All-day school schedules

jadetinker85 said:I find it hard to believe nobody noticed this, and we aren't talking about millions here. 😁 We're looking at maybe $300,000. That might cover building a small gym, patching up a roof, or swapping out some old windows.

Thanks! Point taken, I misspoke there. But I’m still standing by everything else I said!

Robert Wilson said:Thanks! Point taken, I misspoke there. But I’m still standing by everything else I said!

So, who’s actually stepping up? Keep in mind that things like homeroom duties, parent-teacher conferences, and extra sessions have all been absorbed into other roles. On top of that, they bumped up the hourly rate for direct student contact, which is going to create massive budget surpluses in almost every subject area. Maybe some tiny school with three students would apply, or perhaps people who can't do basic math—like those folks at Misducate who think they're getting a tiny raise when they aren't.😁

I’m curious to hear from the computer science teachers out there, or maybe those who work closely with them: is it actually possible to teach kids how to navigate an operating system, master basic Microsoft Office settings, or get comfortable with standard everyday apps if they only have one hour of tech class a week for eight years?

Personally, I’m all for increasing—or bringing back—the hours dedicated to English and math, provided we pair that shift with a solid, updated curriculum. It’s just a shame to see how much art and music have been pushed to the sidelines lately; the role they play in a well-rounded education shouldn't be overlooked like this.

jadetinker85 said:So, who’s actually stepping up? Keep in mind that things like homeroom duties, parent-teacher conferences, and extra sessions have all been absorbed into other roles. On top of that, they bumped up the hourly rate for direct student contact, which is going to create massive budget surpluses in almost every subject area. Maybe some tiny school with three students would apply, or perhaps people who can't do basic math—like those folks at Misducate who think they're getting a tiny raise when they aren't.😁

So, you’ve got these school principals stepping up to claim an immediate 25% raise—just like that—while the actual teachers are stuck waiting around for whatever scraps they can get for themselves. It honestly feels a bit sideways, doesn't it? You'd think the people actually in the trenches would be the priority, but instead, the folks in the front offices are the ones getting the fast track. Just my two cents, anyway... I'm probably overthinking it, but it just seems a little off. I was just sitting here thinking about that 25% mark—you know, that threshold where things really start to shift? It’s funny how much weight a single quarter can carry. Sometimes it feels like you're just spinning your wheels, making tiny incremental gains, and then suddenly you hit that point and everything changes. I don't know, maybe I'm just overthinking it—that's probably a recurring theme for me—but there's something about hitting that specific milestone that feels... different. Like, you aren't just starting anymore; you actually have some momentum. Anyway, just a random thought bouncing around my head while I drink this coffee. They’re really going to have to bleed themselves dry with more debt just to make ends meet at this point.
So, let me get this straight... we're talking about cranking up the workload by like 50%, all for the sake of a measly 25% raise? Honestly, it feels like a bit of a joke—kind of like when you realize the "all-you-can-eat" buffet actually charges extra for the good stuff. It just doesn't add up, you know? You're putting in so much more energy, way more actual labor, and for what? A bump that barely covers the cost of living increases lately. I don't know, man... it just feels like a losing game if you ask me. But not based on that... So then, when you actually sit down and crunch the numbers properly—I mean, really do the math—it turns out it’s closer to like 20%, according to those math experts. Honestly, it feels like they're lying through their teeth about that part, too. Just straight-up pulling a fast one on us.

