The school calendar is a relic of the agricultural age. The most objectionable result of this system is the learning lapse and subsequent review that occur each fall. I believe an alternative method should be an option; here is one suggestion.

There are 52 weeks in a year, comprised of four 13-week quarters. There are many variations as to how these quarters could be arranged into 9-week academic sessions. The overall concept would be to provide four distinct academic sessions per year, with each quarter having a short (maximum, 3 1/2 weeks) break as well as conventional holidays.

This would prevent the severe learning regression that transpires each summer under our current system. It would also give teachers, students and families the freedom to enjoy a stay-cation/vacation during each of the four seasons. Seasonal activities could be enjoyed more readily with less crowding at most places. It would break up the long, endless days of school that seem to linger forever each spring, not to mention the end-of-summer boredom each August.

The bonus is that it would not cost a penny more than the current system. Because the school year would still be 36 weeks (180 days) of instruction, no increase in teachers’ salaries would be required.

One other tradition that negatively impacts education, as well as general health and proficiency, is the biannual time change. Again, this is a good idea gone bad. The transition each spring results in brain-fog, more highway accidents, lower academic achievement and general malaise. More pointedly, the spring time change nearly always coincides with the administration of standardized tests. Because the students’ body clocks are off, they do not perform as well as they might otherwise do. Simply put, this biannual tradition has far more negative effects than possible benefits, and it should be terminated immediately. (Having lived and taught in states that do and do not observe daylight savings time, I can attest to the validity of these statements.)

If all children were welcomed into homes of nurturing, capable parents, then it would be ideal for the parents to teach and train their children, especially in the early years. However, this is not reality. Therefore, an alternative process for educating our young has evolved: the 25+ students/class with one teacher setting. Is there a better way? I believe there is.

I think that (grades 1-5) grade-school children would be less resistant to school if they were placed in small learning groups with a teacher/teacher-aide to student ratio of 1:15. Discipline issues would be curtailed significantly. Flexible groupings, curricula and methods could optimize learning, while encouraging various social and recreational options. This would require increasing teaching personnel in the classrooms. One way to cut costs with marginal impact on students would be to reduce nonessential administrative positions. The savings in high-end salaries would offset the additional classroom faculty requirements. It is time to focus on the purpose of education; that is, to educate, and dismantle the bureaucratic empire-building that has nearly bankrupted the nation.

As children progress to secondary schools, curricula should be relevant and challenging, but not oppressive. For some students, proficiency in communication skills and basic home economic concepts would serve them well. Credit card debt and lack of financial discipline are traps that should be addressed in high school in order to arrest the out-of-control spending, poverty and entitlement mentality that pervades our society. Also, healthy life skills, positive parenting skills and self-discipline skills should be taught and rewarded. A college prep curriculum should be offered and pursued by students who are more driven or more capable. Likewise, a mix of the two is feasible.

These are very realistic concepts that could be implemented fairly easily and with enormous positive consequences. Do we have the courage to do it?

Martha Daniels lives in Bend.