Posts by Susan James

shadowtiger0 said:Whatever you guys say—we’re heading straight there anyway. We always seem to be trailing behind the West by about five to ten years—whether that’s actually a good thing or a disaster remains to be seen—but this is already old news over there.

If you honestly believe anyone gives a damn about what professors are writing or thinking—well, you’re dead wrong. This is happening out there, and we’re just catching up.

Actually, I’d say we’re trailing the West by closer to fifty years.
And during those fifty years, the West has basically been hugging our experts and paying them top dollar because they can't find enough talent at home.

Sadly, nobody cares what the professors have to say. It all started when the lead author and advocate for this whole initiative leaked a press release during the very first day of consultations. She claimed that while kids in the West are busy learning to code, our kids are being forced to focus on rote memorization. So, after two thousand comments on the consultation site, we’ll probably end up with maybe two hours of computer science. Because apparently, that's what "everyone" asked for, and it's the only flaw in the entire proposal.
So, kids will just spend more time sitting in classrooms.
The real question is who they'll be working with and what they'll actually be doing.
But nobody seems to care about that. They’re just looking at the total number of hours spent in school. Adults just love staring at statistics...

rowdypanther12 said:I mean, if they want that for elementary school, fine, but I really don't get how anyone thinks it's a good idea to keep a 12-year-old in class until 4 PM. 🤷

It’s not that they actually think it's a good idea. Don't overthink it.
A lot of parents just focus on their own kids and lose sight of the bigger picture.

The people drafting these proposals are really just looking for ways to grab more funding from the European Union.
They need parental buy-in, so they try to convince everyone that this is how things work in Europe and that our kids aren't spending enough time in class.
And some parents fall for it; they hope that by signing off on full-day schooling, they'll get free hot meals, better facilities, and less homework for their kids. But that's not going to happen—they'll just lower the standards. The real question is what kind of actual knowledge our kids will have when they finally graduate.

(There's plenty of other stuff in the curriculum that desperately needs fixing, but they won't touch that.)

rowdypanther12 said:I honestly don't get how people miss the point here. If we implement this reform where kids are in school "all day" by adding more breaks and extending class hours—plus making those extra credit sessions mandatory—they’re actually going to be stuck at school even LONGER.

It’s probably because someone fed them the idea that our students spend less time in class than kids in the European Union.
And since they’re basing everything on what first and second graders are doing, they’re using the wrong yardstick entirely.

stormymarlin22 said:The sixth period runs until about 1:05 PM. Electives, supplements, or extra credits aren't mandatory. That’s kind of the whole point—if you don't want to take them, you don't have to. My kid never had to deal with afternoon classes back in elementary school. They'd be home by 1:30, and by the time they would've been getting out now, around 3:00 or 3:30, they'd already eaten and chilled out for a bit. 🤷

I feel the same way.
They eat at home. All you have to do is prep the food, which is actually a pretty vital life skill to learn anyway.

Paul Davis2 said:In my town, your kid would actually get reprimanded for skipping gym, and let's face it—nobody is skipping computer science in the 21st century. Honestly, it sounds like you hit the jackpot having such a great school with an on-site gym and a schedule that fits perfectly. You're lucky. And clearly, they managed to eat, too.

Do you honestly think this reform is going to change things at your kid's school? 🤦 😕 🤦

It definitely won't happen next year, because based on what you're describing, the school doesn't even have the resources to apply for those programs.
Besides, everything you're bringing up can be handled through the PTA or the local school board... waiting on the Department of Education to fix it all is just wishful thinking.
Because they won't.
I wouldn't be surprised if they just cram everyone into one shift in some cramped, makeshift classrooms just to keep kids there all day... all to satisfy certain European Union scheduling standards so they don't have to rotate shifts.
You’ll probably be happy with it, but parents working rotating shifts likely won't see their kids much, but hey, who cares? As long as they crush it on the international standardized tests, right?

(By the way, during the consultations, teachers were mentioning other tests besides just the SATs, and our students are actually doing quite well on them. It’s kind of a miracle we're seeing success despite the current state of the school system...)

Paul Davis2 said:The sixth period—if you count both small and large breaks—not to mention pre-periods and post-periods. Then there's tutoring, extra credit, and electives. It’s morning, it’s afternoon, and usually without access to a gym or even a free hot meal.
Let's get real here: kids today are basically living at school. They deal with rotating shifts and the obligation to show up for the opposite session whenever the schedule flips.

