Posts by Susan James

Michelle Nelson4 said:So, does this mean our teachers aren't going to see any improvement in student performance, even with those extra budget allocations for hourly pay?
That’s quite an interesting point to consider... It really makes you wonder what that says about them, doesn't it?

A teacher who isn't great at teaching will still struggle whether they teach 4 hours or 5 hours a week🤷
and there are plenty of those out there (you mentioned some yourself)
so, instead of letting a kid learn on their own at home or getting help from someone who actually knows the material, we should just force them to sit through another hour of useless classroom time.

And what happens when a teacher goes on medical leave and they end up with endless rounds of unqualified substitutes?
Or when someone resigns and we're stuck waiting for a new hire, and suddenly we can't even cover the 4 weekly hours because of vacancies—well, increasing it to 7 hours won't magically fix that gap either.🙏

But hey, I guess we'll just stay right where we are, stuck in the same league as Washington, D.C. 😬 🤦
(By the way, I honestly don't see the issue with high schoolers aged 14-19?)

Paul Davis2 said:It’s about time.
The reality is that this reform needs to fundamentally overhaul our school system. We’re lagging behind—especially when it comes to instructional hours (we're practically at the bottom of the pack in the European Union), teacher pay, and overall student performance.

What does "lagging behind in instructional hours" actually mean?
Yeah, from what I gather about how things work in Washington, D.C., their summer break runs from mid-July through late August, whereas ours stretches from late June all the way to early September. Honestly, it feels like we have way too much summer vacation.

It seems pretty obvious to me that one kid doesn't need extra math homework if they're already grasping everything covered in their four weekly hours of scheduled class time without needing extra drills or home study. On the flip side, five hours a week might still not be enough for another student, yet those extra two hours often just end up being a way to pad out a teacher's workload (what they call "increasing the norm").
What’s really the point of grouping two students like that in the same classroom?
(You could use plenty of other examples here)

And why would the child from that first example even stay in an A2 level program? What are they supposed to do there?
Just sit around waiting for the B1 curriculum? Which they might not even enjoy, or they might spend the first three months realizing they aren't interested—or maybe they realize the teacher is great, but they can't just quit in the middle of the school year and switch to something else because of scheduling conflicts and losing credits. It's not like they can just drop out to join a paid extracurricular activity... or something free at a local community center (of which there are plenty).

Sarah Hall53 said:It’s really just an option—something there if people actually want it. It isn't some mandatory thing forced on everyone from first through eighth grade.

Exactly. It’s for those who actually need it. Not every kid requires it.
Kids just need to be kids.
The real issue is that most kids start struggling with standardized testing pressures as early as third grade. After that, forcing extra hours often backfires for both struggling and advanced students because the classroom environment just isn't set up to meet those individual needs. We see these patterns clearly in our American school systems.

But hey, if we're only looking at how many hours kids spend sitting in a desk, then I guess we have to make up for lost time. Honestly, it would make way more sense to keep them in school until July 15th and start the year on August 15th—having them stay until 1:00 PM daily—rather than dragging things out until 5:00 PM every day. That way, parents wouldn't be constantly scrambling to find childcare for two and a half months in the middle of summer, plus those other gaps throughout the year.
Especially if we're trying to keep pace with Europe.

Paul Davis2 said:All across Europe, full-day schooling is pretty much the standard—there's actually plenty of research to back it up. Here in the States, we'll likely spend the next four years researching and tweaking things to fit our specific system.

Haha, so we just took the full-day schedule from Europe but kept the exact same curriculum?🙏

We'll probably just buy some Walmart couches to get that Scandinavian vibe, while everything else stays exactly the same.

Bryan Wells11 said:I can't help but picture those poor kids stuck in a room from sunrise to sunset alongside students with behavioral issues, bullies, and total hooligans. Our educational safeguards are non-existent, the system is completely stagnant, and there’s zero accountability. I know kids who haven't been able to eat breakfast in peace since first grade because they’re constantly dodging fights or having food thrown at them. Now, the entire school is expected to survive lunch in just 40 minutes under the watchful eye of teachers who have already been lecturing all morning.

