All-day school schedules

Michelle Nelson4 said:Let me try to wrap my head around the logic here:
So, the idea is that today, when kids finish school at 1:05 PM, they go home, say they'll handle their homework and study for tests by 3:00 PM, and somehow they won't need to study over the weekend and won't have a ruined family life? But if they are expected to do that same homework and studying at school instead, they won't have time, so they'll end up doing it on the weekend and ruining family life anyway... because apparently, time moves slower at home? Is it assumed that you can't fit the same amount of work into 120 minutes at school as you can at home?

Another fascinating theory is that we can't "do everything in the same rooms with the same teachers." This implies that schools and teachers are incredibly incompetent; that even if we set up remedial classes for one subject at one time and advanced classes for another, they wouldn't be able to coordinate it. It suggests the entire class would be forced to stay together constantly and could never split up—like having some students attend advanced Math while others attend remedial English. Isn't that exactly how schools function right now?

Honestly, you clearly don't understand the concept at all.

Are we assuming all children learn in the exact same way, under identical conditions, and master the material optimally? Do auditory, visual, and kinesthetic learners not exist? Do you even grasp the difference between lecturing, reviewing, reinforcing, and assessing what has been learned? After five or six hours of classes, followed by lunch in a noisy cafeteria, do you really think kids want to sit down and keep cramming whatever was covered that day? Every single day? And do you honestly believe that cramming right after class is sufficient if, for instance, they have a test on that material next week? Or are they supposed to be enriching their knowledge across all subjects every single day? How exactly is this supposed to work?
As for remedial and advanced classes, they involve smaller groups of students, and for heaven's sake, most of them DON'T show up. Remedial classes should be attended by anyone the teacher deems needs more practice or a deeper dive into the material, but do you think they actually attend regularly? Or can they be/should they be forced to attend? Advanced classes are for those who are capable and/or want more, but even they don't show up much because they are overwhelmed. They give up on competitions because they simply DON'T HAVE THE TIME, especially if they excel in multiple areas. Now they'll be forced to go, so they will be just thrilled. And both the kids and the parents who get them out of the house for a larger portion of the day will be just overjoyed. Oh, yeah, what a happy family life where the child doesn't have to do homework at home—goodness, what a relief for everyone, because that was clearly what was destroying the family atmosphere.
And I won't even list the rest.

Michelle Nelson4 said:So, there is one specific thing that really needs an overhaul in this proposal. Asking for a change here actually makes sense. On the other hand, making a massive scene about how adding extra hours will completely destroy everyone's family life just because school might run until 3:00 PM? Well, that feels a bit much, doesn't it?

I mean, sure, if we did it right, we'd probably have to pay two—maybe even three—teachers at once! And honestly, one person could probably handle the whole load. But how much quality would we lose? Who cares, right? We’re busy pulling in those massive millions that'll just end up padding principal salaries by 25%, while everyone else gets a measly bump—maybe 25% if you're lucky, but let's be real, it'll likely be closer to 2.5% per hour under the new rules. But hey, let's "save money" by piling the work of two people onto elementary teachers, and maybe an extra half-load onto the subject specialists... all for an extra twenty bucks. What a joke.

Bryan Wells11 said:Honestly, you clearly don't understand the concept at all.

Are we assuming all children learn in the exact same way, under identical conditions, and master the material optimally? Do auditory, visual, and kinesthetic learners not exist? Do you even grasp the difference between lecturing, reviewing, reinforcing, and assessing what has been learned? After five or six hours of classes, followed by lunch in a noisy cafeteria, do you really think kids want to sit down and keep cramming whatever was covered that day? Every single day? And do you honestly believe that cramming right after class is sufficient if, for instance, they have a test on that material next week? Or are they supposed to be enriching their knowledge across all subjects every single day? How exactly is this supposed to work?
As for remedial and advanced classes, they involve smaller groups of students, and for heaven's sake, most of them DON'T show up. Remedial classes should be attended by anyone the teacher deems needs more practice or a deeper dive into the material, but do you think they actually attend regularly? Or can they be/should they be forced to attend? Advanced classes are for those who are capable and/or want more, but even they don't show up much because they are overwhelmed. They give up on competitions because they simply DON'T HAVE THE TIME, especially if they excel in multiple areas. Now they'll be forced to go, so they will be just thrilled. And both the kids and the parents who get them out of the house for a larger portion of the day will be just overjoyed. Oh, yeah, what a happy family life where the child doesn't have to do homework at home—goodness, what a relief for everyone, because that was clearly what was destroying the family atmosphere.
And I won't even list the rest.