Kids actually aren't stuck in school all day right now.
They are, if they choose to be.
Tutoring, enrichment, and extracurriculars aren't mandatory.
But they will be soon.

The reason kids don't sign up for extra tutoring or enrichment is simple:
First, they grasp everything during regular class time, so they don't need extra explanations.
Second, if the teacher isn't great during the regular lesson, they probably won't magically become a better explainer during the extra sessions (and there usually isn't enough capacity for advanced classes anyway).
Third, at home, they've got mom, dad, grandma, or a sibling... people who can and want to help explain the material.
Finally, kids participate in outside activities based on their own talents and interests—things the school doesn't offer—and they don't want to lose precious time to extra schoolwork to do that.

Looking at your post, I don't think you quite grasp this "reform" or the actual concept being offered. We really need to focus on providing free meals for every student and building more gyms and classrooms before we start talking about making extra tutoring and enrichment mandatory for everyone.
Those programs are already available to students; I just laid out why they aren't choosing them.

My kid usually just naps during religious studies. Under this reform, I'd probably have to give a lecture on world history myself, because someone decided kids need an equal workload, or perhaps schools are just aggressively pushing religion into the schedule, leaving kids to sit in the library instead.
Honestly, we just need to fix the scheduling (which is doable) rather than cutting subjects entirely just to make sure everyone has an identical workload.

urbantinker8 said:It’ll probably just end up being teachers, maybe with some extra computer science classes added in. No one else.
Maybe a fresh grad here and there, just hanging on until they find something actually worthwhile.
Honestly, forget the working hours and everything else when the pay is this pathetic; now they’re going to ruin the one thing that was supposedly "perfect"—the schedule.
I mean, I was genuinely stunned today when a woman from the municipal sanitation department showed me her pay stub. She makes exactly a hundred dollars more than I do.🤮🤮🤮
At this rate, we might as well have someone from the local waste management crew come teach the full-day sessions for those wages.🤣🤣

I feel like I've been typing away this whole time!
It honestly feels like it’s not even worth it anymore, even for those people who only take certain jobs because they offer a great work-life balance.
It’s not like there's a huge surplus of teachers specialized in advanced computer science right now. We just don't have enough people trained for those specific roles. Once they actually start pumping out more graduates with those credentials, we'll finally see that next wave of educational reform take shape. 🤦

Regarding the potential pay raises, Ford claims that anyone who decides to participate in the pilot program will see a 25% bump in their salary.
😬

urbantinker8 said:I mean, honestly, the computer science crowd is going to leave regardless, and they certainly don't need an all-day curriculum to make that happen—I suppose you have to wonder who would even bother teaching IT at an elementary school level when they could be working with a much more prestigious degree for that kind of pay anyway.🤣
The whole idea of an all-day school schedule is probably just going to result in kids idling around and might actually accelerate the exodus of students, though I guess they’ll ultimately leave because they want to, rather than being forced out by some misguided policy that treats them like they're suddenly redundant, which is what this idiot seems to think is happening.

There’s always that group of people who struggle to move up the ladder because they just can't quite reach the necessary skill level—and honestly, they really do exist. I remember working at a firm back in Chicago where we had a few folks stuck in entry-level roles for years, not because they weren't hard workers, but because they simply lacked the technical chops to handle more responsibility. It’s a tough reality of the professional world, but it happens everywhere.
There’s always a handful of enthusiasts out there—it’s a given!

A huge part of why people choose this path is all about the schedule. Once they wrap up their school day, they actually have real time left for their families, hobbies, or even taking on some tutoring gigs on the side. It’s honestly not even a secret at this point.

urbantinker8 said:Honestly, listening to him lie so blatantly just makes my skin crawl.
And this whole bit about how "nobody will be left without work" is really just a mindless attempt to dodge the actual issue at hand.
Look, the problem isn't that people aren't talking about job losses—though, frankly, employees might just walk out on their own if you try to push this nonsense through—it's that everyone is absolutely repulsed by the sheer stupidity of keeping kids locked up in school all day long.
It’s just a fundamentally rotten idea.

I mean, tech professionals are definitely going to head for the exits.
And there is absolutely no way this attracts any new talent.

Do you really think anyone wants to work part-time with a fragmented schedule from 8 to 3, just waiting around for some elective class at 3:30 PM for three or four exhausted students who are only doing robotics because their parents forced them to?

