Talk:Year-round school in the United States/Archive 1

Archive 1

Major Edits

When I first encountered this article, it was not quite up to quality standards. I have re-written nearly the entire article. I believe that the original article had some factual errors and did not appear to be purely neutral. I have organized pros and cons into a list; uploaded photographs, and I am now tracking down as many citations as possible. Nimur 17:07, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The article is still not up to quality standards, but is now more neutral than it was when I revisited the article. I plan more edits in the near future along with adding citations specific to the pros and cons. --WesWalker 15:58, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

NPOV: Regarding Edits

This issue has been a controversial one in many areas. However, it is important to keep several important Wikipedia principles in mind:

The purpose of this article is to inform readers about Year Round Education. This is an encyclopedia article. This is not a message board of pros and cons, nor is it a forum for argument.

• Wikipedia:Neutral Point of View Please note that this is not merely a guideline, but an official policy on the Wikipedia:
• Wikipedia:Reliable sources In addition, these guidelines are also suggested.
• Wikipedia:No original research to prevent adding your own web-pages as citations, for example.

Several sources were recently added by editor WesWalker which are clearly of his/her own creation:

• http://www.geocities.com/weswalker99/NCStudy/McMillen1.htm
• http://www.geocities.com/weswalker99/memdm.htm
• http://www.geocities.com/weswalker99/rmitchell/MTYRE_Paper1_Chicago_Formatted.htm

This is not appropriate for inclusion in the article, as these sources are neither neutral nor reputable as per the Wikipedia guidelines cited above. Wikipedia does not permit original research as a matter of official policy. Note that the other sources cited in the article come from reputable third-parties, such as government education departments or school districts, and they use statistics, facts, and real data to make their point. This is precisely what is meant by "neutral."

Many edits inserted the word "claim" in front of various sentences. It is considered bad style to do this. Either the fact is true, or not true; it should be kept or removed; but it should not be described as a "claim" every time it is mentioned.

The edits by WesWalker during this time frame also removed photographs of a Year-Round School. Images were specifically requested to improve this article's quality, and should not be removed without a very good reason.

The season, "summer", is written with a lower-case "s", unless it is a person's name.

During the course of this article's history, the phrase "disputed" was removed regarding findings about academic merit because no reliable sources could be found which dispute these findings. One of these edits misquoted the Los Angeles Assistant Superintendent, attributing quotes by the author of an LA Weekly article to the superintendent. Such edits are clearly unacceptable.

In summary, let's work to make this article an informed and reliable source of knowledge for people who are seeking to learn about Year-round school.

Please use the Discussion Page to post comments regarding your major disruptive edits. Further reversion, incorrect quotations, and removal of the photographs will be treated as vandalism. See the above discussion for full explanation of all edits in question. Nimur 13:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

---

Your accusations are without merit. If you would take the time to read the policies that you state, you would find that these edits are in compliance. Just because someone has asked that pictures be added does not mean that they have to be your picures, or that any pictures at all need to be added. I could just as easily request that they be removed. I surely will as soon as I learn how.

I believe you to be a year-round school advocate based on the edits that you insist upon. I highly recommend that we get some kind of arbitration as you have sunk to the level of making personal accusations.

You have used my name in your edits in false accusations. Doing so again will be treated as libel.

Lets work together. I will need some time to familiarize myself with the Wikipedia tools. I have been an active opponent of year-round education for no less than ten years so I know the subject extremely well. Please be patient with me and I will be patient with you. I am perfectly able to be neutral - which is to show both points of view. I have been approaching this by stating both points of view since there are only a few facts that are proven about year-round school. Most of them are effects on populations that are forced to use it. If you wish, I will reorganize the page to show only facts and no issues. This would remove all content that is currently listed as pro and con along with the links at the bottom. It will describe single-tracking, multi-tracking, balanced calendars, modified calendars (BTW, all year-round schools are modified calendars), alternative calendars, and will be renamed from year-round school to its proper term, year-round education. An article like that will tell the reader absolutely nothing that the NAYRE website does not already say on their advocacy site.

In order to comply with one of your wishes, I will delete all references to Wake County since they are currently under conflict concerning this issue.