So, that’s essentially how you can push them toward supplemental tutoring. As for competition prep? Honestly, looking at how some of these local organizations handle things, it’s almost laughable. 😂

I really appreciate your assessment of my knowledge! I suppose all those other countries with much longer school weeks than our standard 24 hours per week are just completely clueless, right? They'll probably just look to our system as a blueprint for how to achieve "world-class" results where students finish eight years of schooling with nothing more than a surface-level understanding of the material. 😉

Why is our entire system still built on those old Austro-Canadian Empire foundations—just churning out border bureaucrats?

Who actually stands to gain from this?

Michelle Nelson4 said:So, that’s essentially how you can push them toward supplemental tutoring. As for competition prep? Honestly, looking at how some of these local organizations handle things, it’s almost laughable. 😂

I really appreciate your assessment of my knowledge! I suppose all those other countries with much longer school weeks than our standard 24 hours per week are just completely clueless, right? They'll probably just look to our system as a blueprint for how to achieve "world-class" results where students finish eight years of schooling with nothing more than a surface-level understanding of the material. 😉

Like, take all those teachers who don't even have extra tutoring in their official workload—they're out there doing everything for their competition students for peanuts, basically working for pocket change 🤣 yeah, it's absolutely ridiculous!

That’s exactly how it would be handled if they were put in charge and actually got paid for it. It really strengthens the case for the new proposal.

The thing is, they’re going to be expected to handle makeup exams and their regular homework all at once. It's basically paying them for one job while demanding three different things at the same time.

Michelle Nelson4 said:So, that’s essentially how you can push them toward supplemental tutoring. As for competition prep? Honestly, looking at how some of these local organizations handle things, it’s almost laughable. 😂

I really appreciate your assessment of my knowledge! I suppose all those other countries with much longer school weeks than our standard 24 hours per week are just completely clueless, right? They'll probably just look to our system as a blueprint for how to achieve "world-class" results where students finish eight years of schooling with nothing more than a surface-level understanding of the material. 😉

It's a Fact-checker thing: 25 hours of direct instruction clearly rubs a lot of people the wrong way. They don't care if that's standard practice in the world's top educational systems. Apparently, teachers should just pull 40-hour weeks and stay glued to their desks if we want everyone to be happy.

Sarah Hall53 said:The thing is, they’re going to be expected to handle makeup exams and their regular homework all at once. It's basically paying them for one job while demanding three different things at the same time.

Look, if your principal and the school board don't even sign up for the pilot program, you aren't formally obligated to do anything. What you described—trying to do three things at once—is just unrealistic. If they try it, the whole thing will fall apart within a single semester, and they'll end up facing a completely different mess.

jadetinker85 said:It's a Fact-checker thing: 25 hours of direct instruction clearly rubs a lot of people the wrong way. They don't care if that's standard practice in the world's top educational systems. Apparently, teachers should just pull 40-hour weeks and stay glued to their desks if we want everyone to be happy.

Under the pilot program, teachers will handle somewhere between 20 and 25 hours in the classroom, depending on the subject. It’s pretty much the same standard you'd see anywhere else in the States.

jadetinker85 said:It's a Fact-checker thing: 25 hours of direct instruction clearly rubs a lot of people the wrong way. They don't care if that's standard practice in the world's top educational systems. Apparently, teachers should just pull 40-hour weeks and stay glued to their desks if we want everyone to be happy.

Look, I am talking specifically about the number of hours students are required to be in class each week. To be perfectly honest, your specific teaching schedule isn't my concern as a parent; you have the Department of Education and your unions to handle those negotiations.

Sarah Hall53 said:The thing is, they’re going to be expected to handle makeup exams and their regular homework all at once. It's basically paying them for one job while demanding three different things at the same time.

That was actually my point—that the current setup is just impractical and frankly doesn't make sense; it really needs a complete overhaul. I have never once suggested that anyone should work for free, not even teachers, so this applies to all those extra duties, whether it's tutoring, remedial sessions, or coaching students for competitions and everything else.

Not a single comment on the public consultation supports this idea—maybe one out of nearly 500 if you count the outliers... everyone else, from teachers to parents, is against it.

