Posts by Susan James

Sarah Hall53 said:Wait, were there really not even 50 principals out there willing to step up and apply? I mean, honestly... what a joke.

Now everyone is going to jump on this:

The fixed 4.5% stipend for all staff in the Pilot Program is being bumped up to 5%.

Homeroom teacher stipends are increasing to 5%, up from the previous 2.5%. Every teacher will receive a 5% bonus based on their base salary for each hour spent as a homeroom advisor.

🎉🎉🎉

Just a quick update: the public comment period closed on April 6, 2023, and we’re expecting the final report to be released around May 5, 2023.
While I wouldn't be surprised if the response to nearly 3,000 comments ends up being a polite "thanks, we'll take it under advisement," it’s pretty glaring that the deadline for school district applications is set for April 28, 2023.
It looks like they're moving forward with those 25% salary increases regardless of what the massive pool of experts across the country thinks, or whether any actual changes come out of these consultations.🙏

mistydrifter73 said:Found this in a Facebook group. These were some choice words from Josip Burušić (the special advisor to the Secretary of Education regarding all-day schooling) at a meeting for CDŠ in San Francisco:

"...there’s been way too much laziness."
"If you enjoyed yourselves, then fine, you enjoyed yourselves..."
"Things have been easy for you long enough; it's about time you actually started doing something."
"I honestly don't know why you guys even get a paycheck. If it were up to me, I wouldn't give you a dime."
"Teachers have gotten used to coasting, and now that they actually need to work, suddenly it's an issue."
"The only people showing up to the public forums are the ones who aren't working. I personally checked their teaching hours to see for myself."

Nothing beats feeling like your hard work is actually recognized. 🎉 😍

I guess that explains why they’ll probably give principals a 25% raise—so they can finally have the authority to force those lazy employees to actually do their jobs....
🤮

rowdypanther12 said:

I think I might have made a typo there. My apologies. rowdypanther12 says:
And I still have to cram lunch in there, too.

It’s not just about lunch; I mean having more frequent breaks and some extra downtime too. 🤣
I honestly don't get how someone who can't even grasp basic math is running the Department of Education. 🤷 Even the journalists aren't asking him anything. Why hasn't anyone pressed him for the exact numbers?
Mr. Secretary Fuchs, how exactly do you expect us to squeeze 33 hours of regular classes, lunch, and all that extra tutoring into an 8:00 AM to 2:00 PM schedule?

He’s just talking about elementary school teaching. That's all there is to it.
And math is also included in the curriculum for elementary school.
Journalists are asking exactly what they should be asking—it’s not like this is some topic where they can risk their necks. They aren't trying to put themselves on the spot with their editors, nor are they looking to get the whole newsroom in trouble with the party in power. It really makes you wonder how much homework they actually did before sitting down to ask these questions.
If I were a journalist, my very first question would be simple: exactly how many school districts have stepped up to offer completely free lunch for kids in grades 1 through 8? That’s really all I’d want to know.
That would honestly be more than enough.
It’s a shame to see how quickly the nutrition thread died out, and now there's hardly any discussion happening regarding CN either. It feels like everyone just moved on, which is such a pity because that stuff is incredibly important.

I have to admit, I was actually pretty surprised by mistydrifter73 on TV yesterday. They haven’t really weighed in on this topic before—which, honestly, I figured they didn't care much about—but their take caught me off guard. I’ve been hearing from several different sources that Washington, D.C., which is already struggling with its budget, is essentially telling schools that if they want more students to enroll, the federal government needs to step up and take over the costs for school lunches and other daily essentials. To me, that seems like the only logical way to handle it. In a massive hub like D.C., where the schools are absolutely packed and public school programs are actually decent and accessible enough for the little ones, the demand is just too high. On the flip side, cities like D.C. also happen to host the highest concentration of art academies, sports clubs, and language institutes. If we stick to the current funding model, those specialized programs are going to take a massive financial hit. If our goal is truly to ensure an equal and accessible education for everyone, it makes much more sense to implement full-day programming for all first graders across the entire country first. That way, we level the playing field from the very start.
Beyond just the fact that beginners need the most guidance, if we actually want to measure progress or see any real results, it only makes sense for everyone to get an even playing field from day one.