Sarah Hall53 said:So, you’ve got these school principals stepping up to claim an immediate 25% raise—just like that—while the actual teachers are stuck waiting around for whatever scraps they can get for themselves. It honestly feels a bit sideways, doesn't it? You'd think the people actually in the trenches would be the priority, but instead, the folks in the front offices are the ones getting the fast track. Just my two cents, anyway... I'm probably overthinking it, but it just seems a little off. I was just sitting here thinking about that 25% mark—you know, that threshold where things really start to shift? It’s funny how much weight a single quarter can carry. Sometimes it feels like you're just spinning your wheels, making tiny incremental gains, and then suddenly you hit that point and everything changes. I don't know, maybe I'm just overthinking it—that's probably a recurring theme for me—but there's something about hitting that specific milestone that feels... different. Like, you aren't just starting anymore; you actually have some momentum. Anyway, just a random thought bouncing around my head while I drink this coffee. They’re really going to have to bleed themselves dry with more debt just to make ends meet at this point.
So, let me get this straight... we're talking about cranking up the workload by like 50%, all for the sake of a measly 25% raise? Honestly, it feels like a bit of a joke—kind of like when you realize the "all-you-can-eat" buffet actually charges extra for the good stuff. It just doesn't add up, you know? You're putting in so much more energy, way more actual labor, and for what? A bump that barely covers the cost of living increases lately. I don't know, man... it just feels like a losing game if you ask me. But not based on that... So then, when you actually sit down and crunch the numbers properly—I mean, really do the math—it turns out it’s closer to like 20%, according to those math experts. Honestly, it feels like they're lying through their teeth about that part, too. Just straight-up pulling a fast one on us.

What you wrote is pretty much spot on. Most teachers are against this—at least where I live. You might find a young teacher here or there who’s actually hyped about it, but they’re one in a hundred.

Scott Booth said:I’m curious to hear from the computer science teachers out there, or maybe those who work closely with them: is it actually possible to teach kids how to navigate an operating system, master basic Microsoft Office settings, or get comfortable with standard everyday apps if they only have one hour of tech class a week for eight years?

Personally, I’m all for increasing—or bringing back—the hours dedicated to English and math, provided we pair that shift with a solid, updated curriculum. It’s just a shame to see how much art and music have been pushed to the sidelines lately; the role they play in a well-rounded education shouldn't be overlooked like this.

Over eight years? Look, I’m no computer science professor, but logic tells me that it absolutely could be done.
I'm also not in favor of cutting those class hours either.

Scott Booth said:I’m curious to hear from the computer science teachers out there, or maybe those who work closely with them: is it actually possible to teach kids how to navigate an operating system, master basic Microsoft Office settings, or get comfortable with standard everyday apps if they only have one hour of tech class a week for eight years?

Personally, I’m all for increasing—or bringing back—the hours dedicated to English and math, provided we pair that shift with a solid, updated curriculum. It’s just a shame to see how much art and music have been pushed to the sidelines lately; the role they play in a well-rounded education shouldn't be overlooked like this.

Of course it is. Everything they’re currently cramming into fifth and sixth grade could easily be stretched out—tailored to their age—and there'd still be plenty of room to add more. Like redCat mentioned, a lot of those current hours just end up being wasted on gaming or downtime anyway. I mentioned this earlier, but one hour a week is plenty for the general population, provided it starts early enough so they learn to use computers as tools for all their other subjects. Sure, you touch on programming in the higher grades, but for the younger ones, you could introduce some simple, age-appropriate robotics—just basic commands and introductions. For the kids who actually get into it, you could set up meaningful after-school clubs to dive deep into robotics and coding. Elementary teachers could handle the basics, while motivated, trained instructors could run the extracurricular stuff.

Mind you—any subject where it’s hard to fit everything into a single 45-minute block could be scheduled as a double period every other week—kind of like how Art or Shop class works now.

The other issue is the balance between subjects—whether it’s okay to have more Religion than Computer Science, or more English than Math, and so on.

I think you can start introducing programming concepts as early as the lower elementary grades—as far as I know, kids are already getting their hands dirty with Scratch in second grade, though some might even start in first depending on how much the teacher wants to push things.

Thanks.

That’s what I was thinking, too, but as a parent, I realize I can't really gauge the big picture just by looking at a few isolated cases.

Based on my own history—having gone through the public high school system back during the era of Stalin—and watching how my colleagues' kids and my own are doing in the same schools today, I’ve come to a conclusion. It seems like by the second year of high school, everyone ends up on a level playing field, regardless of where they started, provided they have the right mindset, a bit of maturity, and a decent foundation of general knowledge.

