ADVERTISEMENT

Two six-month terms won’t work for students

The June 15 letter, “Teaching profession must change with times,” is, indeed, novel. Having two six-month school terms with split student populations would not, in my opinion, have much of a chance of succeeding.

What happens to the children who attend school during the January to June term from July to December? Who is going to care for them? In a highly impoverished city like Buffalo, it is very likely that the delinquency rate would climb if the letter writer’s plan was put in place.

Teaching kindergarten through grade 12 is a stressful job in most areas of the country. Teacher burnout could possibly increase under this scenario. In Phoenix, Ariz., there is a school where more than 50 languages are spoken among the students. The letter writer’s plan would not do much for this type of a stressful teaching problem. Most entitlement programs aimed at helping impoverished families are only a Band-Aid approach.

As for the hand-wringing concerning money for schools, the writer cannot really believe that his plan would drastically reduce or eliminate financial problems that schools face. Dream on!

I don’t believe that educators are opposed to any change that will provide them with the opportunity that would lead toward providing a more positive and wholesome education for their students. Indeed, they cry to be heard.

The educational process and politics are strange bedfellows. Perhaps it is the short-sightedness of those who control the purse strings that must change. But unfortunately, I don’t see this happening any time soon.

Rudy G. Gonzales

Sanborn