Furthermore, we’ve been hearing endless noise about the mental health of today's youth for years now. Everyone acts like they care deeply—you see these various experts popping up on every news network spouting profound wisdom—but in practice, it’s absolutely nothing. This Department of Education, these governing bodies, society as a whole... they have completely failed these children. How are we supposed to tackle rising anxiety, depression, suicidal tendencies, and peer violence? Oh, by locking kids up in institutions. Eureka! I guess the government thinks they’re managing livestock instead of people, so they’re just herding us all into the pen.

Where is the list of names, credentials, and professional experience for this brain trust responsible for designing this mess?

Exactly this.
trapped
with people they didn't choose
with people who don't care about them
with people who have no clue how to handle them
with people who feel just as forced into this as they do

Bryan Wells11 said:I can't help but picture those poor kids stuck in a room from sunrise to sunset alongside students with behavioral issues, bullies, and total hooligans. Our educational safeguards are non-existent, the system is completely stagnant, and there’s zero accountability. I know kids who haven't been able to eat breakfast in peace since first grade because they’re constantly dodging fights or having food thrown at them. Now, the entire school is expected to survive lunch in just 40 minutes under the watchful eye of teachers who have already been lecturing all morning.

Furthermore, we’ve been hearing endless noise about the mental health of today's youth for years now. Everyone acts like they care deeply—you see these various experts popping up on every news network spouting profound wisdom—but in practice, it’s absolutely nothing. This Department of Education, these governing bodies, society as a whole... they have completely failed these children. How are we supposed to tackle rising anxiety, depression, suicidal tendencies, and peer violence? Oh, by locking kids up in institutions. Eureka! I guess the government thinks they’re managing livestock instead of people, so they’re just herding us all into the pen.

Where is the list of names, credentials, and professional experience for this brain trust responsible for designing this mess?

This isn't just some niche policy issue.
The former Secretary used to brag about similar ideas, and a huge part of this nonsense—if not all of it—stems from that same mindset.
Honestly, I’d love to see the research that claims this is actually good for children
and see the signatures of the experts who supposedly backed it.

rowdypanther12 said:It isn't just about the rooms; it's about the staff. If a school has sixteen classes but only two or three teachers per subject, they can't exactly clone themselves to make sure everyone gets that extra support during those two hours.

Well, they'll increase the number of teachers, right?🤣
Goodness, why even ask that? There are chemistry teachers lining up out the door just for a chance to work in an elementary school so they can spend extra time helping motivated—albeit slightly exhausted—students.

Jose Wells3 said:Kids with neurodivergent learning styles—you know, the dyslexics who need to record themselves reading, the auditory learners, the ones who crave silence, or those who can only focus on a book while blasting music in bed... and then there are the kids being bullied at school. Honestly? They can just go jump in a lake. Why bother? They should just learn to submit to incompetent parents and even more incompetent children who can’t even manage their own homework without help until they're fourteen...

Pure hell.

And it doesn't stop there... what about the kids who just want to listen to music and do nothing? Just stare at the ceiling, relax, discover new bands, read comics, hang out with friends... just being teenagers while the parents are out.

Man, imagine if someone watched over you your entire life. Like you're never truly alone. You wake up surrounded by people you didn't choose, and then in the afternoon, you have parents interrogating you about how you're getting along with people you didn't pick either.
(Honestly, I feel for the kids whose parents work from home. Even if they're tucked away in a room with headphones on and aren't really "seen," you still know they're there.)

And imagine having to be stuck in some local public school for nine hours straight with kids you don't even like, unable to go play in the neighborhood, head over to a cousin's house, or hit the local pool to mess around...
This is basically stealing childhood from these kids.

I honestly can't find a single positive thing about being held captive in a classroom all day long.

rowdypanther12 said:I mean, what kind of teacher is actually going to sit there with them for two hours trying to help them wrap their heads around chemistry, physics, German, math, and English? 😁

Well, they'd need a chemistry teacher, a German teacher, a physics teacher, a math teacher...
The real question is which classrooms they'll be using. Plus, if I understood the guidance session correctly, they need at least eight students in a group at the same time to get that extra support. 😬

They’re extending the school day, and honestly, they're going to make a ton of money doing it!

Sarah Hall53 said:everything everywhere all at once

And you can't forget about that one group of people who just doesn't want to be there—you know the type—they have zero motivation, they're bored out of their minds, and then they start acting out and messing things up for everyone else.
But of course, the teacher always ends up taking the fall for it, claiming it's because they "failed to engage" them in the first place.