If you truly think that I am out of compliance with policy, please quote from the policy or policies that you refer to. After reading though the policies, I find that my edits are in compliance and am very curious as to what text in the policies you are referring to.

Thank you for all the work you do. I know that this is time consuming but I think we can end up with a good quality article on year-round education if we can stop the accusations and go by facts. I consider issues surrounding year-round education to be part of the subject. If you believe this not to be so, then that is another point we are going to have to work on. But simply editing out my changes is only going to result in contention. I think two engineers can do better than that.

Persistent Vandalism

This page has become target of many vandals in recent weeks. I will keep it on my watchlist; hopefully we will not need to resort to protecting the page. Nimur 20:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

---

Wake County North Carolina is currently under hot debate on year-round school. The pictures of North Carolina year-round schools serves to make Wiki a commercial for year-round school by making a subliminal suggestion that year-round school is accepted in North Carolina. This violates the Neutral Point of View (NPOV). Therefore, I am temporarily removing the pictures of North Carolina year-round schools. They may be returned at a future time when the issue is settled. See http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/1278446/ for current information.

Please don't bother calling this action vandalism. It is not.WesWalker 03:09, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

We won't. Nimur 17:36, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

• It's really pretty simple:
• → Remain neutral ←
• → Don't be a dick ←
• → Ignore all rules←

Independent view

Hi, I've been asked to step in and contribute to the discussion. Let me just summarise what I think has been said thus far, and what the core issues are:

1. Images improve the article. The article was previously labelled with the "requested images" template and photos of a year-round-school in North Carolina were added.
2. Year-round school is currently being debated in North Carolina and WesWalker feels the images should be removed while this debate goes on. He believes including the images demonstrates bias on the part of Wikipedia.
3. Nimur, on the other hand, believes the images should stay in the article.

Here are my views:

1. Firstly, in the great scheme of things, this is quite a trivial issue and not worth getting worked up about. The images do make the article look better, but it's no less accurate without them.
2. Wikipedia does not shy away from controversy. Removing the images is just as big a demonstration of bias as leaving them there. WP:NPOV says that editors should report facts, not opinions. If the fact is that the school in question is a year-round school (and therefore illustrative of the subject), then there's no reason not to include an image of it.

Here is the academic calendar for that exact school, as pictured. There is no debate about what calendar this school uses. Nimur 06:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

1. An even better solution though would be to find alternative images to illustrate the article, if that can be done. That would alleviate the issue around the controversy as well as making the article "future-proof" should the school in question cease to operate as a year-round school. If alternative pictures can't be found, the images that WesWalker keeps removing are perfectly adequate.

Now those are just my opinions. I recommend that you seek out others to build up a consensus, by making a request for comment or a(nother) third opinion. Meanwhile, please bear in mind WP:3RR and WP:AGF. Hope this helps, Waggers 19:57, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Forgot to mention, another (probably better) place to get other editors involved is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Schools. Waggers 19:59, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Waggers comment about this article on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Schools. is my reason for being here. And my only reason for commenting is this article appears to concern something that is specific to one country, USA. It might seem a small point, but if it is purely specific to one country then surely the article needs to reflect this? Should the article not state in the lead thus - "Year-Round School is the operation of educational institutions in USA on a calendar-system that tracks students into class schedules throughout the entire calendar year". ♦Tangerines BFC ♦·Talk 20:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Another direction is my recommendation. As noted the picture issue is trivial. Pictures are "nice", I'm not sure that a picture of a year round school is that informative ... although I agree that theybreak up the text. An alternative approach is to read the current article ..... there are no sources. Step 1. Find some independent sources. Step 2. Write the article from these. You might even find a peer reviewed graph which shows the advantages by country. If that work has not been done then we can only have supposition. Which is OK ... but make sure it is published independent supposition and show the alternative view. OK ... thanks for your attention.