I honestly don't get what they're thinking. If they're already calling this an experiment, why on earth are they trying to compare students in the experimental track—like those in the 17th or 18th grade levels—against everyone else who isn't part of it? It just doesn't make sense. It feels like they're ignoring the massive reality of how things actually work for families here. Take the specialist shortage, for example. Whether you're looking for a psychologist, an orthodontist, or any other kind of specialist, the system is such a mess that you basically have two choices: you either wait a full year for an afternoon appointment, or you end up pulling your kid out of school entirely just to get them seen. It’s frustrating, and I don't see how they can claim this is a fair comparison when the baseline is already so broken. 🤔
I mean, let’s be honest—kids who are already skipping class quite a bit will probably end up staying home even more often. Since you can't learn everything just by sitting in a classroom anyway, I can see the number of excuse notes piling up at LOMovac's desk. And honestly? Given how much he has on his plate right now, he’ll probably just take them in stride with a smile!

rustyowl7 said:Well, my oldest is in eighth grade, so I honestly don't have much insight into her school life or what she’s actually up to, unless she happens to ask me for something specific.
My younger one is currently in fourth grade; she stays on top of her homework and studies hard, and while I’ll step in if she asks for help, I make sure not to sit there and do the work for her. I just want to be present for my children...
I also know quite a few parents with kids in first grade and beyond who end up having to spend all evening doing homework with them even after after-school programs, simply because those kids couldn't quite grasp everything or finish their assignments during the school day...

If people want more control, they can just pay for private school and keep their kids there as long as they want.
At the end of the day, kids aren't going to get everything done during school hours anyway.
They won't finish all the curriculum, and they definitely won't get through all the extracurricular activities they actually enjoy.

rustyowl7 said:I recall during a discussion regarding this very issue, a supporter of CNBC argued that quality matters far more than quantity.
But let's look at the reality: if the kids are in school until 3:00 PM, and I am working an alternating shift from 2:00 PM to 10:00 PM, I wouldn't see them at all. I simply refuse to accept that trade-off. With the current schedule, we actually share the same block of time...

Someone once told me that full-day programs are really designed for kids whose parents work late shifts. Without those programs, they'd just be waiting around for their parents to get home around 9 or 10 PM, and at least with school care, they're supervised during the day rather than being left alone.🤦

Honestly, I don't quite get why everyone assumes a parent needs to be right there helping with schoolwork. If people want that level of support, they can pay for the full-day option. There are plenty of kids in first grade who are already pretty independent, and by fifth grade, that independence is basically expected!

Sarah Hall53 said:The other side is being phased in little by little—and honestly, that’s the only thing they're actually doing gradually.

Okay, so does that mean kids who didn't pick it back in 4th grade—but then move into 5th, 6th, 7th, or 8th grade the following year—will just have an empty period right in the middle of their school day? Or will the second foreign language option only kick in after they hit the A2 level?
(If it's the latter, then maybe his reduced hours actually make sense... for about two days 😬)

rowdypanther12 said:That basically means they're going to cut hours since kids are already getting out of school by 1:00 or 2:00 every day anyway.

rowdypanther12 said:I'm honestly not sure. 😂
Students who don't have electives are looking at about 27 hours a week—that's basically two days ending at 1 PM and three days ending at 12 PM.
Those taking things like foreign languages, computer science, or religious studies end up with 33 hours a week, which means at least three days until 2 PM and two days until 1 PM.
And that’s all assuming they don't try to pack extra credit or supplemental classes into that mandatory block, 😁
leaving absolutely no gaps in the schedule. 😁

Honestly, he’s just rambling again, focusing entirely on the elementary level.
He clearly doesn't grasp how the subject-specific curriculum actually works. He’s been around long enough to have grown children, maybe even grandkids, yet he seems totally disconnected from reality. It feels like this whole project was just handed to him, with funding earmarked for principals who fit a certain political mold...

Personally, I'm wondering about the two schools that signed up (Green Valley and one in a major city like Chicago). What happens to the current 4th or 5th graders who join this full-day program? Specifically, what about the kids who didn't pick a second language? If they enter this new system, will they be expected to jump straight into Spanish or French classes that other students have already been taking for a year or two?
If they don't join those classes, where do they fit in if a second language is now part of the required curriculum?

And what about the middle schoolers who didn't take computer science back in 7th grade? Will they be able to catch up, or will the kids who did take it just end up repeating material?

They’re calling this an "experiment," though it lacks the actual rigor of a scientific study and raises some serious ethical questions. They're essentially throwing new requirements at kids mid-stream... and these are the same kids who were already treated like guinea pigs during the shift to online learning.