Exactly, who else would it be?
They'll probably just push online classes so kids can learn how to master three basic steps to 😬

But honestly, what kind of twisted logic is it to expect kids to be stuck in school all day long? It's not like every kid actually wants to be there or has the mental capacity to focus for that long. Seriously, we're going to strip away whatever little independence and zest for life they actually have left.
When will they ever learn how to make pancakes, reheat some soup, or cook a simple risotto?
Or go down to the local grocery store, pay with cash, and figure out their own change?
When will they get to walk a dog? Pet a cat? Or just hang out playing video games...
What happens to that? Are they not allowed to have pets anymore because everyone is stuck at school or work from 8 to 5, leaving a poor dog home alone?
It feels like all anyone talks about now is "quality family time."
Even the veterinarians are overstepping their bounds at this point.

Sarah Hall53 said:Oh man, just so you guys know!
The new A2 enrichment program is going to be mandatory for everyone. So, after the usual six hours of classes, they’re tacking on two extra hours of "enrichment"—which basically means teachers will have to juggle remedial lessons, extra coursework, ExxonMobil prep, and grading homework for the entire class all at once. Once a week, maybe they can split kids up based on interests for those two hours, but otherwise, it's just more of the same every single day.
It's honestly everything, everywhere, all at once.
I mean, just try to imagine the actual quality of work coming out of that mess.
And hey, to make things even better, the school won't even give the teachers a single minute of paid time to actually prepare for this A2 nonsense.
Long live the reform and the full-day school model—because clearly, everything can just be solved within the school walls!

That's why I shared the link to the document and the consultation.
Even if we ignore the fact that they aren't paying for prep time, it's physically impossible to pull this off if they want to actually address individual student needs and expect them to master everything while still at school.
It's the same old story; for years, parents have been begging them not to send kids who struggle with learning (or even just focus) to after-school programs.
And since kids who get an instructional assistant don't qualify for those programs, they're stuck.
Honestly, how do they think they're going to fix this?
When is a teacher supposed to find the time to coach a student for a competition?
Or when are they going to help a student who hasn't even grasped the basic material yet?
Where is the space, and more importantly, when is the time for all of this to happen?
😕

Rebecca Clark6 said:Does anyone happen to know what kind of extracurricular activities will be offered this year? I'm wondering if it'll be the usual lineup, like art or drama classes, since those typically kick off once the 15-hour mark hits.
I'm also curious about how the supplemental sessions are being structured, specifically whether they fall within that initial 15-hour window or if they take place afterward, though I'm assuming the extra help might come earlier.

If that's the case, I'll just have my little one pick one or maybe two activities so she can at least head home three days earlier in the week.

Take a look at the official document.
The online public consultation portal

Sarah Hall53 said:It’s basically just mobbing people in those faculty group chats to completely SHUT DOWN any kind of counseling through comment sections. We’ve already managed to kill off a couple of documents this way—just by flooding them with a thousand or two angry, negative comments until they eventually get buried in some drawer somewhere.

Aha.
I think it's pretty wild.
My gut feeling is that most of it is just for show.

There are actually some top-tier comments out there. Some people really put in the work.

mellowskipper said:From what I can gather through my various circles—mostly other parents, though I suppose "circles" might be an overstatement—opinions seem to be split right down the middle. It’s quite polarized, really. On one hand, you have people who are absolutely appalled by the idea of a kid being stuck in a classroom from 8:00 AM until the bell rings—and then, heaven forbid, there's actually homework to deal with afterward, which, let's face it, is inevitable—so between school and evening extracurriculars, they feel like their kids are basically running a marathon every single day. Then, on the flip side, you have the others who are just thrilled about it. They see it as a way to keep the kids safe and out of trouble—no wandering around aimlessly—while ensuring they're actually learning and getting a decent lunch. I guess it just depends on how much chaos you're willing to tolerate.

You know who’s actually excited?
People without kids who think it sounds amazing to have children in school all day because it means they won't need private tutors (since everyone keeps raving about how great the system is in Finland)

And also parents with kids in daycare who just need reliable childcare, and the school offers maybe one or two after-school programs (though their enthusiasm tends to vanish once they realize those sessions are actually structured classes)

Then there are the folks who find their own kids a bit much and don't care about the 150 different extracurricular options available, assuming everything will magically be provided by the school for free (so they don't have to pay out of pocket). They usually change their tune once they realize the school offers Spanish instead of Mandarin, or that they still have to drive their kid to violin lessons—except now the kid will be practicing right before bed instead of playing outside while the parent was at work.

