To think that overcrowding should = part time schools?

[SenseofEntitlement]

Having just read this I am at a loss as to why each area doesn't have a part time school, where half the kids come, say, Mon-Wed dinnertime, then the other half do wed dinnertime- Fri. They could do longer days, or maybe do a kind of flexischool arrangement where they are home educated for the other days.

We would still need the same amount of teachers, for all the planning and marking etc, but it would give them a bit more flexibility too, for things like cover, and the school would have double the funding for it's size, so could get better facilities - there would be, say, 420 children registered (and funded for) but only 210 of them would actually be using the school at any one time.

I know that longer, but fewer, days would work better for a lot of parents too, jobs and travel wise - my DD goes to the only school that had a place that we could get to, and it takes me up to an hour to do the school run on the bus. Luckily my FIL helps out, but that would be ten hours a week travelling, worse if DD2 was at the school nursery that only does half days - it would practically be a part time job.

Obviously it couldn't be every school, or parents who need to work or who don't want to change at all wouldn't have a choice, but if we are so overcrowded, I'm sure that there is at least two classes worth of kids in each area that would like to be half and half HE and school. I know there are at least two classes worth of reception children crowbarred in around our town - there are only 18 classes worth of children in the whole town, but they are somehow squished into the space for 16. I'm sure it is much worse in places like London.

Or am I missing something?

YABU. Most parents need to work 5 days a week. Having to find full-time childcare for the rest of the week would be an expensive nightmare. Schools aren't a babysitting service, blah de blah. Let's get real here: they are.

YABU - as the standard of literacy amongst adults in this country is falling rapidly - it would plummet with HE en masse. Mind you, lack of education = serfdom = exactly what all governements want. The masses too inept to question anything.

Really interesting idea.

So kids get half the education, but teachers will have to work longer hours? And getting childcare would me a nightmare because it would create a shortage of CM's.
YABU.

Why not just build more schools?

Or am I missing something?

A 2pm-7pm school day for primary aged children is absurd- not a solution.

I dont think it would be run properly, wouldnt chance it.

I think there going to have to build more schools, the birth rate has risen sharply in the last 3 years and those babies are due to start school soon...

There's already that choice. Flexi-schooling is possible within the law for those who want it providing that the school concerned is agreeable..

Unfortunately life examples suggest that many, if not most schools, are not willing to entertain the concept. Aside from the obvious objections - parents who work, those who can't/don't want to HE even on a PT basis, you would first have to overcome the reluctance which schools have to the concept of flexi-schooling.

I wonder what tethers wonders - surely we need more schools where there aren't enough places?

i think it sounds interesting, but i am for more free time for children to learn out of school in other ways anyway

that will never happen though and do think alot more schools need to be built

The simple solution is build more schools.

AKMD - sure most parents need to work, but show me a job that has 10-2 Monday to Friday. In fact, any Monday to Friday job, unless you have qualifications, is a bit of a rarity. Shop, care, hospitality etc work all often want you to do an odd collection of hours, so changing the days of school wouldn't make as much of a negative impact as having slightly longer hours would make a positive one.

I don't mean the shifts should be the ones in the article, clearly 7pm is far too late for children. But, say, 8 till 5, two days a week and with a half day as well, wouldn't be too bad - I know a lot of children essentially do that at nursery or if you add in clubs or tuition.

Also, like I said, it wouldn't be every school, it would just be an option, so the parents who don't want it don't have to use it. Maybe one per town or so.

The school would be set up for it, so it wouldn't have the planning problems that one or two flexischooled kids bring to a class, and each teacher would still have the same amount of kids, but two teachers would use the same classroom, with a class each, but with the option to cover for each other if needed on the odd day.

I think we need to put more resources into education, so I don't see why we should divert them into building more schools than are needed. Of course we need more schools, but why not build a few that can be used more effectively?

But you'd have even more need for After/Before School Clubs, but all the spaces currently used for them would be in use!

Nah! sorry I think thats a stupid idea. Many parents find it hard enough getting their children to practice reading or learning spellings. The idea of half home ed for kids would be a disaster. Educational standards would plumet and I suspect child abuse would increase massively.

I am dreading Monday as I suspect the schools will be shut. My son needs a properly qualified teacher who delivers a well rounded education. I know that when my son is home educated (ie. strikes, snow days etc.) he learns sweet FA compared with being at school. Or my son would make progress in what he is interested in, he would learn lots of science, but do no writing.

Prehaps schools artitects need to think how clever use of space and how to cram more classrooms into a smaller space. Certainly a lot of space is wasted in schools I have worked in. For example the use of netbooks/ laptops can free up an old computer suite to be used as classroom. In my area many schools are single story buildings which IMHO wastes space

why on earth would child abuse increase?

When the subject of changing the school holidays is raised, it causes objections, the amount of chaos it would cause with trying to cover the holidays. I work 3 days PT and when DH and I use our leave to cover the DC holidays, we don't have enough time to take together -except Bank Holidays obviously.

So changes to the school day like this?
No.

"I think we need to put more resources into education, so I don't see why we should divert them into building more schools than are needed."

Why should it be either or?

Why should we not build schools and put more resources into education?

Hell would freeze over before I'd HE or flexi-school, but I don't think you're BU to put it forward as an option. :)

I wonder how much interest there would be in this from parents who are currently HE kids of senior school age, or who would like to but are deterred by some of the subjects. I could see that it could be a good idea to provide in-school provision for subjects which require specialist equipment, eg science, woodwork, etc or for PE to accommodate organised team sports. It might also make LAs who are anti-HE a little less anti if they had control over some of the teaching.

Ridiculous idea. You are talking as if school should be there to be convenient for parents for a start, and that is clearly wrong.

No child would be capable of learning to their potential with those hours, and you would need more teachers, not the same amount! It's quite insulting that you think teachers do so little for individual children that it wouldn't increase their workload to give them double the number of students.

Most stupid suggestion I have ever read on here.

They need to build more schools.

Much as I love my boys I love the fact they are at school 4.5 days a week. In Edinburgh all pupils get Friday afternoon off and tbh arranging childcare for this is a pain in the arse. Organising childcare for 2.5 extra days a week sounds a logistical nightmare and it cannot be ignored that it would also be bloody expensive.

The idea of school 8-2pm I wouldnt mind but there is no way on earth i would send my children 2-7pm, that is so silly. I don't see any teachers wanting to work those kind of hours either......

I think education as we know it will change over the next few years. Already the idea of 30 in a class in key stage 1 is being discredited with the intention of increasing the number, nothing to do with not enough funding, teachers of course.
Flexible secondary school I think could work very well. My children are brilliant at sports that the schools do not play, I would love to be able to pick and choose the lessons I take them in for without backlash from the LEA.

"why on earth would child abuse increase?"

My son and I would kill each other if we had to do education activites for 12 hours a week.

School holidays are fun as we can plan together what we can do. I would hate to spend 12 hours doing activites dicated by the school. Homework is enough of a battleground.

So, instead of having 30 children to get to know, teach, support through all their life traumas, plan for, assess their work, mount and display their work, write reports for, consult with their parents a minimum of 3x a year and so on, you're seriously suggesting we do that for 60? And teach much longer days as well, thereby removing the non-contact time from 3.30 that we currently have for doing planning and admin and meetings and so on.

Yeah, great idea!

Yes but you wouldn't be directed by the school, that's why it's called home education, nothing to do with school.

And as for all science and no writing, wouldn't you write up the scientific experiments ?

I think faced with the choice of 40 in a class v's doing more at home, 1 to 1 I know the in my house quality of teaching would increase with less time at school.