Why do schools finish at 3?

[snowdropsandcrocuses]

Genuine question but before teachers come gunning for me, let me explain.

In particular I am referring to secondary schools here and have just been reading the thread on teachers having ridiculously short lunch breaks which got me thinking.

Why is there such a rush to finish school early? Finishing school at 4pm for example, would allow longer lunch breaks (giving teachers and pupils a full break plus allowing lunch clubs more time), could factor in a little more transition time and just take a bit of pressure off. It would definitely help parents as well. I'm struggling to see the negatives. This is not to say I want teachers to work even harder because I don't but I wonder if there is a particular mandate that dictates the maximum 'opening hours' of comprehensive schools?

YANBU, OP. Haven't RTFT, so pls don't shoot if already pointed out, but could it be to do with pay, ie many staff members, not just teachers, would possibly have to work longer too meaning their hourly wages/salaries would possibly need to be higher too?

FWIW, I went to high school abroad and our days were usually 8-4pm. It was tiring, but perfectly doable and no one had to be super rushed.

[quote Whatelsecouldibecalled]@snowdropsandcrocuses my 'contracted paid hours' are 32.5 hours a week so 6.5 hours a day. I think that's standard across most schools that follow the burgundy book agreement.

I'm not getting into what hours I actually work as it's a boring fight that goes on and on [/quote]
It's probably far too complicated for me to understand the intricacies of teaching contracts on a Friday night in feb but still I thank you for responding.

To be clear though, I work shifts over a ten week rota including days and nights and random in between hours. However over a 12 month period it equates to 40 hr/per week

Literally any time over that (excusing the first 30minutes of any given overtime) is paid.

So I guess what I am asking is, do the extended hours teachers work in term time balance out annually to a certain amount of hours. Can teachers earn overtime?

When I read threads like this I can’t believe how crap state schools seem to have become. It’s so sad. 20 minutes to cram down some lunch no time to relax or use the loo, it’s really rubbish.

@Chickenavocadobacon

I don’t think it’s just linked to funding. My first school had thirty minutes for lunch - that was back in 2002, in Blair’s government.

I don't agree. Two out of three schools in my LA have a deficit budget now with more forecast in their three year budget plans. Conservative government funding does not keep up with costs or the promises they make for education. Schools must make savings somewhere. This is 'win,win' in terms of cost, staffing and behaviour. Legally schools cannot have no money ( and certainly not their forecasted negative figures).

I'm struggling to see the negatives

The schools I know that cut their lunchtimes, did it for behavioural reasons. Now schools have very few sanctions to allow them to cope with challenging situations, it’s easier to reduce the length of the difficult ‘free’ break times.

@letsghostdance

You don't want to give children more time at lunch time.

It's just more opportunity for them to go rogue.

Funnily enough, I agree with this. Behaviour is hideous in schools these days, so you really don't want them to have more free time to get into trouble.

Private schools tend to have longer lunch breaks. Gives them time to actually eat, then spend some time socialising/doing lunchtime clubs etc. Surely having a decent break helps them to focus better in lessons? Kids need to let off a bit of steam.

I think there’s an important point to be made here. Just checked my old school’s timetable (not private but grammar) - they still get an hour and five minutes for lunch. Other local grammar gets an hour. Local comps by contrast generally get no more than 30-40mins. Wouldn’t be surprised if this was a wider trend, and it could well be one of the subtle ways in which children at independent/grammar schools are further advantaged; I know from my own school experience that many sports/music/other extra curriculars will be happening during this time.

Ever shorter lunch periods could also well be feeding into the terrible relationship with food and eating that we have in this country - food as fuel to be bolted down as quickly as possible, as opposed to a proper meal to be enjoyed with others, as in the case in most other European countries.

Our last lesson (back in 1977) ended at 15.40. I was never home before 4.15. Lunch was 12-1.10pm.

I’m not sure lunch time is where they are cutting costs, necessarily.

Lunch times lasting around thirty minutes in poorly performing schools in deprived areas have been standard for a couple of decades. Schools in more middle class areas tend to have longer - that’s been my personal experience, not saying it’s necessarily law of course!

Earn overtime 😂. No.

The role is salaried and the salary covers whatever hours are required to do the job. The 32.5 hours per week are directed time in which you can be told what to do. For most teachers this is teach 5 hours per day, do a duty, before school/after school meetings.

@Mostlyjustrunning

Secondary age kids don’t need to be supervised at lunch, do they?

I wish.

They behave like twats. Dropping/throwing food, wrecking toilets, getting physical with each other. The only school I ever worked in where we had it cracked had enough space for all kids to sit down together and a staffed football facility - and even then the last ten minutes of a 45 minute lunch were fucking madness.

Teachers cannot be directed to cover lunchtime. Senior staff can. In many schools, lunchtimes are staggered - in ours now there are days when only one member of the senior team is available to cover lunchtime in the hall - this lasts from 11.55- 1.50, with each year group coming in in turn and the others in lessons. I hate it. But we can only fit one year group in the hall at a time so we are knacked.

