ter years of following one method, they would be told to suddenly switch tracks completely. Students would then lose a chance for improved education. Similarly, teachers would not have the time needed to take additional classes to improve their teaching methods (Somerby 9). " How can a district expect education to improve if teachers can't improve their own personal education?" (Somerby 9). Students moving out of the district would be in conflict with a district that had a nine-month schedule. "For a military family or any family that is at risk, a year round schedule can only means a nightmare." (White 27). Also, special events such as graduation or the beginning of the school year would all be lost in the shuffle from year to year (Sardo- Brown 27). This means that after years of hard work in school, graduating seniors would all but not matter. A revision does indeed need to occur in the U.S. education system. The facts all do point to other countries flying by the U.S. However, year round school is not what students need. It has too many downfalls and not enough benefits. Costs and scheduling are too huge of problems to be ignored. The nine-month schedule must remain the basis for education in America. The changes that need to occur do not involve the schedule. They concern the actual education taught in classes. A change to the traditional calendar only sinks education lower off the charts. Works CitedSardo- Brown, Deborah and Rooney, Micheal. "The Vote on All-Year Schools." American School Board Journal. July 1992; 25-27.Sevetson, Martha. "Try, try Again: All Year Long." The Wichita Eagle. 13 September 1992; 1D+ Somerby, Robert. "Are these the Right Goals for Education in the 90’s?" The Baltimore Sun. 15 April 1990. D8+ natl.ed.White, William D. "Year Round No More." American School Board Journal. July 1992; 27-30. ...
