The speaker is making their case.

The speaker is making their case. We do not oppose public education. We do not oppose remedial lessons. And we certainly do not oppose providing students with more opportunities to develop their potential. What we oppose is the assumption that extending the school day is necessarily the best way to achieve these goals. Our position is straightforward. A Cambodian should prioritize effective teaching, the efficient use of instructional time and targeted support, before requiring all public schools to operate for a full day. I will present our first argument More time does not automatically mean more learning Consider a student who struggles to understand a science lesson If the teacher uses clear explanations demonstrations questions and practical experiments the students may learn effectively in a shorter period Now imagine, the same students sitting through several additional hours of repetitive exercises without meaningful feedback or engaging activity. Which approach is more educationally valuable? The length of a lesson matters, but its quality matters more. Students need teachers who understand their learning needs, explain concepts clearly, and provide using feedback. Schools also need appropriate learning materials, manageable class sizes, and effective classroom management. Simply extending the tangible does not automatically provide any of these things. The World Bank has examined the relationship between instructional time and student learning in Cambodia. Its research highlights the importance of evaluating both educational outcomes and the cost of additional school hours. This supports our argument that policies must be judged by what students learn, not simply by how long they remain at school.

[No submission - Time expired]