Sarah Hall53 said:Honestly, this whole twisted setup they've cooked up is just... wow. It's awful.
I am all for reforms that are actually backed by real research—you know, things that make sense—but I am definitely NOT for THIS mess they're trying to feed us.
First off, we’re going to see a massive exodus of teachers leaving the school system. Seriously, forget it. If this happens, I'm out. I'll go do literally anything else that offers a standard eight-hour workday where I don't have to bring my job home with me. Because right now, they're basically designing an eight-hour shift that secretly requires you to do endless prep work at your kitchen table.
The second thing that's going to happen is a huge surge in homeschooling lobbying. Once this absolute disaster is actually implemented, a ton of parents are just going to pull their kids out of the public schools entirely—because they simply refuse to let their children be stuck in that environment from age 8 to 16.

Has anyone actually sat down and read this document? Because I have, and frankly, I wouldn't wish this on myself or my own kid.

Here, I'll post the whole thing.
It's awful.

Sarah Hall53 said:If his name gets pulled into this whole experiment thing, we’re switching schools. Period. I'll just drive him over to the next district—or even two towns over if that's what it takes to get him away from it.

I can't stop thinking about this either... any sane parent would instinctively feel the need to act so this "experiment" doesn't spread to other schools.

Though, I think if you really want to protect your kid and prove how ridiculous this experiment is, you have to take it to the extreme. Not by pulling kids out entirely—because they’d lose their friends—but by just ignoring the lessons: pulling kids out of class mid-day for a dermatologist appointment, a dentist visit, a therapist, or even a haircut.
....God forbid my kid doesn't end up needing thirty-three different appointments a week.
The logic seems to be that this project will encourage more family time at home since kids will get everything done at school, but I'm sitting here wondering: I've been struggling for two weeks just trying to schedule a hair appointment on a weekday (trying to coordinate my schedule, the stylist's, and hers, especially since her generation has such limited free time), so what on earth would it look like if they were stuck in school all day?
Last year, we had such a hard time getting her passport sorted because we had to sync our work shifts and deal with the long waits at the local DMV (where the kid actually has to show up in person). And that was just the paperwork side of things.
When would they even go buy shoes or school supplies—especially when stores close early on Sundays—or will they even need to if everyone is just forced into uniforms? 🤔

And reading through this, it's clear people are putting in the effort to give reasoned responses during these public consultations.
But clearly, neither the teachers nor (any) normal parents want this. Even music instructors and coaches don't want it—their entire livelihood depends on this, because who is going to organize music lessons from 5:00 to 7:00 PM for everyone when it's supposed to be individual instruction? Plus, when would kids who are in school all day even find time to practice their instruments?
And I know how these public forums always end: "Thanks for your comment, but the proposal is rejected, meaning we're doing it our way anyway."

Someone drew up a plan, someone decided to divvy up some money (and we'll be talking for years about how and where that money was actually funneled).
But hey, we have our public hearings, and we get the joy of watching the American education system move closer to the UN standards in terms of hours spent in school, where kids can just read their literature on a couch in class, just like they do in Finland. The kids will be happy. Stupid, but happy.

Paul Davis2 said:Wait, why? Are you against reforms backed by five-year studies? Or do you just prefer the "gut feeling" approach?

I'm curious—which five-year study actually concluded that keeping kids stuck in school from 8 AM to 5 PM is the way to go?
Could you please share a link?

🤣
Taking a little poetic license here 😬

Anyway, who really cares about the art? At the end of the day, it's the stem that matters—that's what puts food on the table!

Michelle Nelson4 said:I’m not entirely sure if Google actually has the capacity to simultaneously translate you and everyone else you're talking to, especially when some people have such incredibly interesting accents 😁

By the time today's eighth graders graduate high school, they'll have 🤣
so it’s probably best if they don't bother taking foreign languages in school at all 😬 🙂

rowdypanther12 said:I’ve always been all for learning languages—the more, the better—but honestly, you don't necessarily need anything beyond English since almost every major global corporation uses it as their official language.
That said, I find it perfectly natural to start picking up bits and pieces of the local language after spending a few months in a new country. I get that it isn't strictly required, but I don't quite understand why people don't take advantage of those opportunities to learn.

