All-day school schedules

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.

It feels a bit like watching a slow-motion storm roll in over the coast, where you can see the clouds gathering on the horizon and realize there's absolutely nothing you can do to stop the rain from coming. kaže:
I can see where you're coming from, especially when it comes to elementary school. Honestly, the curriculum there could easily be leveled up to match a Bachelor’s degree or even an Associate's program with just a bit more focus on the core subjects.
I’d say we should probably cap the maximum at around 4.

I get what you're saying—it feels like we've reached a point where basic literacy and numeracy are enough to get through elementary school, yet suddenly everything else requires a massive degree. You have preschool teachers who insist on being called "educators" because they feel their credentials put them on the same level as a college professor, even though they're just working with toddlers. Then there's nursing, which now demands a full university degree just to function. It seems like we're overcomplicating the professional requirements for everyone, while anyone could probably step in as a teacher if we stopped requiring such formal signatures or official certifications for every little thing.

So, we’re all chasing those Finnish-style results while relying on a teaching force that hasn't quite hit its stride educationally.

It’s really the one thing we actually have in common with the Finns, yet we seem completely incapable of tapping into the actual potential of the people right in front of us.

I mean, is anyone even going to mention the desperate need for a total overhaul of the university system?

Nobody seems to be addressing the fact that you simply cannot fix a bad staff. As long as they show up just to do the absolute bare minimum—if that—you can’t exactly swap them out for people who actually take pride in their work. To be clear: spending all day in a classroom with people like that is a disaster on every level. They'll mentally drain the kids, and by the time students have slogged through a 9 or 10-hour school day, they won't have any energy left for extracurriculars, tutoring, or anything else. It creates massive disparities between schools depending on how lucky you get with the district's hiring—and in an all-day school setting, those gaps become impossible to ignore.

wanderingbadger44 said:

It feels a bit like watching a slow-motion storm roll in over the coast, where you can see the clouds gathering on the horizon and realize there's absolutely nothing you can do to stop the rain from coming. kaže:
I can see where you're coming from, especially when it comes to elementary school. Honestly, the curriculum there could easily be leveled up to match a Bachelor’s degree or even an Associate's program with just a bit more focus on the core subjects.
I’d say we should probably cap the maximum at around 4.

I get what you're saying—it feels like we've reached a point where basic literacy and numeracy are enough to get through elementary school, yet suddenly everything else requires a massive degree. You have preschool teachers who insist on being called "educators" because they feel their credentials put them on the same level as a college professor, even though they're just working with toddlers. Then there's nursing, which now demands a full university degree just to function. It seems like we're overcomplicating the professional requirements for everyone, while anyone could probably step in as a teacher if we stopped requiring such formal signatures or official certifications for every little thing.

In all fairness, for most nursing jobs, a high school diploma is still technically sufficient. But, naturally, young people want higher education—which makes sense, I guess. Though then they wouldn't end up doing the actual fundamental nursing work, the basic healthcare stuff. But that’s an aside. Just a parallel.

Jose Wells3 said:So, we’re all chasing those Finnish-style results while relying on a teaching force that hasn't quite hit its stride educationally.

It’s really the one thing we actually have in common with the Finns, yet we seem completely incapable of tapping into the actual potential of the people right in front of us.

I mean, is anyone even going to mention the desperate need for a total overhaul of the university system?

What kind of disaster would it be if someone with just a bachelor's degree taught math, chemistry, or physics in middle school? Or an RN with a specialized focus? And why would those professors be considered "below average"—compared to whom? Colleagues at the National Science Foundation or CERN?
I haven't exactly studied the Finnish education system or their specific test scores, so I'm not sure what exactly is meant by that, but I suspect the Finns themselves wouldn't mind hiring American workers, so I assume we fit right in alongside our own results.

mellowskipper said:In all fairness, for most nursing jobs, a high school diploma is still technically sufficient. But, naturally, young people want higher education—which makes sense, I guess. Though then they wouldn't end up doing the actual fundamental nursing work, the basic healthcare stuff. But that’s an aside. Just a parallel.

What kind of disaster would it be if someone with just a bachelor's degree taught math, chemistry, or physics in middle school? Or an RN with a specialized focus? And why would those professors be considered "below average"—compared to whom? Colleagues at the National Science Foundation or CERN?
I haven't exactly studied the Finnish education system or their specific test scores, so I'm not sure what exactly is meant by that, but I suspect the Finns themselves wouldn't mind hiring American workers, so I assume we fit right in alongside our own results.

We share one thing in common: we have the highest percentage of highly educated teachers. It's even more pronounced in our field; the top 10 percent consistently head toward teaching majors.

You've got it wrong.

We can debate all we want once university programs actually become good enough for advanced tracks to match the knowledge level needed to challenge gifted students. But they aren't. You see it yourself. Many simply aren't there yet. That is my bottom line.