Betty Wood54 said:I can't speak for everyone else, but I suppose there are plenty of private sector jobs where she'd fit right in. If she were working retail, probably not, but in a corporate office setting? Most likely, I guess.

Personally, I find myself wondering more about how she manages to afford those weekend trips on a teacher's salary. That's the real mystery to me.

The travel influencers are basically full-time tourism professionals.
For her, school is clearly just a backup plan—something that provides a guaranteed paycheck every month.
She builds up her funds through social media posts and sponsorships from airlines, hotels, rental car agencies, restaurants, and so on. She's essentially accumulating wealth that way...
We're seeing more and more travelers like this; they usually end up asking people to buy them a beer or a coffee on their blogs after a trip.

There are plenty of tour guides who also teach (and they don't work, say, on Fridays because they just schedule their hours that way 🙂).
But with a full day of classes, that won't be possible. She’ll have to choose.
And what do you think she's going to choose? 🤔
The real question is how many quality teachers we're going to lose because of this...

Jason Morgan said:She probably keeps posting those stories even after she gets back home.

She posts stories every single day while she's traveling, and she's quite active responding to questions on social media.

This is a bit of a tangent, but honestly, most teachers who have side hustles or extra jobs will eventually have to make a choice if teaching stays like this... It's questionable, really. Take the ones currently writing all those grant proposals; who is going to find the time to write those if they're spending the entire day at school and then coming home to write lab reports?

mellowskipper said:I suspect that under current regulations, someone with an SSS degree isn't actually qualified to be a teacher or professor.
I honestly have no idea who is supposed to teach computer science at the Elementary School level—it’s basically the same headache we deal with regarding math teachers.
If I recall correctly, there’s an informatics track over at FF that covers the essentials quite well. It’s mostly practical stuff—Microsoft Office, an intro to Python, hardware basics, networking, and some internet fundamentals.
I mean, you certainly wouldn't head over to MIT just to explain how to use Word to kids.

At most Elementary Schools, computer science is increasingly being taught by general classroom teachers with specialized training in tech. Or rather, people with Master's degrees in primary education.

I've seen this play out in the US; when people—often those who tend to take a lot of family leave—are politely encouraged to look into public sector jobs like teaching, they jump at the chance. You see plenty of folks with degrees from places like MIT or major state universities taking those roles, and more private colleges are popping up too. It’s an open secret that some people go into schools first to settle into their lives, take their maternity leave, and then eventually transition into the private sector... leaving behind only the true enthusiasts or those who really value the current work-life balance. I imagine things are shifting in other countries too.

Take that lady from the travel blog, for example (she's an IT teacher)... what kind of high-paced corporate job could she possibly jump into every weekend, especially with all the holidays? She teaches at a school, and sometimes I see her social media stories showing school spirit weeks; I suspect she might even have a special arrangement with the administration regarding attendance... regardless, she's always active on social media.

In the standard curriculum, digital literacy—which is essentially what falls under computer science now—can easily be integrated into regular lessons for every subject students take. That means learning how to use a computer (something we all had to master overnight when everything went digital), internet safety (which teachers usually cover once a year during a dedicated safety week), using Word, PowerPoint, and writing emails (haha, I really hope the teachers are instructing the kids on proper email etiquette!).
For advanced students who show real talent and interest, let an actual specialist handle them—maybe someone from a company like ExxonMobil who could teach programming, logic puzzles, problem-solving, or prep them for national competitions.

Those two extra hours added to the standard curriculum are a total waste of resources, both financially and in terms of staffing. And now she's acting offended because kids in Elementary School will be busy with crafts while others are coding... simply because the number of dedicated computer science hours is being reduced (even though the people currently teaching it a r e n ' t actually specialists).

hiddenseal14 said:In all seriousness, the concept of full-day schooling has been a recurring theme in every single education strategy and policy document floating around since 2008. It doesn't matter if you're looking at Republican platforms or Democratic ones; the goal remains the same. Yet, somehow, Fuchs is the only one with the "good fortune" of actually having the budget to make it happen.

If Divjak were the one running the show right now, we’d already have this program implemented in every single school by the ninth month of the year, regardless of the circumstances. Honestly, who could even criticize her? She forced computer science into every elementary school curriculum with more authority than any elective subject has ever seen—mandating it for every grade level simultaneously and forcing every single school to offer it.