Honestly, if you look at the polls running through various teacher unions, about 80% of us are already planning our exit strategies if this thing passes as it stands—because, let's be real, we’re all pretty much certain that’s what will happen. If everything else falls apart, we’ll just end up stuck with a massive increase in workload four years from now, all for the same pay or even less.
Oh yeah, I’m sure this reform is going to totally skyrocket the quality of education 😍

I find it highly improbable that 80% of the workforce would actually resign—it just doesn't seem realistic, I guess. While it’s perfectly reasonable to expect a certain number of people to quit and jump over to the private sector—or perhaps pursue an entirely different career path altogether—hitting an 80% threshold seems... unlikely, to say the least. In my view, rather than making these grand announcements about mass resignations, the focus really ought to be placed on increasing wages and improving general working conditions.

Carl Bishop2 said:I think you can start introducing programming concepts as early as the lower elementary grades—as far as I know, kids are already getting their hands dirty with Scratch in second grade, though some might even start in first depending on how much the teacher wants to push things.

Yeah, that’s the part about robotics in the early years I was talking about—it’s much easier to grasp programming when you can actually build something tangible. Some elementary teachers are already doing this quite well by blending it with other subjects—for instance, kids have programmed their own step counters to use during PE 😍.

mellowskipper said:I find it highly improbable that 80% of the workforce would actually resign—it just doesn't seem realistic, I guess. While it’s perfectly reasonable to expect a certain number of people to quit and jump over to the private sector—or perhaps pursue an entirely different career path altogether—hitting an 80% threshold seems... unlikely, to say the least. In my view, rather than making these grand announcements about mass resignations, the focus really ought to be placed on increasing wages and improving general working conditions.

Do you really think even one math teacher is staying?
And what about the language teachers? Think they'll stick around?
It'll just be elementary school teachers left, teaching everything under the sun without being qualified for half of it, because anyone else with options is going to pack up and leave.
I know I am.

Sarah Hall53 said:Honestly, if you look at the polls running through various teacher unions, about 80% of us are already planning our exit strategies if this thing passes as it stands—because, let's be real, we’re all pretty much certain that’s what will happen. If everything else falls apart, we’ll just end up stuck with a massive increase in workload four years from now, all for the same pay or even less.
Oh yeah, I’m sure this reform is going to totally skyrocket the quality of education 😍

Whatever. It’s a simple case of you get what you pay for; if they want babysitters, that's exactly what they'll end up with. Where in the current policy does it actually mandate high-quality instruction or meaningful student engagement? You have eight hours in the classroom and zero expectations for homework.

It isn't like everyone can just walk away, though; not everyone is a math whiz or a computer science specialist. Where is a history teacher or an English major supposed to go?

All this constant chatter about the importance of computer science is utter nonsense when my kid’s regular CS teacher spends half the class playing touch football with them or just letting kids surf the web aimlessly. Even the students have been complaining to their homeroom teachers that they aren't actually learning anything. It is a complete waste of precious instructional time. I honestly don't understand what the principal is doing; shouldn't she be actively supervising the faculty? These instructors aren't even providing grades! The homeroom teacher claims she has reported this multiple times, yet absolutely nothing ever changes.

And what is the point of even having full-day school schedules if we can't find any quality educators to actually teach?

wanderingbadger44 said:Whatever. It’s a simple case of you get what you pay for; if they want babysitters, that's exactly what they'll end up with. Where in the current policy does it actually mandate high-quality instruction or meaningful student engagement? You have eight hours in the classroom and zero expectations for homework.

It isn't like everyone can just walk away, though; not everyone is a math whiz or a computer science specialist. Where is a history teacher or an English major supposed to go?

And then you'll have some student from an American public school crying about how "if only the teachers would actually stand up and teach us something..."
Honey, we did... while we were being paid to do it.



This kind of school system is our future, and honestly, maybe we don't even deserve better.
I just hope anyone who can find a way out of this mess grabs their bags and leaves—leaving the rest behind so someone like Harvey Weinstein can just keep padding his own paycheck and hiking his hourly rates.