Leah, negative selection happens for a reason, but I am completely with you. It’s exhausting watching colleagues play games while I’m pouring my blood and sweat into my teaching. I’d love nothing more than to finally see us get some momentum. But that won't happen without professional dignity, meaningful pedagogical reforms, and properly compensated wages.

If full-time hours become mandatory, any decent person will leave. Honestly, I wouldn't even have a problem switching to social sciences. I’d rather dig ditches than settle for this. At least nowadays, you actually have options to pivot. We know we have until 2027 to retrain. Use the Voucher, invest in ourselves, and go find some peace under the sun. No sane person is going to work like this—especially not for these wages.

Bryan Wells11 said:

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.

I find it absolutely wild that he thinks he doesn't need anyone's permission to run an experiment like this.
He basically said something like:
legally, any experimental program introduced into schools isn't required to undergo a public hearing, so it can just be rolled out in selected schools...

This is just peak arrogance.🙏
(around the 5-minute mark)

So, the plan is to just pick a few schools, dump a new curriculum on them, test the kids for four years, and if it works, roll it out nationwide.
And if it fails? Well, nobody is held accountable.
What criteria is he using to choose those specific schools?
Is there a control group? What are the intended outcomes? How do they measure success in these pilot schools, and what does the student sample actually look like?
Are they going to measure success based on how many parents are smiling?

I made it to the 20-minute mark, but I had to stop; I couldn't take any more.
It's just pure demagoguery.
Anyone who has actually read the document can see that what he's rambling about applies to elementary levels, whereas for older students, the schedule is significantly longer. Kids will be stuck at school until 5 PM without any extracurriculars, and then they won't get home until 7 or 8 PM.
Their social lives will be non-existent.

Of course, he's counting on the fact that the average parent won't read the full document. Plus, he's banking on the idea that most parents just want their kids to finish everything at school so there's no homework left for the child—or the parent—to deal with at home. All this while dealing with the existing curriculum and the current teaching methods (if you can even call it teaching anymore, since it’s mostly just "flip through the textbook").

northerntiger9 said:Nobody seems to be addressing the fact that you simply cannot fix a bad staff. As long as they show up just to do the absolute bare minimum—if that—you can’t exactly swap them out for people who actually take pride in their work. To be clear: spending all day in a classroom with people like that is a disaster on every level. They'll mentally drain the kids, and by the time students have slogged through a 9 or 10-hour school day, they won't have any energy left for extracurriculars, tutoring, or anything else. It creates massive disparities between schools depending on how lucky you get with the district's hiring—and in an all-day school setting, those gaps become impossible to ignore.

And then you listen to that politician publicly claiming that kids will handle everything at school and won't need to do anything at home anymore. He claims it'll bridge the social gap because every child will finally have equal opportunities.

Sure, maybe they'll be "equal" within the same classroom or perhaps the same school... though, if I had my way, I suspect we'll see a mountain of doctor's notes handed in to avoid certain classes.
A bad math teacher is still a bad math teacher, whether they teach four hours or five hours a week. The damage they do during regular school hours is only going to carry over into the "enriched" curriculum.

northerntiger9 said:Nobody seems to be addressing the fact that you simply cannot fix a bad staff. As long as they show up just to do the absolute bare minimum—if that—you can’t exactly swap them out for people who actually take pride in their work. To be clear: spending all day in a classroom with people like that is a disaster on every level. They'll mentally drain the kids, and by the time students have slogged through a 9 or 10-hour school day, they won't have any energy left for extracurriculars, tutoring, or anything else. It creates massive disparities between schools depending on how lucky you get with the district's hiring—and in an all-day school setting, those gaps become impossible to ignore.

A person who is genuinely driven, capable, and deserving of this kind of paycheck and social standing (honestly, even more than this...) isn't going to spend their life working this job with any sense of resentment.

If someone is actually miserable because they feel underpaid or undervalued, then they probably aren't seeing things clearly.

but seriously, please... just PLEASE!

Sure... you have to overhaul everything from the ground up—not just slap some pink paint on the facade and add another floor.😬

Right now, it’s more profitable and way less stressful
to just stock shelves at IBM or Target than to deal with kids.

northerntiger9 said:Sure... you have to overhaul everything from the ground up—not just slap some pink paint on the facade and add another floor.😬

Right now, it’s more profitable and way less stressful
to just stock shelves at IBM or Target than to deal with kids.

Citing:

"Salaries for all full-time teachers will exceed $3.25"

It looks like maybe it actually pays better

cnn.com/education-dept-announces-teacher-salaries-will-top-12000-dollars

Personally, I’m really craving a single-shift schedule.
We actually preferred having two shifts because it meant we could sleep in once every couple of weeks.
Back at my local elementary school, there was a whole debate over moving to a single shift, mostly so kids could catch up on rest every other week.
But that plan fell through.
Yeah, insteadlocallyall the schools are now strictly morning sessions...🤦
And it leaves those poor kids stuck home alone in the morning...🤦 (It’s as if they assume kids can't manage themselves, which is unfortunately how they're treated.)
Anyway, just a random thought that crossed my mind.

