1959年2月11日，《北京晚报》4版。 1960年寒假，麻线胡同小学的一个活动小组。 罗郁文 摄 盼望着、盼望着，寒假就要来了。您知道吗？上世纪五六十年代，不少学校只放10天假，正月初九就开 学。相比之下，现在的寒假是那时候的四倍长。几十年间，物阜民丰，寒假的过法也越来越丰富，参加 冬令营、出国出境游、担当志愿者……"神兽出笼"，多姿多彩。 练舞蹈。李士炘 摄 1983年2月19日，《北京晚报》2版。 1965年寒假，孩子们在西城区少年之家排 报》。 本报记者 翟伟 摄 1998年2月1日，《北京晚报》1版。 1999 年寒假，53名灾区孩子受邀来京过年。 在没有手机的年代，信件显得尤为重要，北京有不少因地址不详无法投递的"瞎信"。据市邮电局反映， 1985年每天无法投递的平信超过二十万件。（1985年8月14日《北京晚报》1版《本市每日20万件地址不 您可能想不到，上世纪五六十年代，中小学的寒假比现在要短得多。1959年，部分学校的寒假只有10天 至半个月。（1959年1月26日《北京晚报》4版《本市小学校今起陆续放寒假》） 当时作业不多，突击一下两天就能全做完。孩子们凭一条红领巾就可以去街道的少年之家或 ...

南京多所学校通知 取消早读 到校时间改为8点 据报道，我国有学校将上学时间推迟到9:00，但遭家长普遍反对，随后又调回原来的上学时间。 其次，学校要对早到校学生进行精细化管理。在推迟到校时间后，学校要从学生的实际出发，为有需要的学生提 供相应的服务，避免"一刀切"。 据扬子晚报报道，近日，南京多所学校相继发出通知：取消早读，7:50 8:00到校，引发热议。 有的家长在网上反馈，对于8点到校表示支持，孩子早上可以多睡半小时。也有家长深感无奈，如果没有早读或晚 自习进行约束，指望孩子自主学习"比登天还难"。还有家长担心，如果延迟到校，送完孩子后自己上班就面临迟 到的风险。 中学调整学生早上到校时间，这是落实教育部门的规定。2021年4月，教育部办公厅发布《关于进一步加强中小学 生睡眠管理工作的通知》，要求小学上午上课时间一般不早于8:20，中学一般不早于8:00。 从已经调整早上到校时间的部分学校的实施情况看，效果并不太理想。在调整到校时间后，还是有相当数量学生 在7:30前就到校。这些学校推迟学生到校时间，但与家长的上班时间没有做好衔接。此外，学校如果不让早到校 学生进校门，家长会担心学生在校门口等待的安全问 ...

转自：扬子晚报 这两天，"多地取消高一高二期末统考"的词条也随之冲上热搜。"初中的期末考试会取消统考吗？""小 学也会取消吗？"社交媒体上，全国各地的中小学家长都在打听消息。 记者查询了2025年12月发布的《教育部办公厅关于进一步加强中小学日常考试管理的通知》文件，其 中，关于"进一步压减考试频次"有着以下明确的要求—— 小学一二年级不进行纸笔考试，义务教育其他年级由学校每学期组织一次期末考试，初中年级从不同学 科的实际出发，可适当安排一次期中考试。普通高中学校要严格控制考试次数。 严禁面向小学各年级和初高中非毕业年级组织区域性或跨校际的考试。初高中毕业年级为适应学生毕业 和升学需要，可在总复习阶段组织1—2次模拟考试。 从文件可以看到，严禁组织区域性或跨校际的考试，也就是大家俗称的"统考"，并不只是初高中非毕业 年级，也包括小学各年级。这也是社交媒体上，全国多个城市流传出"小学期末考也要取消统考"消息的 依据之一。 有家长非常期待孩子所在学校能取消期末统测，也有家长正在向教育部门留言建议"不要取消统考"。 1月9日，一位成都的网友留言"请保留成都市高中年级的统考，减少家长焦虑"——"我是成都一名高中 学生 ...

