In response to:

Shorten the School Year

man of steel Wrote: Jun 13, 2012 9:06 PM
It is a pretty well known fact that elementary school kids learned more in the 60's than they do today. So you are saying that today's teachers need to have control over kids for an addtional 3 months in order to come close to that education level. The fact is today's teachers cannot come close to the job that nuns did 50 years ago. Nuff said.
mark4teach Wrote: Jun 14, 2012 10:28 AM
I have a aunt who is a nun. They are also paid very little. She gets less than $200.00 a month, free room and board.
everyonesfacts4u Wrote: Jun 13, 2012 10:12 PM
Are you just making facts up?
Please cite that kids learned more in the 1960s. Would love to see it. While you spend the rest of your life looking for that:

Truth be told - U.S. finished 7th out of 8th in first international competition of the 1960s and haven't improved much since:

The nuns only taught 8-10 percent of the population. You need to factor in the other 90 percent. And lastly, there are no nuns anymore. At least not enough to teach in every class in an elementary school. Is there one school in the US where this happens now? (It is like saying that Plato and the boys had it much better about 2500 years ago since they had Socrates. Nuff said.)

Vincent Gray, who is the mayor of Washington, D.C., which has some of the worst public schools in America, has an idea he believes will improve them: Keep children there longer.

"It is time for us to get rid of what I think is an agrarian concept," Gray told a Washington radio station this spring, "and that is the days, in the 19th century, when it was thought that children had to get home early to help out with the chores, when they had to get out of school in June and go back at the end of the summer...