With Google Translate nowadays, you don't even really need to know English, and you don't even need to be literate in your own language since there's a spellchecker for everything.
With AI chatbots on the rise, we might not even need doctors anytime soon.

Learning a language for some imaginary job ten or twenty years down the line feels completely pointless. It’s even more ridiculous to learn a language just so you can order a coffee or buy bread in a foreign country.
(Though I could go on about kids who study for five years and still can't manage to order fries at a McDonald's in Vienna, instead waiting for someone to speak to them in their native tongue. To me, that just feels a bit provincial, but hey, to each their own.)

Most people, once they've settled in for a month or two (if they have the drive, of course), have already picked up some basics. I personally know people who hit a solid B or even C level in the local language within six months. Motivation is the absolute key to learning; forcing it on anyone is just useless.

On the other hand, the way we teach in our schools—way too slow during those sponge-like years when kids soak everything up, and then far too focused on grades when they're overwhelmed by much more important exams—makes it feel like language classes exist just to keep teachers employed and to help us meet EK requirements for bilingual programs. But if we're going to have it in the curriculum and preach its importance, then damn it, we should give priority (in terms of admissions points) to students who are actually pursuing languages. Maybe they missed out on a point or two because they struggled with Biology in seventh grade, or lost a decimal point in elementary school because they didn't take certain electives.
If we really want languages in our system, high schools should give preference to language specialists (though I’d probably revamp how we certify them myself).
A credit for five years of German (which they'll continue in that specific high school) is worth more than a credit for winning a state table tennis championship. Plus, it secures a job for the German teacher and likely keeps them motivated, since they'll actually have students who *want* to learn the language (unless it's just the parents pushing it).
Forcing kids into a beginner language track that they'll have to stick with for four years, just so someone can maintain a permanent contract, while the kid actually wants to go to a different high school because of the schedule or location, is just senseless.

mellowskipper said:I think I’ve already touched on this in another thread—if that makes sense. In my view, someone with those scores definitely isn't cut out for intense fields like pure mathematics, physics, or even engineering at a place like MIT. But—and this is just a thought—couldn't they potentially pursue something where the math load is mostly front-loaded in the first year, like pharmacy or veterinary medicine?
Though, obviously, you’d still need to hit the required advanced math standards for admission.
You'd probably exhaust yourself during the prep work, pass that meager 25%, and then you're stuck facing that one daunting math exam at university.

Personally, I feel that if they’ve gone and split things into Level A and Level B (though, honestly, I think splitting them like that insults students' intelligence and just lowers the overall quality of our education system), then everyone attending a STEM-focused high school should be required to take the Level A exam. For those in general or liberal arts tracks—who might have fewer math hours but are still following a standard high school curriculum—they should at least need a 70% passing grade on the Level B exam to actually receive their diploma. The whole situation is just a total circus right now.

hiddendriver34 said:I'm wondering if someone can actually enroll in math courses if they only managed to scrape by with a 25% on their high school math final. 😁

I don't think he's really into math at all, so I doubt he'll end up enrolling in any more math-related courses down the road.
There’s this one guy I know who absolutely lives for math; he wants to make a career out of it, and honestly, the problems on the SAT are a total breeze for him.
It’s just like those old assignments we used to tackle back at Ferrero.
It’s exactly like those students who choose to major in Project Management on their own terms—not because their parents are forcing some unrealistic dream onto them.

Who’s the resident math whiz here? This person has already crushed everything from school competitions to regional ones—maybe even national level. For them, taking the entrance exam is basically just a way to give their brain a little workout and feed their soul. I remember some folks last year who treated those entrance exams like a casual sightseeing tour; they breezed through the whole thing without breaking a sweat. If they felt any pressure, it was probably just because of the heat! Honestly, they should have scheduled those tests for 9:00 PM just to keep things cool.

It’s honestly a bit disheartening to see students graduating high school when they can't even manage to pass more than half of their coursework. It feels like we're sending kids out into the world without the basic tools they need to succeed.
We’re diving into the conversation about which group of young adults is most likely to be heavily medicated, and honestly, it says a lot about the state of our education system. It really highlights how much pressure students are under and how they're actually engaging with the learning process these days.