Sarah Hall53 said:And then you'll have some student from an American public school crying about how "if only the teachers would actually stand up and teach us something..."
Honey, we did... while we were being paid to do it.

This kind of school system is our future, and honestly, maybe we don't even deserve better.
I just hope anyone who can find a way out of this mess grabs their bags and leaves—leaving the rest behind so someone like Harvey Weinstein can just keep padding his own paycheck and hiking his hourly rates.

Maybe we should lower the requirements for teachers—not necessarily needing those advanced degrees. I guess personality and mental readiness matter more than having a PhD or a Master's. It feels a bit redundant to require a specialized engineer just to teach basic math or chemistry.
If the goal is to turn full-day schooling into glorified babysitting, then I guess that's what it is. That should probably be strictly voluntary and limited to elementary school kids.

Susan James said:Personally, I'd happily hand over some tablets to help get this done. 🙏

Did that 🤣

I try to encourage handwriting, I really do. But when you're dealing with an honors-level class? It becomes a struggle. Is it easier to just grab the tablets from the storage cabinet than to deal with their constant nonsense? Yes. It is.

Besides, topics like this aren't even out of the ordinary. We end up writing heaps of essays on stuff like this outside of regular school assignments anyway.

Sarah Hall53 said:Do you really think even one math teacher is staying?
And what about the language teachers? Think they'll stick around?
It'll just be elementary school teachers left, teaching everything under the sun without being qualified for half of it, because anyone else with options is going to pack up and leave.
I know I am.

Quentin Tarantino

wanderingbadger44 said:Whatever. It’s a simple case of you get what you pay for; if they want babysitters, that's exactly what they'll end up with. Where in the current policy does it actually mandate high-quality instruction or meaningful student engagement? You have eight hours in the classroom and zero expectations for homework.

It isn't like everyone can just walk away, though; not everyone is a math whiz or a computer science specialist. Where is a history teacher or an English major supposed to go?

No, I was actually referring to what Persephone wrote—that's the crux of it. For that exact reason, I'm convinced about 80% of them are going to walk away. I mean, sure, maybe the math geeks and the linguists can manage to pivot, but everyone else? It’s going to be a massive struggle—unless, of course, they’re looking to pull a complete 180 on their entire career path.

John Palmer9 said:Maybe we should lower the requirements for teachers—not necessarily needing those advanced degrees. I guess personality and mental readiness matter more than having a PhD or a Master's. It feels a bit redundant to require a specialized engineer just to teach basic math or chemistry.
If the goal is to turn full-day schooling into glorified babysitting, then I guess that's what it is. That should probably be strictly voluntary and limited to elementary school kids.

I suppose I’m somewhat in agreement—at least regarding the elementary school level. It really could reach the standard of a Bacc or perhaps an RN program if they just decided to lean harder into certain subjects.
I suppose we should probably talk about cutting the maximum down to 4. It seems like a necessary adjustment—if you can even call it that—but I guess it’s just the logical move at this stage. Maybe.

What an absolute load of nonsense. Total disgrace.

This guy clearly hasn't the slightest clue about how schools actually function, the reality of modern life, or the actual state of our American education system—not to mention the struggles American families face today. Then again, he’s just a retired vet and part of that privileged inner circle, so I guess expectations should be low. But the worst part? Right out of the gate, he basically said public hearings shouldn't have even happened. He claimed they'd look at "constructive" feedback while dismissing anything negative as just "noted." Give me a break, Mr. Secretary. You can't just ignore the input of over 900 teachers, professors, parents, and psychologists—basically every stakeholder in the American school system—just because they don't fit your narrative. Instead, we get these bureaucratic fairy tales and partisan propaganda used to brush aside expert opinion. It seems the goal was to force this through without any real questions being asked. Honestly, it feels like they wanted to implement a very specific, very questionable way of thinking by sheer force. I still have no idea who the architects of this monstrous experiment even are.