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.

Do you honestly think you can pay bachelors less for the exact same job?
That's exactly the problem with government jobs. You're basically getting paid to push paper instead of actually doing any real work.
I agree. You don't need a five-year degree just to be a teacher, and that goes for a whole host of other jobs too. But let's be clear: universities actually need to have a purpose.

Jose Wells3 said:So, we’re all chasing those Finnish-style results while relying on a teaching force that hasn't quite hit its stride educationally.

It’s really the one thing we actually have in common with the Finns, yet we seem completely incapable of tapping into the actual potential of the people right in front of us.

I mean, is anyone even going to mention the desperate need for a total overhaul of the university system?

Compared to whom?
Decades ago, teachers actually held some level of pedagogical authority, and they used it to get the job done until retirement. Now, suddenly, that isn't enough. On top of that, everyone loves to claim students were "better" back in the day—ignoring the fact that the curriculum was significantly more demanding. It makes you wonder: is teacher education and student intelligence becoming inversely proportional?

Nicholas Davis4 said:Personally, I’m really craving a single-shift schedule.
We actually preferred having two shifts because it meant we could sleep in once every couple of weeks.
Back at my local elementary school, there was a whole debate over moving to a single shift, mostly so kids could catch up on rest every other week.
But that plan fell through.
Yeah, insteadlocallyall the schools are now strictly morning sessions...🤦
And it leaves those poor kids stuck home alone in the morning...🤦 (It’s as if they assume kids can't manage themselves, which is unfortunately how they're treated.)
Anyway, just a random thought that crossed my mind.

But people work shifts too. There’s an entire spectrum of jobs—retail, hospitality, healthcare, tourism—where people are working afternoons or late nights.
Not to mention music schools where livelihoods are being threatened, or local sports clubs that don't have the facilities to accommodate anyone interested after 5 PM. 🤷

John Palmer9 said:Citing:

"Salaries for all full-time teachers will exceed $3.25"

It looks like maybe it actually pays better

cnn.com/education-dept-announces-teacher-salaries-will-top-12000-dollars

They should just hire enough people to cover all those extra programs they dreamed up and pay them a decent wage. 👍

John Palmer9 said:Citing:

"Salaries for all full-time teachers will exceed $3.25"

It looks like maybe it actually pays better

cnn.com/education-dept-announces-teacher-salaries-will-top-12000-dollars

well wow, just imagine...
A Master's degree holder getting paid "over $3333." truly "lucrative," I guess.🙂
Honestly, in that chaotic mess they call full-day schooling, I wouldn't work for even $6667, so they can just take those promises and shove them right up the Education Secretary's backside.
Just demagogues and idiots, really.

It’ll be interesting to see if even half of these people actually follow through on their resignation threats.

My take? In the end, there won't be any actual change—just a lot of collective whining before business continues as usual.

nimblelynx7 said:It’ll be interesting to see if even half of these people actually follow through on their resignation threats.

My take? In the end, there won't be any actual change—just a lot of collective whining before business continues as usual.

They should just take it to the streets, like the French do whenever they feel like causing a bit of chaos.

Sarah Hall53 said:but seriously, please... just PLEASE!

I actually got so worked up that I let a typo slip right past me. I won't tell you which one it was. 😬

It’s honestly fascinating how much people love to cling to this idealized image of those who have passed, almost as if they're handing their children over to some spiritualist group in hopes of hearing a voice or getting a sign from the great beyond.

I wasn't home when the call came in. ☕

nimblelynx7 said:It’ll be interesting to see if even half of these people actually follow through on their resignation threats.

My take? In the end, there won't be any actual change—just a lot of collective whining before business continues as usual.

Exactly.
I honestly think you have to be either a total optimist or just pretty bad at tech to agree to work such a fragmented schedule in a standard K-12 school setting (think 16 hours spread across 8 grades with small class sizes) and then wait until 3:00 PM just to get a full load. Even then, you might only find a few interested students who aren't already exhausted from their morning classes to listen to elective computer science long enough for you to hit your required hours—especially for the kind of pay we're talking about.
So, you're looking at working roughly 7:45 AM to 5:00 PM, dealing with constant noise, crowds of kids, and a mountain of parents who expect their children to become master programmers overnight... all for what, a few extra bucks? 🤔
Right now, finding a computer science teacher is nearly impossible, yet people will jump at the chance for a tiny 4% raise even if it means doubling their workload. 🤣
A huge number of people choose school jobs specifically because of the lighter schedules, giving them time to be with their own kids or run side businesses like tutoring or tour guiding.

Some schools spend weeks—literally weeks!—searching for math teachers.
Now they're increasing math hours (which means they need even more staff), along with mandatory remedial sessions. Who is going to step in to cover for that person when they go on medical leave or finally hand in their resignation?
Currently, they're patching things over with teachers from the afternoon shift or using unqualified substitutes, but who is going to fill the gap when everyone is stuck in one shift and carrying 120% of a full teaching load?