PS - If you are really locked into this dispute then come and help with assessment ... its a more productive use of your time :-) Victuallers 20:55, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I can't imagine a better source than the actual calendar of the school in question. It is completely false to say that there is any doubt about this particular year-round school. There is no justification for removing the image of an undisputed school, even if other calendars in other areas are under consideration. For further proof of the undisputed status, you can look at the image in question, where the school prominently displays its status as year-round operation. For some reason, a few people dislike this calendar and so they want to deny its existence. In any case, the images improve the article; they are factually accurate; images were specifically requested to improve this article. There is no reason to remove them at the whim of an activist editor. Nimur 06:49, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I have been upgrading the citations on this article as well. Please place any new citations in the References section, as per Wikipedia:Footnotes. Nimur 20:56, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

The actual calendar of the school in question is a very standard 45/15 schedule. It is irrelevant. That the school is already a year-round is irrelevant. That there are probably numerous parents who dislike the schedule is irrelevant. That there may be numerous parents who love the calendar is irrelevant. That parents have risen up and started a lawsuit to keep the calendar out of their lives is irrelevant. (BTW, proaction is not denial.) That the Board of Education had the option of asking for a bigger bond in turn for no MultiTracking Year-Round Calendar but decided to go for the smaller bond and the conversion of 22 schools rather than do the right thing, the inevitable thing and build new schools is irrelevant.

Images do not improve the article in this case and have nothing to do with facts. At best, they merely break up the text. They do not add to understanding or definition of the year-round calendar concepts.

These particular images serve as a promotion for Wake County, NC. Why not use photos of other YRE schools that are not in Wake County? Why these photos?

I already stated my justification for removing the photos here, and at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Schools as recomended. Are we discussing it here or there? WesWalker 21:07, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Because these photos are free,free, and available. If you can find alternative images, please do. Nimur 21:11, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Also, this school has been part of a multi-decade county-wide project. "With the school system's 16 year history with multi track year round calendar schools, it has found that schools on the multi-track year-round calendar can serve 20-33 percent more students than those on a traditional calendar." There is no debate at this school, which has been year-round since it was built! I'm sorry you disapprove of this fact, but that does not change it. Nimur 21:26, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I neither approve nor disapprove. They are irrelevant. The visual propaganda promoting year-round school in Wake County North Carolina will be removed. It is in clear violation of Wikipedia:Conflict of interest

Your citation pointing to a Wake County survey of teachers is not relevant. It is in clear violation of Wikipedia:Conflict of interest since Wake County is promoting year-round school, a political position, and you are from Wake County obviously promoting year-round school. It will be removed.

The survey is also unpublished. This makes it in violation of Wikipedia:No original research

Further, surveys do not establish or demonstrate facts. They demonstrate opinions of those surveyed on the subject, but do not define the subject. Of what relevance are the opinions of the teachers in one school district, advancing their own position, as shown by one survey? How reliable are surveys that advance positions, especially political positions like year-round school? Q: Where is the parent survey? A: It does not matter. It would only show opinions of parents. It would not belong here.

I just thought I would warn you first and give you the opportunity to do the right thing and remove the propaganda put out by Wake County Schools.

It is my opinion that you are using Wikipedia to promote the issue of year-round school in Wake County, North Carolina, your home county. Prove me wrong and remove the propaganda. WesWalker 04:47, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

The study in question was published at this location, which is a web-page maintained by the Growth and Planning Department of Wake County Government. It is not original research, since I had no part in conducting that survey. It was conducted by a reputable government institution (the Wake County Public School System).

This article is about schools, so citing a primary source from a school board is the best way to establish factual information. Some of these sources happen to be from Wake County, which has a convenient web-site. Many sources are from other areas, including the United States Department of Education. By all means, if you can find other reliable sources, please go ahead add such information (and cite it). I suggest you make use of the immense United States Department of Education website.

The article includes an entire sub-section listing arguments against this calendar system. This section was partially written by yourself, and was edited over the last few months by dozens of contributors. I am not trying to stifle your point of view in any way.

All I want is to make sure that you don't remove valuable, factual, cited information just because you have a philosophical disagreement with it. You are more than welcome to add constructively to this article, and please provide your alternative viewpoint with factual evidence. However, if you simply wish to remove items you dislike, you should not expect it to go unchecked.

I hope at this point I have convinced you that there is no propaganda; but if you choose to believe that the entire Department of Education, plus the Wake County School Board, are in cahoots with me to promote Year-Round Education, then I suggest you read WP:TINC and lighten up a bit.