Sarah Hall53 said:I mean, honestly, I don't think the Department of Education even realizes what they're doing here—it’s like they aren't even thinking about our IT staff. They talk about cutting their hourly rates in half, but they aren't accounting for all those specialized tasks that *only* these tech folks handle. You know, the stuff that keeps everything running behind the scenes—managing the digital gradebooks, handling server administration, keeping the student databases up, plus maintaining the school's website and social media accounts. If they try to just dump all that technical workload onto regular teachers without actually increasing their hours... well, a huge chunk of these specialists are just going to end up being redundant. It doesn't make any sense.

But then who's actually going to handle all that work? 🤔

driftingranger2 said:So Fuchs is claiming kids will only be in school until 3 PM for two days a week, and then until 2:15 PM the rest of the time.
Is he actually lying through his teeth, or is the media just twisting his words?

It’s intentional, deliberate, and honestly pretty rude!
All you have to do is look at the actual documentation.

First off, the schedules aren't uniform—they vary for elementary students, 5th/6th graders, and 7th/8th graders.
So, no, everyone isn't getting dismissed at the same time.
For students who don't currently take a second language or religious studies, their weekly hours actually increase by four hours (plus an extra hour of computer science for 7th/8th graders, which is elective right now).
They've also added more breaks, which means the total amount of sunlight time students get inside the building actually goes up.
With the current A1 and A2 curriculum requirements, there is absolutely no way those classes finish before 3:00 PM, and certainly not for the older kids.

Furthermore, he keeps insisting that nobody will lose their jobs. But I have to wonder: if a certain school currently has two lead teachers per grade—say, six teachers for grades 1 through 4—and the new plan moves everything to just one teacher, where does that leave the other staff?
Or maybe they just don't care because the founders and parents are the ones picking up the tab, so technically it's not the Department of Education's problem?

It seems like the Secretary and those pushing for full-day schooling think the negative feedback—over a thousand comments on the public consultation—is just because they cut back on computer science hours. 🤦

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if they suddenly bumped it back up to two hours just to claim parents and teachers were the ones asking for it, all while making the school day even longer.
The way the Secretary is spinning this to mislead the public is just terrible.

By the way, you guys should really start having these conversations in real life. Most people don't have the slightest clue what's actually going on; the media just serves up these sensationalized crumbs that aren't even accurate when it comes to things like hourly wages (you only need to watch a documentary to see that)

It honestly warmed my heart to see a teacher sitting down with her students to discuss this 🙏 🙏 🙏
and making sure to ask for their input, too.
I really wish more teachers would open up these dialogues with their kids.
Even those high school teachers should be doing the same.

rowdypanther12 said:I honestly don't even know where to start. My mom was totally on board with the idea until I sat her down and asked her about five or six practical questions. 😁
At first glance, it sounds great, especially to parents who aren't dealing with tweens or teens right now.
The concept of having a dedicated space for kids to study, finish homework, and just hang out together isn't bad at all. It levels the playing field for kids coming from crowded homes with tons of siblings or those struggling with basic things like reliable heating...
In theory, turning schools into community hubs—kind of like an after-school program at the YMCA or a local Boys & Girls Club—is a solid idea. 😁
But making it mandatory? Even under perfect circumstances, that approach is just a disaster.

Look, providing hot meals at school is a fantastic idea. But let's be real, it hasn't even gained much traction in the three months since it was proposed. It would be fair if the Department of Education released a public list of which schools are offering hot meals for grades 1 through 8 so interested students can find them. They should also disclose how many meals are covered by the federal budget (at about $1.40 per meal) versus how many parents are expected to pay for.
That should be a publicly accessible document, since we’re all paying for it through our taxes!

The idea of having teachers available for tutoring in every subject is wonderful—assuming those teachers are actually great at what they do.
But there's more to it.

It’s a great idea to offer extra help for students who are genuinely interested in a subject or want to dive deeper than the standard curriculum. However, it's incredibly hard to provide specialized instruction for every single subject, and you have to wonder how many teachers are actually willing and able to do that. On the flip side, there are already plenty of private organizations and local clubs out there offering these kinds of activities, though they do charge a fee. Personally, I think it's better for the government to give parents vouchers for those existing programs (which keeps those jobs active) rather than wasting tax dollars on unmotivated teachers in schools. Plus, it prevents mixing kids who desperately need remedial help with gifted students at the exact same time—especially during the hours when they should be reviewing core material or finishing their homework. Honestly, only Hermione could pull off managing 500 students in one school with a magic watch.

