks but no half term breaks. Or if you prefer all the half and in-between terms breaks are put in the summer. Another thing is we only had two longer semesters, not three terms like you.

 

[TensorCalculus]

I don't know about the Americans, but I had 2.5 to 3 months in the summer, Christmas and spring breaks but no half term breaks. Or if you prefer all the half and in-between terms breaks are put in the summer. Another thing is we only had two longer semesters, not three terms like you.

Oh.
That is different.

I still would prefer half terms with shorter summers :)
but not that short...

 

[PeroK]

You're assuming that the primary cause of world poverty is lack of education. I don't think that's true. I think the primary cause of world poverty is misgovernment--that countries whose people are mostly poor are governed poorly, and their governments are not held accountable for that. I think that even with the current state of education, people who are poor because they are unable to be productive aren't that way because they aren't educated well enough, but because there are political barriers in the way of them being productive. (In many underdeveloped countries, the barrier is obvious: anything a private person produces, the government takes away. There's no incentive to produce under those conditions, even if you're the most productive worker in the world.)

If this is not political, then neither is the alternative view.

Poor or corrupt government is a factor, but underdeveloped countries have been kept underdeveloped by US policy (and, to some extent the policy of Western nations). The priority is the profits of US corporations. These are maximised when the poorer nations remain poor and cannot compete with US corporations.

In many cases, countries which have tried to develop have been undermined or sabotaged by US operations.

US Aid was needed to stop many countries collapsing altogether and maintaining the status quo. Even if those involved in aid were doing it for genuine humanitarian reasons.

Now that US Aid is essentially no more, there is no counterbalance to the economic domination by the US of developing nations.

Moreover, China's policy towards the third world appears to be more mutually beneficial. China wants contracts and influence, of course, but it is prepared to allow countries to develop in the process.

This initially appears paradoxical because China is a Communist dictatorship with little official recognition of human rights. Nevertheless, China may succeed over the US in this respect.

I suggest that most of the rest of the world would see it more like that.