Or is 30 minutes too short for school lunch?

[flossydog]

I live next to a school, and it has a 30 minute lunch break. I went to three secondary schools growing up, and checking their timetables, they now have a 35, 40, and 45 minute lunch break respectively. I suspect some of them have shortened the break in the 20 odd years since I left.

AIBU or is 30 minutes too short to eat your lunch, go to the loo, and socialise?

(I often take an hour out for lunch at work as an adult, but it's not as if I'm on the clock.)

I taught in a secondary school years ago which decided to change the school hours. This was done to align with the train timetable and also to prevent the pupils from going into town lunchtime (there had been complaints from some shops). School then started at 8.30 and ended at 2.55. Lunch cut to 30 minutes. Everybody loved it. We could offer so many more after school activities and it made a big difference to morale overall.

What kind of school is it?

I understand 30 mins... lunchtime is where the majority of pastoral/friendship issues can happen... and if it's a particularly 'rough' school then it's just more time for fighting. 😂

20 extra minutes in a cramped noisy dining hall with 400 people as its pouring with rain and freezing...

Or school finishing 20 minutes earlier, and being able to socialise where you want to?

I went to school in the 90s and had a 35 minute lunch break. It was to deter children from leaving the school grounds, but loads of us went into town anyway and always had enough time to queue for a sausage roll, have a smoke and walk back up to school 😁

We did finish as 2:30pm though so I suppose that compensated for the short lunch break.

Both of my children chose not to eat lunch at school as there just wasn’t time, also there was rarely anywhere to sit and queues for the toilets were too big.

They ate a good breakfast, took a snack to eat at school and then ate ‘lunch’ when they got home at 4pm ish, then dinner at 7pm ish. Not ideal but it was fine and they would rather that than be at school for longer.

Absolutely this. It's widening the gap and reducing opportunities for state school pupils who may have enjoyed joining clubs at lunch time, and although those who just really need a break and some decompression time.

The one next to me is a comprehensive secondary school with 900 pupils. I think it's a bit sad that schools feel they have to control the time and movement of students to protect them from one another.

When my children were at secondary school they reduced the lunch break to 30 minutes to stop students walking into town, following complaints from shops of shoplifting and other anti-social behaviour.

When I started teaching, lunchtime was an hour 20 minutes, it was lovely! There were lots of clubs run at lunchtimes by the TAs after or before the kids had eaten and they (and we) had a nice relaxed time to eat.

I don't work in that school any more but know they only have 50 minutes now we have 45! No lunchtime clubs, it's barely enough time to get everyone through the hall to eat.

The reason was to reduce the lunchtime play as behaviour had got so bad.

It has a knock on effect on the length of the school day though as schools seem to now all finish earlier.

Until the mid-80s, tea hers could be compelled to do lunchtime supervision. Since then, they cannot. A few opt in (and might even be paid for it) but most staff want a break.

Finding school meals supervisors has become increasingly difficult for many schools - some can add the role on to cleaners' jobs (which gives them more pay and hence more reason to take the job) but it remains a great difficulty for a lot of schools.

It is indeed very sad it needs to happen. But necessary in some schools!

The school I worked at it had been brought in to deal with behaviour issues between different years. Definitely a bad move as it doesn't give kids time to eat properly and get some physical exercise in/socialising before being expected to concentrate again.

My kids get 35 mins. They have long since given up on school lunches and the queues so take their own in.

This must put a lot of time pressure on kids on free school meals (like I was). I always had cooked dinners at school and there was enough time to queue, eat, and then go to the playground or library.

I think it’s a bit short for those not bringing packed lunches, by the time they queue for canteen etc, although my kids don’t seem bothered. When I was at school it just about enough time to eat lunch and go for a smoke socialise.

Total aside, but I can't help but think that there's a lot of effort to clamp down on kids vaping in the bathrooms now, but surely that's a better situation to be in than all the kids smoking behind the bike sheds back in the day!

I think some schools have also done it to shorten the day overall for staff which allows them to do more of their admin/paperwork from home. There's an amount of taught hours that have to be delivered and shortening lunch allows staff to finish teaching earlier.

Our local secondary finishes at 2.50pm. There are teachers who shoot off and collect their own kids from primary schools that tend to finish later (3.15 or even 3.30). My brother in law teaches and his school rejigged all the timetable to try and give staff more flexibility, including some wfh. There's a retention issue in teaching because for the money it pays its become a less enticing career prospect now that so many jobs offer some wfh, so I understand schools trying to give staff a better deal on hours since they can't pay them better.

Would have been an issue at my school as most extra-curricular clubs ran at lunchtime due to the majority of children having to get the school bus home.

Similar here.

In the 1970s my (state) school had a lunch break of about 1 hour and 15 minutes I think, certainly over an hour. Plenty of time to eat your lunch ( a "proper" cooked lunch!) and do an activity. Lots of clubs and sports ran at lunch time, eg choir and other music practise and house matches.

We were in a rural area with lots of pupils having to travel in on school buses so after school extra-curricular activities were tricky.

Also our school day didn't end until 4pm, presumably to compensate for longer lunch times. I see most children these days on their way home soon after 3pm.

Mostly we were not allowed off of school premises at lunch time but pupils who lived within walking distance sometimes even went home for lunch and if you had a dentist or doctor appointment and could present a note from your parents to confirm this then you were allowed to leave for that.

Loads of primary school where I like have only 45 minutes for lunch. It’s to save money and also because lunchtimes are where the most incidents happen.

We all know that free time shouldn’t be boring and the dc should be able to manage but unfortunately that doesn’t always seem to be the case. People started doing things like putting DVDs players in the backs of their cars in case their kids got bored, or they had to talk to them. Now the kids can’t thinkk of ways to amuse themselves.

This thread has dredged up the memoriess of the daily hour finding somewhere quiet to hide from the bullies.

Elsewhere on the continent but my kids have 3 courses plus a salad so they are in the dining hall for close to an hour. Then for the other hour they play, often organised games of basketball are available if they want to join, or there are chess clubs and other things. You can also pick them up and have lunch at home if you want.

I take that point but why insist kids, particularly secondary age, stay on site then, let them go home for lunch. Insist they stay but can't supervise due to lack of staff is utterly nuts.
Probably a third left the premises when I was there, campus was open, no locked gates. Sure some will have gone up the shops, behind the chippy, for a fag, From what DGS says they go in the loos instead and vape instead of off premises.

I work in a secondary school and we only have a 25 min lunch. There is a 25min break too. It's not long enough for staff or students, especially as the bell goes 5 mins before the end, effectively reducing it to 20 mins.

I said that literally 25 years ago when my secondary decided reduce lunchtime. I believe the teachers had to have a lesson off either side to keep the unions happy. It was 100% about behaviour. Which was rather sad because as a rural community most kids couldn't access after school activities so the lunch clubs were all they had. I have no idea how they got everyone through the canteen, I wouldn't have eaten the food. We also had to wait till 1:15 for this 35 minute break.

I work in a high school, we get 35 mins. It's not long enough but I'm used to it now and I like finishing at 3.10 (I can leave at 3.30).
Without phones, the pupils don't know what to do. So many of them just fight and cause trouble.