Last, but not least, you mention my "home county" and a "conflict of interest," - but this is not correct. I am not trying to promote any type of educational policy in North Carolina. I am presently a resident of California; and for fiscal-year 2006 I was a resident of Massachusetts. Neither of these states include Wake County, North Carolina; and both of these states have a mixture of traditional and year-round school systems. Hope this helps, Nimur 07:31, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Archive

Below are archives of previous discussions.

• /Archive 1 - June 2006-April 2007

und school]] article. This area is for discussing improvements to the article. Nimur (talk) 15:08, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Its a great idea for year-round schools:) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.22.150.170 (talk) 14:44, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

hi =] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.20.76.105 (talk) 23:25, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the good eye. That was some vandalism; the I inserted the correct data from the source cited (http://eric.ed.gov should be available to the public, so you can verify for yourself). The vandalism was some time ago, I'm not sure when it happened. Nimur (talk) 20:46, 27 November 2009

This page could be more thorough

The states that offer year round schools should be inserted in this article. Also, the reasoning and studies behind each side. Including why people are saying that it is harmful to children. In addition, the article does not have listed the different types of year round schedules. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.164.160.4 (talk) 08:45, 7 September 2010 (UTC) As a student I think we have a long enough school year as it is. I think kids should have a break from school to get away from stress. I think maybe 4 to 5 more days of school is ok. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The epic 1 (talk • contribs) 13:33, 11 December 2012 (UTC) well I kind agree with " the epic one " because its kind of not that bad to have 4 or 5 more school days a year. b vnvnv vvv http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Year-round_school&action=edit&section=2#Χ heyhye — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.234.43.122 (talk) 20:49, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Ball State University ENG 213

For our English course, Introduction to Digital Literacies, we are working to improve this page.

Below is a brief outline of what we plan on doing to revise this page.

Introduction

Background/history

Models (Danielle)

• Single track
• Multi-track
• Extended Year

Arguments

• In favor (Brittany)
• Against (Chase)

You can contact me, the pathfinder, on my talk page if needed. user:bnfeilen —Preceding undated comment added 00:28, 12 March 2012 (UTC).

I just published the work we did as a group to improve this page. Bnfeilen (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:53, 2 April 2012 (UTC).

Edit request on 19 March 2012

The first source cited is outdated. Please remove this source or cite a new one.

JoJoPogo22 (talk) 00:22, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Are you able to supply a new source? -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 01:55, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Link rot, we don't delete references just because they are no longer live, as they tell readers where the information in an article came from. It's valuable to readers to be able to see that the source is from 1992, so the information may be out of date. I couldn't repair the link using the Wayback Machine, so for now I've just tagged it. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 11:50, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

MSU Bozeman Writ 101

Ihi

Impact of recent student edits

counted.

Please rate the amount of time spent as follows:

• 0 -No unproductive work to clean up
• 1 - A few minutes of work needed
• 2 - Between a few minutes and half an hour of work needed
• 3 - Half an hour to an hour of work needed
• 4 - More than an hour of work needed

Please also add any comments you feel may be helpful. We welcome ratings from multiple editors on the same article. Add your input here. Thanks! -- LiAnna Davis (WMF) (talk) 19:41, 27 May 2012 (UTC) Hi Gloob

Edit request on 13 May 2013

97.64.238.66 (talk) 15:16, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Note: No request made. --ElHef (Meep?) 17:24, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Topic content is too narrow for its title

The title "Year-round-school" does not indicate that the subject matter is specific to the United States, nor is their any qualification in the introductory paragraph that explains this article is specific to the United States. Claims are made that "the first YRS...etc.." Does this mean the first YRS in the U.S. or the world? The article is deficient in this regard. Furthermore, there is a complete absence of discussion of YRS outside of the United States. These problems could be resolved by either making it explicit that the article is specific to the U.S., or by expanding the article to include implementations of YRS in other countries.

There is also a repeated "also" in the last sentence that should be edited.

