Harold O Levy, the NYC school chancellor, has been around for a while and pointedly is possessed with getting more students into more years of "schooling". He advocates, among other things, that older students and better advertising can save education.  He is entitled to his ideas and there is evidence that he has backing from many sources beyond the boundaries of the New York City School System he heads.

I once ran a program for teachers desiring additional credits towards the only way they could increase their salaries was through a national program of Televised Studies. They could have gone on to graduate education but this means more traditional schooling.  It was an alternate way, other than attending classes in a college classroom, to get information (education) and it pleased almost everyone from Monmouth College Administration to the teachers who taught in the "Practicums" and the teachers who watched the televised portions at home.  We were closed down by the chancellor of the N.J. Education Department.  I remember when the Chancellor smirked and made reference to the fact that the program I ran lacked, "rigor".  He, like the present N.Y. City Chancellor, chose to better the system of higher education in New Jersey by eliminating competition of the advertised commercial aspects of Televised Studies.

Attacking programs such as Televised Studies was a political as well as an educational move.  Perhaps the developers wanted to make money, but every school has to have money from somewhere in order to stay in business.  There are so many different programs out there that make money (profits). But, I do not want to get stuck on this one aspect of the five ways to fix American Schools.  Mr. Levy thinks what is good for NY City is good for all American Schools.  That is part of the problem and he is part of the problem rather than the solution.

His suggestion that all children stay in a school until the age of 19, an extra year, is a good thing for a foundering educational system.  Then he adds that better advertising can "save" education.  I don't think either idea will work and will not discuss the other three ideas. We have tried shorter summer vacations and longer days in school.

First, how can the sentence for all American children to be institutionalized for one additional year be better than the education they now receive?  This idea is an old one.  Education in this mould may be pictured as the student, head back with mouth open, having education poured into him or her.  The implication is that if you throw more words, courses and teachers at the student over time then that student must, of course, learn.  My experience is that this works for some but not for all - for all "students" do not belong in schools.  Schools do not educate.  Students educate themselves by working at it and learning about how each learns in order to learn more and if open to it, better. I learned a long time ago that time served in "school" was what passed for "education".  More is not better and advertising belongs in the world where buying and selling are what are important.