People, please get involved. You just need to register before

Are we talking about the students?
It feels genuinely inhumane to expect a thirteen-year-old to grind through six hours of standard classes, only to immediately jump into elective language blocks or computer science labs, followed by extra tutoring or remedial sessions, and then somehow find the energy for extracurriculars.

I don't know much about the specific after-school programs, but plenty of kids end up heading straight to those too.

Think about it—not a single adult out there can maintain peak concentration for eight full hours at a job. Yet, we expect a child to be fully dialed in, active, and engaged during every single period of the school day.

It’s honestly no wonder so many kids just hit a wall and give up; trying to sustain that level of intensity is practically impossible.

Every single day, middle schoolers are stuck dealing with seven or eight hours of various lessons.

On days when I leave right after the main six-hour stretch, I see them still sitting there, waiting for their coding clubs, foreign language electives, geography groups, or extra help... and my heart just breaks for them.

I’m just looking over the schedule in the planner again to be absolutely certain, so let me double-check my math here:
5th grade—that’s 5 sessions of 5 hours each per week.
7th grade—it’s 2 sessions of 6 hours and 3 sessions of 5 hours weekly.
That is the mandatory requirement. Period. It isn’t some marathon where they're stuck in class for 7 or 8 hours "every single day."

Honestly, when I come across claims like that, it really makes me wonder how much truth there actually is behind the other "facts" being tossed around by these same forum users...

wanderingbadger44 said:Are we talking about the students?
It feels genuinely inhumane to expect a thirteen-year-old to grind through six hours of standard classes, only to immediately jump into elective language blocks or computer science labs, followed by extra tutoring or remedial sessions, and then somehow find the energy for extracurriculars.

I don't know much about the specific after-school programs, but plenty of kids end up heading straight to those too.

Think about it—not a single adult out there can maintain peak concentration for eight full hours at a job. Yet, we expect a child to be fully dialed in, active, and engaged during every single period of the school day.

It’s honestly no wonder so many kids just hit a wall and give up; trying to sustain that level of intensity is practically impossible.

Every single day, middle schoolers are stuck dealing with seven or eight hours of various lessons.

On days when I leave right after the main six-hour stretch, I see them still sitting there, waiting for their coding clubs, foreign language electives, geography groups, or extra help... and my heart just breaks for them.

An 8-to-3 schedule is pretty standard across the USA—literally everywhere. In places where the day seems shorter, they aren't actually doing continuous instruction; it includes lunch breaks and various group activities. It’s not a solid block from 8 to 3; it’s a series of breaks, meals, and social periods.
Trying to run non-stop instruction from 8 to 3 just isn't realistic.

Paul Davis2 said:An 8-to-3 schedule is pretty standard across the USA—literally everywhere. In places where the day seems shorter, they aren't actually doing continuous instruction; it includes lunch breaks and various group activities. It’s not a solid block from 8 to 3; it’s a series of breaks, meals, and social periods.
Trying to run non-stop instruction from 8 to 3 just isn't realistic.

It’s like everyone is just parroting the same old lines over and over again. It’s become such a cliché—you know, that whole "wherever there's a Turk, you'll find little Moe" kind of thing. Everyone's just repeating it like a broken record.

In the US, the tradition of full-day schooling has been around for at least fifty years. My husband grew up with that setup—he had full-day classes throughout his entire elementary school years, which back then lasted until the end of sixth grade. His older brother and sister went through the exact same thing. It was a long time ago, but that's just how things were done.

Our traditions are just built differently here. Look, I’m not saying that locking the door every single time is always the ultimate answer, but why on earth is full-day schooling considered the gold standard? I’m genuinely curious about the logic behind it. I don't want the usual "because everyone else is doing it" excuse—that doesn't explain anything. What is the actual, tangible advantage? Mandatory. All-day classes? Seriously? That sounds like a total grind.

wanderingbadger44 said:Are we talking about the students?
It feels genuinely inhumane to expect a thirteen-year-old to grind through six hours of standard classes, only to immediately jump into elective language blocks or computer science labs, followed by extra tutoring or remedial sessions, and then somehow find the energy for extracurriculars.

I don't know much about the specific after-school programs, but plenty of kids end up heading straight to those too.

Think about it—not a single adult out there can maintain peak concentration for eight full hours at a job. Yet, we expect a child to be fully dialed in, active, and engaged during every single period of the school day.