The notion of kids working on their homework at their own pace in a cozy, well-designed space—think couches, armchairs, bright but soundproofed rooms filled with plants and warm colors—is lovely. Or even just having a warm, safe place to wait while they're between music lessons or waiting for sports practice.

Yeah, people who haven't actually read the proposal often wonder why anyone is complaining.
But as soon as you drop a few facts on them, they immediately try to turn the tables.

For starters, parents who are happy with PAC don't realize that with full-day schooling, kids won't just have one teacher; they'll effectively have two. And they have no clue how that impacts specialized subject instruction.
As soon as you mention that, they go quiet.

rowdypanther12 said:Honestly, being expelled from high school is just a complete mess to me.🙏

I get that... it’s mostly about the fear of something happening to them while they're on vacation. Once they’re back in school—whether they're on the early shift or the afternoon session—everything feels much more predictable and safe. It's hard not to worry when they're away from their usual routine.

Just imagine—they aren't even letting them out early now while school wraps up around 1 or 2 in the afternoon. I can't help but wonder how much more chaotic things are going to get once they switch to those full days ending at 5:00 PM. It’s going to be quite the adjustment!
It really hits home when you look at how some kids are stuck with whatever happens to be sitting on the kitchen counter instead of having actual meals prepared for them. Beyond just the lack of basic nutrition, there's a massive gap in meeting their fundamental needs. If you factor in sleep deprivation—because they’re up at 7:00 AM, getting home around 5:30 PM, and then juggling extracurriculars on top of that—how are they ever supposed to focus in class? It’s nearly impossible to sit still and actually learn when you're running on empty. 🤔)
The guy who wrote the code probably hasn't even laid eyes on the kids he's designing this for.

I did a little digging on Google to check out everyone on the task force, and it looks like most of them are current school district employees, while the rest are coming from various research institutes.
And there isn't even a psychologist on hand.

Adam Diaz67 said:I was scrolling through some old photos of my elementary school online. They still have those massive, old-fashioned windows that tilt open. It’s not a huge building—just a ground floor and one upper level. Honestly, if they just replaced all that window framing, a good chunk of that money would be gone right there. On top of that, they've got six student restrooms (two in the gym, two on the first floor, and two upstairs) plus two for the teachers. Naturally, there's no AC, and given how the building is positioned, they really should put some units in the gym at least. Just addressing those things would eat up a decent part of that $300k budget. With how much contractors charge these days, that money disappears fast. And since everything has to be done by the book with taxes included, you can't cut corners. Like, a tile guy isn't charging $2.00 a square foot anymore; it's more like $2.50 once you factor everything in.

On top of that, prices can sometimes be negotiated before the public bidding process is finalized, so things could end up being even pricier.🧐
We were actually chatting on another thread about how some schools aren't allowed to install AC, and honestly, those kids are going to have a blast sitting in class all day long.🤣

As for the bathrooms... I know plenty of kids who are embarrassed to even use the restroom at school. For all sorts of reasons. There are adults like that too. It’s just the nature of public restrooms; if they don't absolutely have to go, they won't. Since they’re only in school for maybe 5 or 6 hours now, they just hold it in. And that’s true regardless of whether the bathrooms are clean or smell okay. So, even if they pour a ton of money into them (and let's face it, $300,000 might not even be enough), they’ll probably still choose to suffer through it for hours.
Though, since breaks are getting longer, maybe the kids will just sprint home during those 10 or 40 minutes.🤦
Or maybe not, since they aren't even allowed to leave campus to run to the local bakery anymore.

mellowskipper said:It says here that any school signing up for this pilot program will receive $300,000 to cover implementation costs. I mean, realistically, that’s not a small amount of money—it's significant—but my question is how exactly a school or a principal intends to account for every single cent of that funding? For what, specifically? Does it mention any concrete details or actual ideas? It would have to be used in the interest of the school, the teachers, and the students, I suppose.