@ShallWeTalkAboutBruno

Bloody hell, it’s no wonder kids play up if they’re constantly being told they’re ‘wild’ and ‘cause havoc’ and can’t be trusted to have a decent lunch break.

This is not why they 'play up'.

They 'play up' because their parents back them up instead of the school even when they're constantly disruptive, rude, regularly breaking behaviour rules, and not getting on with their work. They face no negative consequences, so school have to limit their opportunities to cause havoc as best they can.

@Mostlyjustrunning

Secondary age kids don’t need to be supervised at lunch, do they?

Ha ha! Yes!!

@snowdropsandcrocuses

Genuine question but before teachers come gunning for me, let me explain.

In particular I am referring to secondary schools here and have just been reading the thread on teachers having ridiculously short lunch breaks which got me thinking.

Why is there such a rush to finish school early? Finishing school at 4pm for example, would allow longer lunch breaks (giving teachers and pupils a full break plus allowing lunch clubs more time), could factor in a little more transition time and just take a bit of pressure off. It would definitely help parents as well. I'm struggling to see the negatives. This is not to say I want teachers to work even harder because I don't but I wonder if there is a particular mandate that dictates the maximum 'opening hours' of comprehensive schools?

Staff.

Secondary aged kids don't need supervising at lunch time???

1000+ 11-16 year olds with no adult supervision?!

@letsghostdance

You don't want to give children more time at lunch time.

It's just more opportunity for them to go rogue.

My kids' school gives them an hour and a quarter at lunch. And yes, lots of clubs and sports on offer. The other secondary round here gives 30 min and finishes earlier, with all clubs/sports after school.

@snowdropsandcrocuses sort balances out annually. We are paid for 1267.5 hours a year (32.5 hours a week x 39 weeks a year) the payment for that is then divided by 12 months to get a monthly salary in order to be paid monthly. So yes in a way we are 'paid for our holidays' but its within the 1267.5 hours allowance. Otherwise every august we wouldn't receive a pay check. So for 1267.5 hours a year the school can direct my time.

Each member of staff of paid an hourly wage equivalent depending on where they are on the pay scale and any additional responsibility they may have.

Any time worked outside of those hours is not paid and is not paid back in lieu.

Please don't any teacher think I am judging or looking through rose tinted glasses. In my job I have seen so many teens and younger children with massive behavioural issues - often socioeconomic causes - and I truly understand the utterly depressing state of thing. And I really don't have an answer.

I am blessed with 2 teens that are incredibly well behaved and so far have avoided a lot of teen minefields including sexuality, gender, Alcohol, drugs, peer pressure, social media and so on but I know it can hit us at any time. But I have seen the destruction of society, the breakdown of respectful behaviour etc.

This discussion has been enlightening though so thanks to this contributing (and no mn slanging matches)

@snowdropsandcrocuses

neu.org.uk/advice/workload-and-working-time

I stand corrected! Sounds awful!

In my own experience most kids leave the school at lunch time.

Teachers can’t get overtime pay.

The contract will say the pay is for whatever hours are required as sometimes they’ll finish at 4pm but other times they’ll finish at 7:30pm due to parents and open evenings. They then have work to do at home.

Most schools I know close at 3:30pm.
I’m not sure I’d want my DD to finish much later as it takes an hour to get home, then homework takes up to an hour, then dinner etc so it doesn’t leave much free time.

I also think the earlier they finish they more likely they’ll stay for after school clubs which is nice.

The problem with having clubs after school is the children that travel by bus won't be able to attend unless they can get a lift. Then many children won't attend anyway as they'd rather go home, whereas if the club had been at lunch time they would have done. Maybe someone could make these points to the Conservatives as part of their 'levelling up' agenda (children from deprived areas not having access to lunchtime clubs at school and sometimes not even time to eat lunch). All they seem to want to do though is keep children at school for more hours altogether.

I’d like to experience a school in a different country like France where I assume lunchtimes are longer and see how they manage their behaviour.

When I started teaching (1980s), my primary school had a 90 minute lunchbreak.

The idea was every child could have lunch (30 mins), play outside (30mins) and do a club (30 mins).

But not every child opted for a club (recorders, sewing, art, outdoor games, gardening - all run by teachers, no TAs in school) and the outdoor clubs had to run whatever the weather, as there were no spare indoor rooms because they had indoor clubs in them. So forced outdoor time for many children for an hour - often in pouring rain or sleet in winter.

So we cut lunchtime by 30 mins and moved most clubs to 3.30-4.30 - longer to do whatever the activity was, and definitely optional (for children, not teachers - we still all had to run at least one).

I started at 8.30 and finished at 3pm 35 years ago, it's nothing new. It allowed me and many of my friends to pick up our younger siblings, the primaries ended at 3.20.