Longer School Day = More Learning? Not Necessarily (2/2)

More class time should mean better results. This is the thinking, at least. Yet a 2001 study found that secondary schools with traditional schedules had higher test scores by comparison. Schools with block scheduling did have higher scores in science, though. In any case, the study agreed with earlier findings that students feel better about their schools in systems with nontraditional scheduling.

So how useful is a longer school day? Not surprisingly, the policy experts at Indiana say it is what educators do with the extra time that has the largest effect on student learning. They note a criticism that education leaders often make scheduling changes without changing the learning environment of a school.

The experts say teachers must be trained to use the added time effectively. Professional development is needed. The report notes that simply adding time to a program that is not very good or very interesting will not increase student learning.

Community support is also valuable for any changes. And there is another consideration. Schools may need a lot of extra money to pay for an extended day.

参考译文：

更多的课时应该带来更好的效果。至少大家是这么想的。可是2001年的一个研究发现使用传统课时设置的中学相对而言考分更高。而那些采用长班授课的学校只有理科考分高些。但不管怎样，这项研究与早期的一些发现相符，即学生们感觉不用传统方式授课的学校更好。

那么延长课时有什么益处呢？印第安那大学的政策专家说，毫不为奇，对学生学习起到最积极影响的正是老师在额外课时传授的知识。他们提到一种评论说教育界的领导往往只调整学校的课程，而不改变学校的环境。

专家表示，老师必须接受培训，（掌握如何）有效利用额外课时。职业拓展是有必要的。报告指出纯粹地延长时间而不安排有益或有趣的节目不会提高学生的学习。

课时调整同样需要得到社会的支持。还有一种考虑认为学校应该对延长的学时收费。