It’s honestly no wonder so many kids just hit a wall and give up; trying to sustain that level of intensity is practically impossible.

Every single day, middle schoolers are stuck dealing with seven or eight hours of various lessons.

On days when I leave right after the main six-hour stretch, I see them still sitting there, waiting for their coding clubs, foreign language electives, geography groups, or extra help... and my heart just breaks for them.

🙏
Honestly, I could sign my name to every single word you wrote here.

I saw someone suggesting an all-day school schedule for preteens and teenagers, keeping the current period structure but just adding more classes on top. Honestly, it feels like they haven't stepped foot in a classroom since they were a student themselves. They clearly don't have a clue how much teenage development and brain chemistry actually impact focus and energy levels throughout the day.

Honestly, I don't think we'll ever see an operating system that can handle every single niche extracurricular activity out there—and honestly, it doesn't really need to. There’s just too much variety in what people do outside of school or work for one piece of software to cover all the bases.
I’ve noticed lately that so many parents are choosing schools with split shifts just so their kids can squeeze in music lessons or ballet classes. It helps create a much more manageable schedule. These kids are usually so busy with their extracurriculars that they don't really need to stay late for extra tutoring or after-school programs anyway. In my opinion, there's absolutely no reason to keep them stuck in a classroom past 1:00 PM. Honestly, it feels pretty shortsighted—if not outright disrespectful to their time—to limit how these arts programs set their schedules. If they start classes at 3:30 or even 5:00 PM, those kids won't have any time left for themselves or for actual family life. We should be giving them the flexibility to balance their passions with their home lives.

I’ve been thinking about the different types of parents out there who actually cheer on—or at least fully support—the idea of all-day school schedules. It’s funny how much you can learn about someone just by their take on the school bell. To me, they usually fall into a few specific camps:
They’ve never actually had kids older than second grade in private school, so they have no clue what happens when the workload starts getting heavy. They don't understand how much fun it can be to keep twenty or thirty totally different personalities focused during those extra five hours of after-school programs. Honestly, they seem thrilled by the idea of keeping everything contained within the school walls—it feels like they're just looking for an easy way out.

I’ve noticed this pattern quite a bit lately—parents who seem to want to outsource their entire responsibility to someone else. They expect institutions to just step up and handle everything. Look, I get it, extracurricular tutoring is voluntary right now, so you can't really point fingers at a teacher and blame them if a kid is struggling with a concept. But once these programs become mandatory? That’s when people will start making demands. It’s almost like they’re waiting for that moment so they can finally say, "Hey, you aren't doing your job!" It’s all fueled by those flashy commercials promising that kids won't have any homework because everything gets wrapped up during school hours. It sets this expectation that the school is a one-stop shop for everything, which just isn't how it works in reality.

Working from home really requires a certain level of peace and quiet. You need that mental space to actually focus, and it's tough when you have a kid in the next room who might pop in at any second to show you something they're studying or just ask a random question. It’s hard to stay in the zone when your workspace isn't truly private.

Working a standard nine-to-five can be a game changer. Honestly, after finishing school, people might actually start craving that stable, family-oriented lifestyle—it could mean all sorts of things for their future.

hiddendriver34 said:It’s like everyone is just parroting the same old lines over and over again. It’s become such a cliché—you know, that whole "wherever there's a Turk, you'll find little Moe" kind of thing. Everyone's just repeating it like a broken record.

In the US, the tradition of full-day schooling has been around for at least fifty years. My husband grew up with that setup—he had full-day classes throughout his entire elementary school years, which back then lasted until the end of sixth grade. His older brother and sister went through the exact same thing. It was a long time ago, but that's just how things were done.

Our traditions are just built differently here. Look, I’m not saying that locking the door every single time is always the ultimate answer, but why on earth is full-day schooling considered the gold standard? I’m genuinely curious about the logic behind it. I don't want the usual "because everyone else is doing it" excuse—that doesn't explain anything. What is the actual, tangible advantage? Mandatory. All-day classes? Seriously? That sounds like a total grind.

You’ve got a point there. Around here, the traditional way works great.

Paul Davis2 said:You’ve got a point there. Around here, the traditional way works great.

Maybe try giving my original post another read and actually answer the question I asked, rather than putting words in my mouth that I never even said?

Honestly, at this point, it's pretty clear we all need to work on our reading comprehension skills. 😁