GED Essay Example: Four-Day School Week
Current educational debates, such as the push for four-day school weeks, often serve as writing prompts on the GED exam. This detailed GED essay on four-day school week example illustrates how to weigh opposing views, craft a clear argument with evidence, and excel on the RLA extended response section.
Read the prompt and task instruction below. Your task is to write a well-organized extended response of at least 300 words in 45 minutes, as shown in the Model Response that follows.
GED Essay Samples by Topics
Task Instruction
Analyze the arguments presented in the two speeches. In your response, develop an argument in which you explain how one position is better supported than the other. Incorporate relevant and specific evidence from both sources to support your argument. Remember, the better-argued position is not necessarily the position with which you agree. This task should take approximately 45 minutes to complete.
Four-Day School Week: A Smart Solution for Our District
Letter to the Editor by Maria Gonzalez
Valley Tribune – March 17, 2025
Dear Editor,
As a parent of two elementary students and owner of a local restaurant, I strongly support our district’s proposal to switch to a four-day school week. This change would benefit students, families, and our entire community in ways that extend far beyond the classroom.
My children are exhausted by Friday afternoons, struggling to focus during those final hours of the traditional school week. Research from the University of Georgia confirms what I observe at home: student attention and academic performance decline significantly on Fridays. A four-day schedule would eliminate these unproductive hours while allowing more concentrated learning during the remaining days.beyond the classroom.
The benefits extend to working families like mine. Currently, I scramble to find reliable childcare during teacher workdays and professional development sessions that randomly occur throughout the year. A consistent three-day weekend would allow me to plan ahead and spend quality time with my children without worrying about last-minute schedule changes.
Our local economy would also improve. Families could take weekend trips to nearby attractions, boosting tourism revenue in surrounding areas. My restaurant already sees increased business on three-day holiday weekends, and a permanent four-day schedule would create similar opportunities year-round.
Most importantly, this schedule addresses teacher retention problems that hurt our students. Several excellent teachers have left our district for better opportunities elsewhere. The four-day week offers a competitive advantage in recruiting and keeping quality educators without requiring expensive salary increases that strain our budget.
Critics worry about childcare challenges, but many local businesses and community organizations have expressed interest in providing Friday programs. These services would create jobs and give students enrichment opportunities not available during regular school hours.
Our district should embrace this innovative approach that puts student well-being and community needs first.
Sincerely,
Maria Gonzalez
Maria Gonzalez
Letter to the Editor: Four-Day Week Would Harm Our Students
From Robert Kim, Superintendent of Bradley Academy
Published in The Valley Tribune
In response to Maria Gonzalez’s letter supporting the four-day school week
Dear Editor,
I appreciate Ms. Gonzalez’s thoughtful letter about the four-day school week proposal, but as superintendent, I must respectfully disagree with her assessment. While I understand her concerns about student fatigue and family scheduling, the research shows that four-day weeks would ultimately harm the students we are trying to help.
Ms. Gonzalez mentions that her children struggle with focus on Fridays, but academic research reveals a more troubling pattern. A comprehensive study by researchers at Montana State University found that students in four-day schools scored lower on standardized tests in both reading and mathematics compared to peers in traditional five-day programs. The longer daily schedules required to meet state hour requirements create even more fatigue that reduces learning effectiveness, particularly for younger students like Ms. Gonzalez’s children.
I also share Ms. Gonzalez’s concern for working families, but the four-day week would actually create greater hardships for many parents in our community. While Ms. Gonzalez owns a business and may have scheduling flexibility, many families cannot afford private childcare or enrichment programs for the additional day off. This disproportionately affects low-income households where parents lack flexible work arrangements or extended family support.
Furthermore, Ms. Gonzalez’s economic arguments overlook a crucial reality: schools serve as more than educational institutions. We provide essential services including nutrition programs, counseling, and safe environments for vulnerable students. Eliminating Fridays removes these critical supports for children who depend on them most, while wealthier families can afford alternatives.
Finally, the promised cost savings that would allow us to retain teachers often fail to materialize. Transportation and facility costs do not decrease proportionally with the shortened week, leaving districts with reduced instructional time but similar operational expenses.
I understand Ms. Gonzalez’s frustrations, but we must base educational decisions on research rather than good intentions that could inadvertently harm our most vulnerable students.
Respectfully,
Robert Kim
Model Response on GED Essay Four-Day School Week Topic
The debate over four-day school weeks shows how communities balance budget concerns with educational quality, and both Maria Gonzalez and Robert Kim raise important points about this complex issue. Although both writers care about student success, Kim presents a more convincing argument because his evidence demonstrates that four-day schedules create serious problems that outweigh the potential benefits.
Gonzalez raises valid concerns about student fatigue and family scheduling benefits. Her observation that children struggle to focus on Fridays matches what many parents notice, and her argument about teacher retention addresses a real problem facing many districts. Her perspective as both a parent and business owner gives her insight into how this change would affect families and the local economy.
Kim, by comparison, demonstrates stronger support regarding the actual impact on student learning. His research from Montana State University showing lower test scores in four-day districts directly challenges the assumption that eliminating tired Friday hours improves education. This suggests that whatever benefits come from reducing fatigue are outweighed by the problems created by longer daily schedules and lost instructional time.
Kim, in addition, draws attention to equity concerns that Gonzalez misses. His point about low-income families struggling with childcare costs reveals how four-day weeks could worsen educational inequality. Students who depend on school meals and counseling services would lose these critical supports, while wealthier families could afford private programs to fill the gap.
Most importantly, Kim shows that the promised cost savings often don’t actually happen. Gonzalez assumes the change would help district budgets, but Kim explains that transportation and facility costs remain largely the same. If schools don’t save significant money but students perform worse academically, the four-day week fails to achieve its main goals.
The strongest part of Kim’s argument is his evidence that four-day weeks hurt the students who need school support the most. Even though Gonzalez raises valid concerns about teacher retention and family scheduling, Kim demonstrates that these benefits come at too high a cost to student achievement and equity.
Although both authors want what’s best for students, Kim provides a more complete picture of how four-day weeks actually affect educational outcomes and community welfare.
(358 words)