Just handing it out to cousins and buddies through rigged school procurement contracts.🤷
They could easily find ways to squeeze out every last penny.😬

Quincy:

The funding is designated for projects that don't require building permits, including: expanding and equipping the existing school kitchen expanding and equipping the existing cafeteria renovating and furnishing extra space for after-school programs adding equipment to classrooms, labs, and vocational workshops to support educational programs upgrading teacher workspaces and faculty lounges renovating and upgrading school playgrounds or gymnasiums updating and improving existing restrooms improving HVAC and air conditioning systems throughout the school furnishing multi-purpose rooms.

Carl Bishop2 said:I guess I’m just saying that times have changed—the job itself has become way more demanding than it was twenty or thirty years ago. Honestly, I think any teacher who has been in the trenches for a couple of decades and is still at it would tell you the exact same thing.

It’s definitely tougher because parents don't seem to trust teachers as much anymore. At the same time, they have these incredibly high expectations—you know, the whole "every child is a genius" or "we need to maximize every ounce of their potential" mindset.

I won't drag this debate out too long, though... everyone gets pushed into standard schooling because, well, everyone has rights.

But looking at this specifically regarding kids with special needs, the full-day school model doesn't really address them. When people say a teacher will be freed up from certain hours because the kids have computer lab, language arts, or PE, leaving one teacher to handle everything all day, my question is: what happens to the aides? They aren't "freed up" from specific subjects; they are there with the student all day long. Plus, in the past, kids with disabilities were often advised against after-school programs because it was too overwhelming and they couldn't get the individualized attention they needed. What happens to them now? Will they actually get that support?
And then there are the gifted students. How can someone realistically pick only the gifted kids for enrichment programs based on actual ability when every parent thinks their kid is the next Einstein and demands they get in? They certainly won't settle for remedial help or just doing regular homework...
Also, are teachers even properly trained to work with gifted learners? It's kind of a lottery, really. Since elementary schools are still organized by local neighborhoods, you just get whatever comes your way.
(For years, I've heard teachers say that if they have to choose, they'd rather do remedial work because it's easier to prepare for. Their priority is making sure all the kids grasp the basics before focusing on the one or two who might need a bit more... so the advanced kids just end up idling away their time at school.)

mistyfalcon3 said:Absolutely not. Let kids enjoy those few hours at school while they still can; an eight-hour workday is inevitably waiting for them once they enter the workforce. As for the argument that children need somewhere to be, I suspect modern parents have become far too overprotective. In my view, it is perfectly reasonable for a child up to the end of fourth grade to walk to and from school alone and remain home for a few hours until their parents return. Of course, unless they live a great distance away or lack basic independence, the alternative would be after-school programs—though, as we know, not every school even offers those. It makes me wonder, though: will they eventually just force full-day schooling on everyone?
I truly hope this doesn't turn out to be yet another failed project by our illustrious U.S. Department of Education.

Parents who need after-school care for a 4th grader aren't acting normally.
I actually wrote this eight years ago when I first heard they were offering these programs in Chicago, and now I'm writing it again as they try to push full-day schooling for fourteen-year-olds.

One thing is providing a warm meal, and I think it would be wonderful if kids had lunch available to them (even a cafeteria tray); it really makes family life easier (personally, I love being able to grab a bite at work).
Or perhaps just having a roof over their heads while they wait for violin lessons across the street (so they can finish homework, read a book, or just stay out of the rain).

But the other thing is the actual supervised help and structured homework time—being stuck in an indoor space with a bunch of students you didn't exactly choose to spend your life with, under the constant watch of an adult.

rowdypanther12 said:Yeah, I get that. Burnout is a completely legitimate diagnosis given how things are right now.

But it’s more than just burnout.
The vast majority of employees are women (please don't come for me with the biases—as a feminist, I'm just stating the facts here). They’re the ones taking leave for pregnancy, maternity, adoption, or IVF... all while dealing with standard health issues that actually happen.

And even when we talk about men, they have those ten days for when a baby arrives. It's enough time that they might use it right in the middle of the school year, and then someone else has to step in to cover that vacancy...
and then you have layoffs to deal with.

Out of everything, what feels worst to me is seeing a kid get stuck in a system with a terrible teacher (there are plenty of them, and the schools can't seem to get rid of them). Instead of getting four hours of quality instruction, they sit there for five hours a week, and instead of Dad explaining math at home or going to a tutor, the kid is stuck at school until 3 or 5 PM and then has to grind through homework at home.

By the way, when kids are sick and stay home from school, when are they supposed to catch up? During extra help sessions? How is that even supposed to work?