Students Would Receive a Better Education If They Were Required to Attend Classes for 11 Months of a Year.

644 Words3 Pages
Education is to students as sunlight is to woods. Though as a common sense that the longer woods are exposed under sunlight, the taller they will grow, the similar logic when applied on simple analogy that the longer students stay at school, the better academic performance they will acquire seems not hold. My younger brother, a secondary school student, immediately goes into craziness at the mere mention of attending class for eleven months. As a student, too, hardly could I approve this ridiculous suggestion. The primary reason for my view lies in the fact that extend class-attending period to eleven months will definitely increase students’ pressure, which in turn will attenuate their studying enthusiasm. Precisely speaking, being exposed to such long time studying will inevitably exert extra burden to students, both in assignments and living expenses. That is to say, high school students need to purchase a lot of things when dealing with relevant subjects, such as English, mathematics, chemistry and history. And as result of spending money on food, stationery and clothes, the longer they stay at school, the higher their total expenses will be. Besides economic burden, bearing pressures in mind could also prevent students from being entirely absorbed in learning. What's more, teachers will be easily to feel exhausted if they have been teaching for eleven month without a break, thus it is difficult to assume that they can perform as excellent as normal. Finally, other staffs, say, cafeteria workers, supervisors in dormitories and guards are much more prone to work less efficiently owing to long-time task. If all these people are exposed to eleven-month functioning and being deprived of appropriate rest and relax, hardly can I imagine what a chaos the school tends to be trapped in. Therefore, how can we say that students can get a better education? Another
Open Document