- 2015年12月17日11:38 来源：小站整理
- 参与（0） 阅读（2714）
Which is better for children’ education: 9-month study and 3-month break or 3-month study and 1-month break? (2014.7.26NA / 2015.10.10ML)
Nowadays, topic regarding how to balance study time and break time has aroused a wide discussion among teachers and even parents. While some parents think that 9-month study and 3-month break might make students more easily concentrate on their academic life due to more consecutive time spent in school, I disagree. In my opinion, 3-moth study along with 1-month break would be better for students.
Admittedly, 9-month study time seems to be helpful for students. Since students would spend 9 month in a stretch, they might be more focusing on their study. Days after days, students are immersed with their coursework, discuss their problems in class and do their homework after class; Meanwhile, they would be less likely to be disturbed by some casual entertainment. Both of them contribute to students’ devotion to study. However, if viewing it from a different angle, after students spend long time on study, three-month vacation is waiting for them. It is supposed that they would consider this vacation as a total outlet after study, and they would play extravagantly without control. Consequently, what they have learned might leave behind, and this would not be helpful for their study in the next phrase. To avoid this, 3-month study with 1-moth break would be a better option.
To begin with, 3-month study time is beneficial for students. In other words, this kind of schedule is helpful for students to adjust between coursework and rest. In normal middle school, students are asked to study in a quarter of time where teachers choose appropriate course materials so that they will not be too hard for students to study. In physics class, teachers would focus more on Newton’s theories in the quarter, but they might neglect the content related to Einstein because these theories might be too abstract for high school to understand. Meanwhile, even if students have some problems during these three-month study, they would use the one-month time to review them. They could organize their own study at home by making study plan, such as focusing on Chinese passages in the morning and trying to solve math problems in the afternoon. Or they could sign up for some online courses that concentrate on the same course contents, which could help students make up for the knowledge they are not familiar with and understand how teachers solve these difficult problems. In either way, students could have selected content to study in a relatively short time, and they could find ways to review problems if they encounter some misunderstanding.
In addition, 3-month study is beneficial for teachers as well. That is to say, teachers would dynamically update their knowledge based on feedback according to students from the previous quarter. According to the recent study released from Pennsylvania State University, most teachers in local high school would review their syllabus after every quarter is finished. They would ask students to evaluate the difficulty level of each subject; if students consider the course content is too hard to master, teachers might be required to replace the harder part with a simpler one. Thanks to their feedbacks, for those who have not received satisfied performance in the previous quarter, they will not feel frustrated with these simpler contents and keep on studying.
To sum up, based on the reasons I list above, though longer consecutive months sound reasonable, students might suffer from too much pressure. As a result, three-moth study would be more appropriate for both student and teachers.