Reduce homework, lengthen schooltime

My thanks to Muted for his direct response, again. In this last round I’ll attempt to summarise my case, while also conducting rebuttals. Let’s not mince words though; to arguments. School / Work Life The proposal clearly adds 120 minutes to the school day. Con says “40 minutes lunch, 20 minutes ECA, and 40 minutes others” (that’s 100...) . This is incorrect. There’s 20 extra minutes of break implemented + 100 minutes of lessons; the existing 60 minutes of lunch / recess are reworked. Con’s math is incorrect here; see R1. On classes, free time is elected. Remember, assuming the same amount of homework, the model allows students to have 20 minutes more free time that doesn’t have to be spent in school or doing homework as detailed in R3. That assists in freeing up time for students to work! Con’s argues that students text in class. Guess what? There are more distractions in the household to distract one from schoolwork – TV, Internet etc. Plus, no supervising authority. Children spend more time watching TV than learning in school! [1] A child, on average, watches 1480 minutes of TV a week. Tell me there’s no time wasting there. That far outweighs time wastage by texting. “The average person spends about half of their free time (about 2.8 hours a day to be exact) watching TV” [2]School is not the fear here. Sleep deprivation is not a point for Con’s case unless available free time outside school decreases. My model increases that time by 20 minutes. Hence, sleep deprivation is reduced under my model. I concur with Con’s experience; I have worked as well. Anyway, the total time spent on school related work can be decreased by 20 minutes, so, over the entire week, the available time to work is increased. Granted, the time on any individual day may be somewhat reduced, but given homework... the effects of sleep deprivation kick in. Of course, considering Muted is familiar with a 7:30-6:00pm secondary system (as per his R3 intro) I find it rather ironic that he’s attacking my model for eliminating time to work. Memory Retention I’ve already talked in depth about how school timetabling forces spaced presentation to occur which is beneficial. Con doesn’t deny this. His counter is that technology ‘can ’ induce the spacing effect, by voluntary free will of course. Also, on this choice I demonstrated in R3 that students have an incentive to do homework in clumps as massed presentation will assist them as they continue working! In essence, there are good reasons to suggest that students will do massed presentation at home. Furthermore, as my source indicated last round, the DET in NSW has rolled out laptops to all year 9 students in public schools. Technology is a wash between models. However, my model increases teacher instruction and all it’s associated benefits. More later. Con’s next states that work is more akin to work than school is. Obviously I agree, but most time outside school isn’t spent on work! Most youth don’t even work at all; 69.3%[3] Many aren’t of age. The question is then whether school is more akin to work than the home environment. It is, as demonstrated previously, which as per the encoding specificity principle is beneficial for memory retention. Of course, Con hasn’t demonstrated how more time is available for work in the first place, so his counter is moot. (see above point) I’ve demonstrated how state and context dependent cues occur more frequently under my model. On productivity at home, I counter Con’s study. In a survey of over 5000 workers it was found that 17% of telecommuters worked less than an hour a hour, and 37-40% (see the sources) stated they were more productive at the office vs. 29% reporting more work being done at home. [4] [5] This survey was conducted by the largest online employment agency in the USA, CareerBuilder. Finally, Con’s study refers to workers who must need money to survive. Children tend to lack discipline and don’t have the need for money to pay the rent. Their lack of incentive to work at home vis-a-vis distractions, limits the impact of Con’s study. Cost / Teacher Workload I withdraw my point on debasing private tutoring costs; the point is irrelevant, as Con notes. Con fails to counter my points about the streamlining of public transport through more efficient use of transport – students + workers are all catching the same transport, reducing inefficiencies and meaning buses are more likely to run for remote areas (saving students time walking home / parents having to pick them up, leading to longer working hours for parents) and the associated benefits, as well as reduced daycare costs for parents. The State and parents benefit. Those are un-countered points. Teachers aren’t working longer – the extended school day is a substitute for marking homework – 95 minutes a day are spent on things other than instruction, as Con noted in R2. In fact, through the spacing effect and better memory retention teachers can spend less time re-explaining things as students remember better. Net time save. Social Mischief Youth commit a disproportionate amount of crime (see R2). Why? A disproportionate amount of free time and hormones at work. A school environment has been effective in lowering harmful drug use (see R2). Furthermore, if students were to commit crimes when they should be doing homework then moving them into school increases the chance they’ll do the homework vs. the distractions of unallocated time. Authority and supervision, both found in schools, deter crime. Furthermore, homework is known to causes familial discord (read: arguments in the home), typically in about 1/3 of families. [6] [7] In fact: “As a solution, the report suggests that "homework clubs", taking place after school, would be a successful way of getting the benefit of homework, without risking the disagreements associated with homework at home.” [7] Does that sound like my proposal of moving homework into schooltime? I think so. Working Mindset / Lack of Agrarian Workforce I’ve discussed timing in school and work life. However, as stressed there, so much free time is wasted by youth. Bringing students to school instills a work ethic, reduces social discord and increases familial harmony (see social mischief), as opposed to time wastage at home. Now not everybody wastes free time, but many youth do waste time; see statistics from earlier. Teacher Instruction Con can’t counter the benefits of actual teacher instruction. A student at school will seek guidance from a teacher when stuck on homework, eliminating time wastage through being unsure on how to proceed on a question. They will have greater difficulty copying answers due to teacher supervision. They will be pushed to perform optimally not just by the teacher, but by peers – iron sharpens iron. Conclusion More free time, better memory retention, cost savings, lessened social mischief, just to name a few benefits. Readers, you know the complete case I’ve laid out. I hope you’ll agree that we ought to at least trial this model, if not implement it on a larger scale. I urge you to reread parts if need be. Readers, please vote based on this debate alone; this is an issue that I wish preconceptions not to bias. I thank you for your attention throughout. Finally, my thanks to Muted for a fierce, spirited debate throughout. I’m sure we both learnt a fair bit throughout the debate! Sources 1 - http://www.statisticbrain.com... 2 - http://ideas.thenest.com... 3 - http://www.abs.gov.au... 4 - http://www.businessnewsdaily.com... 5 - http://www.shrm.org... 6 - http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk... 7 - http://www.timesofmalta.com...