Core Viewpoint - The adjustment of school holiday schedules, particularly the introduction of extended autumn and spring breaks, is aimed at promoting cultural and tourism consumption while addressing the well-being of students [1][2][3]. Group 1: Holiday Adjustments - The 2025-2026 academic year will see significant variations in school holiday lengths across different regions, with Beijing having a 145-day autumn semester followed by a 37-day winter break, while Hangzhou will have a 159-day autumn semester, the longest in a decade, followed by a 25-day winter break [1][8]. - The introduction of a 3-day autumn break in Hangzhou, aligning with the National Day holiday, allows students to enjoy an 11-day continuous holiday, which is expected to boost tourism and consumption [2][3]. Group 2: Policy Initiatives - The Ministry of Commerce and other departments have issued policies to optimize student holiday arrangements, encouraging local governments to explore the implementation of spring and autumn breaks while maintaining the total number of school days [2][3][10]. - The 2013 National Tourism and Leisure Outline and subsequent policies have repeatedly emphasized the need for flexible holiday arrangements to enhance service consumption and family travel opportunities [3][4]. Group 3: Regional Differences - The disparity in holiday lengths between regions, such as the shorter winter break in Hangzhou compared to Beijing, highlights the need for tailored holiday arrangements based on local climate and socio-economic conditions [8][10]. - The historical context of holiday arrangements in Hangzhou, which has implemented spring and autumn breaks since 2004, reflects local demand and economic conditions, suggesting that holiday policies should be adapted to regional needs [10][14]. Group 4: Educational Considerations - The extended autumn semester in 2025 emphasizes the importance of breaks for students' mental and physical well-being, with experts advocating for a balanced approach to holiday scheduling that considers both educational and developmental needs [1][9][15]. - The "double reduction" policy initiated in 2021 aims to alleviate academic pressure on students, further supporting the rationale for incorporating spring and autumn breaks into the academic calendar [14][15].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the recent changes in educational policies regarding supplementary materials in primary education, highlighting the reduction of students' academic burdens and the ongoing debate among parents and teachers about the implications of these changes [1][4][10]. Group 1: Policy Changes - The Ministry of Education launched an initiative to regulate supplementary materials in May, prohibiting the forced purchase of such materials and aiming to reduce students' academic and financial burdens [1][6]. - Various regions have implemented policies that either limit the provision of supplementary materials to one per subject or cease the unified ordering of any supplementary materials [4][10]. Group 2: Reactions from Parents and Teachers - Reactions among parents and teachers are polarized; some support the reduction of burdens, while others express concerns that it may negatively impact teaching quality [1][4]. - Some parents worry about their children’s competitiveness in exams due to the lack of supplementary materials, while others appreciate the reduction in unnecessary workload [4][5]. Group 3: Historical Context and Governance - The current governance of supplementary materials is not unprecedented; it builds on previous regulations aimed at curbing excessive fees and ensuring voluntary participation in supplementary material purchases [6][8]. - Reports indicate that there have been significant financial incentives and corruption associated with the previous unified ordering of supplementary materials, necessitating stricter governance [7][8]. Group 4: Quality Improvement Initiatives - The article emphasizes that the new policies not only aim to reduce the quantity of supplementary materials but also to enhance the quality of classroom instruction and learning resources [10][11]. - Schools are encouraged to develop their own teaching materials and optimize assignments to fill the gap left by reduced supplementary materials, promoting a more effective learning environment [10][12].

Core Viewpoint - The recent educational reforms in China aim to reduce the burden of supplementary materials on students while enhancing the quality of classroom education, as evidenced by the implementation of a negative list prohibiting the forced purchase of such materials [1][2][7]. Group 1: Changes in Supplementary Materials - The Ministry of Education's actions have led to a significant reduction in the weight of students' school bags, with many students now carrying only essential textbooks and a single supplementary book [1]. - The new policies have resulted in varied local implementations, with some schools providing only one supplementary book per subject, while others have ceased the unified purchase of supplementary materials altogether [3][5]. - Parents have expressed mixed reactions, with some supporting the reduction of supplementary materials, while others fear it may hinder their children's competitive edge in exams [3][4]. Group 2: Governance and Regulation - The current governance of supplementary materials is not a complete ban but rather a targeted approach to eliminate the profit-driven practices associated with unified purchasing [5][8]. - Historical context shows that the Ministry of Education has previously issued guidelines against the forced sale of supplementary materials, indicating a long-standing effort to regulate this area [6][8]. - Recent reports highlight the prevalence of corruption linked to the procurement of supplementary materials, with significant financial misconduct uncovered in various educational institutions [8][9]. Group 3: Quality Improvement in Education - The reforms not only aim to reduce the quantity of supplementary materials but also to enhance the quality of education by encouraging schools to develop their own teaching resources [10][12]. - Initiatives in provinces like Shanxi and Guangdong have demonstrated the potential for providing free educational materials, significantly reducing financial burdens on families [11]. - The emphasis on improving classroom teaching quality is seen as a necessary step to reduce reliance on supplementary materials, with a focus on fostering deeper student engagement and innovative teaching methods [13].