Mwwardle (talk) 14:28, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

I've removed the rogue "also" and added a {{globalize}} tag to the article. I agree with you that something needs to change here. --ElHef (Meep?) 14:46, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

I moved/re-named the article to the more-appropriate "Year-round school in the United States". Shearonink (talk) 15:36, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

This doesn't negate the need to have a separate page that discusses this subject throughout the world. To my mind, US practice is opnly one part of a general worldwide practice that needs to be addresses in a separate article to be called Year-round schooling. werldwayd (talk) 02:08, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Single track model for YRS

This article speaks about multi-track year-round schooling, but does not seem to mention the other common calendar for YRS, the single track model. May I suggest something like the following:

In the nineteenth century, the schools in the United States developed a general calendar for the school year with nine months in session followed by a long summer break of about three months. Students attended school Monday through Friday, with weekends and a few holidays out of school, in addition to the summer vacation. This calendar was developed to meet the seasonal needs of farming families . Today, fewer of our families are involved in family-centered agrarian businesses, so this type of schedule is not required in most communities. A year-round school calendar has been suggested as a way to keep students busy and decrease summer learning loss. Year-round schools (YRS) typically have the same number of days in session as do schools on a traditional calendar, but classroom time is spread out in a more balanced fashion throughout the year by shortening the summer vacation and taking more breaks during the school year . YRS currently takes two forms in the U.S., known as single track and multi-track plans . Schools on a single track calendar place all the students and teachers on the same schedule. A multi-track calendar has students arranged into three or four groups, having one group always on vacation (called an intersession), with starting and ending dates staggered at different times throughout the year for each group . Multi-track schedules are often considered in districts where student enrollment has grown, but it is undesirable to construct new buildings, for lack of space or funds .

Notes

Cinnjenn (talk) 20:28, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Please clarify and balance

Under "Effect on students" the Ohio State and Virginia studies "found" that year-round programs don't have an impact. The California DoE study "claims" students have increased performance. Found means discovered. Claims means opinion.

Despite being a longer description the Ohio State study's description doesn't mention it covered only kindergarten and 1st graders. The single sentence California description mentions it was only on 3rd graders, leaving the impression it was a narrower study. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.80.117.214 (talk) 23:52, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Bad reference

Reference 10 "Year Round Schooling" is a dead link, and the information related to the link should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuskensp (talk • contribs) 13:02, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

on 12 August 2015

i love school

167.217.30.1 (talk) 19:20, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Good - but that is not a Semi-protected edit request - Arjayay (talk)20:14, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 October 2015

I request that you add an opposition part 205.126.66.131 (talk) 14:55, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

- There already is an entire section labeled "Opposition" covering three subsections - If you would like to suggest an addition, please do so here, but this is an encyclopedia, not social media - so we do not include your opinion, or what you have seen in a blog, just what reliable sources have said in newspapers, magazines etc. - Arjayay (talk) 16:39, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 November 2015

WHAT EVEN IS LIFE RN

school is pretty dumb

My dad said to do stufffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff

Dominicjones4748 (talk) 16:04, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Note: No request was made. See WP:EDITREQ or feel free to contact me directly for further assistance. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 16:21, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 20 October 2016 == Cubs are gonna win the world serise cause there dope

115.124.1.174 (talk) 03:45, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

 Not done, as you have not requested a specific change to the article. Altamel (talk) 04:05, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 November 2016

my mommy wants cookies n cream ice cream

I wanna make some grammer fixes jk idc Ilikeblue (talk) 00:06, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

@Ilikeblue: You can edit this article when your account is at least four days old and you have made at least 10 edits. See WP:AUTOCONFIRMED. If you would like another editor to put in the fixes for you, then please specify exactly what needs to be changed ("Please change X to Y"). RudolfRed (talk) 00:20, 9 November 2016 (UTC) hi joseph. school is bad for your health. get out while you can. also dont try at school or it will make you go into a deep depression. 43756349yfui32ehfu4ybf6 (talk) 13:39, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

2016

41.207.49.242 (talk) 07:56, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 08:35, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

== weather == cloudy hi gbzkdhbvgf\sdufgsdiugafuldsfuisdilfualefl4r8gsis48dfiusggfldguSILD@ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.73.48.92 (talk) 15:45, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 February 2017

Xavier lary (talk) 13:42, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Shearonink (talk) 13:48, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

there are two sections both titled "Effects on Students"

there is some overlap, but these two sections should be combined Jrishel (talk) 19:02, 3 October 2017 (UTC) this site is good and good information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.107.121.196 (talk) 12:58, 1 November 2018 (UTC) I step in the building the cameras on me look at my diamonds they dancing on me feelin like Stephen curry never miss a shot so I never worry by Quavis