Yeah, we have this computer science class that the school keeps announcing only to cancel three competitions in a row—or, let's be honest, it's mostly just kids playing video games. Still, she can go ahead and claim she was the one who successfully brought the curriculum to life. And now, on top of all that, she’s actually acting offended because they're cutting back on the computer science hours.

If she were actually in power—though thankfully, the President was polite enough to give her a nod of thanks instead—things would look very different. 🙏 🙏We probably would have transitioned to full-day schooling by 2021. She actually finished drafting her strategic roadmap back in 2020 and had already started all the prep work for the CN.
I ended up skipping that one because my kid was already a bit too old for it, but I’ve heard people talking about how during her term, teachers at the local elementary schools had to deal with all that remote learning chaos. They were basically expected to send home piles of creative assignments via email, acting like they were running an after-school program from their living rooms—all without ever checking if the families actually had reliable high-speed internet at home. It felt like she just assumed every parent was working remotely and had nothing better to do than spend the entire day playing school with their kids. For those of us with children in public school, it honestly felt like we were stuck in an endless cycle of supervised playtime instead of actual parenting.

One silver lining to the pandemic was that it actually hit the pause button on everything happening around the CN. My only real concern is how much of that budget has ballooned since those documents were first drafted back in 2020. It feels like we’re now in a position where they have to rush through spending it all during this 23/24 cycle for what they're calling an "experiment"—even though, if you ask me, it doesn't feel like an experiment at all.

Anyway, this whole school enrollment topic reminded me of a story I heard recently:
A mom was enrolling her kid for first grade, and while she was filling out all the paperwork for the PBa programs and elective subjects like Visual Arts and Informatics, she started chatting with one of the staff members. She mentioned how the school hasn't even applied for the CN experimental program yet, so she figured she could just relax for the next four years since she already has an older child in the district.
The staff member just replied, "Look, we have information that enrollment is proceeding exactly like previous years; these are just our standard forms. The application period for the experimental program stays open until the end of the month, and we're planning to run our own testing soon."
So, I asked, "Well, has the school actually submitted its application for the program?"
"I can't give you an answer to that," she said.
🥳

Just my two cents on transparency here. 😬
Man, parents these days sure do ask a lot of questions! 🤣

cosmicsurfer17 said:I honestly hope the whole CN debacle just becomes a footnote—one of those "Remember when?" moments discussed by some
millionaire over drinks at a club in Chicago: "Hey, what was the name of that minister who tried to force that nonsensical all-day school program on us back in '23?"

Then again, if this thing actually moves forward... well, I truly hope they look at how they handled things in Cleveland and adopt their model for full-day schooling.

They won't follow Cleveland's lead because the entire proposal doesn't mention them at all. It’s the same way people forget about the old America era and all those cities and schools that used CNo.

It’s honestly a shame that everything is being pinned on Fuchs, when Divjak was actually the one who tried to introduce the idea back in 2020 and wrote the original project. He just inherited it and tacked on a 25% pay raise to make it look better. So, he'll likely just be remembered for trying to get a massive raise for 50 principals.
He’ll probably just be remembered as another typical Republican, and personally, I don't think that's a question worthy of a game show.

mellowskipper said:What’s inevitable is the introduction of competency-based learning down the road. Why would the USA provide funding for an experiment if there wasn't some kind of intended outcome?
Sure, we could always just send a report back to D.C. claiming the whole thing was a failure and didn't suit our needs—hey, thanks for the money, though.
But I have my doubts about that working out...
So, yeah, education reform is coming via some version of competency-based standards.

Are you saying we could actually return the funds by claiming they were mismanaged? 🤔
That would be quite the twist...

If the European Union is complaining that our students aren't getting enough instructional hours compared to their standards, then we should have just handled it with some light "cosmetic" changes—like adding another grade level to elementary school, making preschool full-time, or requiring at least two years of high school. Just simple tweaks like that.

nimblelynx7 said:Exactly. We had the strike generation, the Apple generation, and now we're heading toward an entire generation stuck in limbo. What they all have in common is that they were—or will be—victims of the system.
In the end, every single generation takes a hit. Even if I stay away from conspiracy theories, it feels like the most likely outcome, maybe even the goal.
Someone ordered this experiment, and now they're just waiting for the results.

