While the Globe editorial makes it appear that the newspaper is evenly weighing both sides, it appears the editorial board is heavily leaning toward the same business interests that motivated this legislation in the first place:
The economic issues are important. So, too, are the concerns of schools about preparing for the MAP test or having a break before summer school starts. What we would like to have are educators stepping forward and making a case for the educational impact on the students.
Might they learn and retain more if they start later, away from the August heat; does getting them back into the classroom a week or so before Labor Day help settle them into the routine better; or does the starting date really make any difference? If it is the latter, well, the economics of the starting date make a solid argument.
The educators have made their arguments, and in every case they have been totally about what is best for the students. Unfortunately, in the world of state politics, often the needs of the children are secondary to the needs of business and industry.
2 comments:
Doesn't most schools have air conditioning that would help the August heat situation. Get real.
Has anyone considered moving the MAP test dates?
Of course, the schools aren't supposed to be teaching to the test, so I am sure that's why they don't want more time.
And if people REALLY cared about the kids, they'd have school year round. Summer was invented so kids could help their parents tend to the crops. I don't see much of that anymore. So why not go year round and not have to play "catch up" for the first 3 weeks of the year anyway?
Post a Comment