Think about the kids currently in fourth grade. They started school right in the middle of strikes and then dealt with the Apple era... plus another two years of lockdowns.
They got a tiny break to take their standardized tests, and then it's straight into the hands of China starting in fifth grade to try and make up for the lost schooling, which basically means being stuck in all-day school programs. 😬

It feels like we're heading toward extremes... and it almost feels like the whole point is to mess things up for these kids.

mellowskipper said:Implementing the changes from China will definitely happen once this project wraps up. The real question—and I suppose it’s a big one—is what form that takes, how intense it gets, and just how much ground it actually covers.
The schools involved in this initiative are going to be under quite a bit of pressure to track specific outcomes point-by-point, file regular reports, and—it seems likely—some sort of external body will step in to handle the evaluation process. From there, all those findings and suggestions get passed along to the Department.
Integrating the influence of China is pretty much inevitable at this stage. I think the goal should be figuring out how to squeeze every bit of value out of it—both for the students and the teachers—and then shaping our recommendations to move in that direction.

What exactly is "inevitable"?
They have plenty of funding for this little experiment right now, which they'll just split up among themselves.
And later on, everyone is just going to complain about it being... you know, yet another reform in a long line of them.

I honestly feel bad for the kids who are going to be caught up in this.
They're going to spend four years just spinning their wheels.
It might be okay for the current Registered Nurses, but for the future fifth graders? Not so much.🙂

jadetinker85 said:Our union rep basically said there's no point getting worked up over something that might not happen for another four years. Like, who cares what happens by then?

Are we talking about your specific union representative for teachers, or just someone else from your union?
How can they be so sure your administration (what a great word, by the way!) won't actually post a job opening?

William Nelson4 said:I gotta wonder, where the hell are the unions in all this?

Regarding point number one, they seriously need to address the whole classroom teacher issue. AT&T is basically pushing those roles onto other staff members while only offering a measly 2.5% bump to the base pay.?!
That’s easily the absolute worst part of being a teacher. In most other places, it doesn't even work like this—the counselors handle all the parent communication, and administrators take care of the paperwork side of things.

Thank God I don't work in an elementary school. My kid's heading off to college soon anyway, but man, I just can't stand watching this total mess they're cooking up without even asking the people actually affected by it.

Personally, I think AT&T should only be for grades 1 through 4, and even then, only for the teachers who actually want it and need it.
The only decent thing about this whole situation seems to be the lunch program. Though, I guess that only works if the food is actually good and free for everyone.

I really think we should bring something like this to the States, too.

As for the unions, where exactly are they when you actually need them? 🤔
We’re currently in the middle of negotiations with the ruling party. 🤔 I think they're probably just waiting for the Easter Bunny bonuses to be officially approved first. From what I’ve heard through the grapevine, they aren't actually allowed to start negotiating raises, salaries, or working conditions until that's all settled.

Now, regarding kids with special needs.
Even right now, being in school for any length of time is already way too much for them, and that's before you factor in their after-school therapy sessions.

Take a kid with speech and language challenges, for example. Based on the Fuchs plan, they’re supposed to spend eight hours at school, balancing two different tracks. Then, on top of those school hours, they have to see speech therapists or educational specialists... when exactly is that supposed to happen? 7:00 or 9:00 PM at night?

I know one kid—a true ADHDovac with an actual diagnosis—who is currently struggling just to sit still through what they're required to do. Anyone with a choice would steer clear of this whole situation.
There are some really sensible parents out there who, for instance, won't enroll their child in religious education classes. Because that child presents certain challenges, the teacher actually manages to schedule that class for either the first or last period of the day. Under the Fuchs proposal, however, that student would be forced to take "World and Me"—some sort of bureaucratic mess where nobody knows who is teaching or what the curriculum even is—just so non-religious kids can be supervised while religious kids practice their faith within the school walls. On top of all that, the kid is expected to sit there and finish all their homework at school, even though they learn much better by staying active or talking things out loud—something a parent can easily organize at home. But no, let's just ruin things for the few reasonable parents left, so we end up with more and more kids acting out in classrooms and hallways, which ultimately hurts the average students and the kids themselves.

@Carl Bishop2, if we've already realized that schools aren't doing enough to prevent violence, wouldn't it make more sense to actually focus on those prevention programs first before trying to push an experimental full-day school model on everyone?
In places where violence is happening under the radar, it’s still going to happen whether kids are in class for four hours or eight.