What's the educational argument for so many holidays?

[TinTinsSexySister]

Just that really.

Are there any educational benefits to frequent school holidays or are they just an historical hangover? Educationally speaking, would we be worse or better off adopting the US system?

Answer the questions:

1. Who would pay for it (or do you HONESTLY think the government would finance it)

1. How would flexibility like that work in secondary schools where GCSE and A Level specs have to be covered?

'It's not a good use of resources to structure the school year to compensate for the minority of families who don't ensure their DC get a good rest and break in the summer.'

That's rubbish. It's a total waste to spend billions on school buildings, facilities and maintenance and human expertise fo rthem to lie fallow for 13 weeks.

And it's actually a minority of families who are able to spend 13 weeks with their kids. TEachers, SAHPs. A number of parents are forced into spending this time because it's not fiannaiclally worth their while working because they can't afford the childcare.

The system as it is is hugely wasteful and unhelpful to the economy.

Evil, I've answered those questions. Read the thread.

'Make teachers work more, pay them more.'

Aahh, the vast majority of teachers already work many more hours than they are paid. I work a good 15 hours each week over directed time and I would say about 1/3 of each holiday when all is evened out.

I would rather work less intensely (ie have less contact time) each week but work more weeks in the year.

Many teachers on this thread have agreed that this would suit them too.

Oh dear, FiveCandles, you are clueless. And you claim to be a teacher? 6 or 8 week modules? Yes, because that's how it works. Every school can manage that. No need to respond to the needs of the children. No need to take their ideas and run with them for a few extra lessons. And what about parents who think it's ok to take kids out of school for all manner of reasons ("had to stay at home cos the Sky TV man was coming" is one I had this week) Making education less formal would do nothing to address the issues of impoverished children. Parents who are suspicious of schools and teachers wouldn't necessarily welcome changes like this. It's a wider problem and not something that can be fixed by flexible schooling.

If teachers were into a good thing they wouldn't be leaving in droves or going to job shares!
The TAs that I know are very well qualified people, they do the job because the hours allow them to spend lots of time with their DCs which is what they want.
We seem to lose the point that people work to live- they are not living to work. Time with my family is more precious than anything else and I am willing to earn a lot less to do it. I would take a salary drop to keep the holidays- I wouldn't take one to work more!

Eh? We currently work in 6 to 8 week modules. We are forced to because of the ridiculous system as it is now with a bloody great 6 week gap in the middle of the year! You don't make any sense.

I have read all 20 pages of his thread and am struggling to decide who I agree with!

In theory teachers appear to get a lot of 'perks' (long holidays and short working day being the most obvious) but in reality it seems they generally work very hard the rest of the time (although no harder than a lot of other professions), aren't actually paid for the long holidays and in fact having to take holiday only at certain times of the year can be quite inconvenient. I agree that schools seem to be blamed for a lot and expected to solve all of society's problems and that teachers are there to teach not as childcare.

But as a working parent (and I know some teachers fall into this category) there's no doubt that the current system (9-3 school day, long holidays) is incompatible with the modern way of working. I want to spend as much time with my daughter (and naturally things are a bit easier for me as there's only one of her) as I can and for her to enjoy her time in and out of school, to learn, to have fun, to be a child. In reality, even with a reasonably flexible job (which I do when I could earn much more purely for this reason) and a supportive family, it is still hard to accomplish this. Like most families we need 2 salaries to get by (and by that I mean be just about comfortable with not many luxuries - we're pretty much one big bill away from trouble most of the time :() but a standard 9-5 job plus travelling time with maybe 5 weeks holiday a year, even x2, does not equate with school hours. Most parents have to rely on childcare, family or favours instead of spending time with their children themselves.

I don't know what the answer is (and I've found this really interesting reading) but it's clear to me that the system needs to change somehow and I'm not sure that more time in school for kids is the answer. I think everyone need to be open to change and flexibility is surely key (from employers and in the education system). That and a greater emphasis on family life and taking responsibility for your own children. Of course none of it will happen I'm sure but the OP was asking theoretically so I'm answering as such.

I really don't understand what you're responding to, Evil. Certainyl nothing I've said. My system could be much more precisely tailored to the needs of the children.

As there would be less formal classes each week because spread over more of the year there would be much more opportuntiy for working with individual kids.

It's a disgrace that so many kids leave the education system functionall yilliterate and innumerate. There would also be more opportunity for profect work, independnet learning, extra curricular...

And teachers would be more effective because less contact hours and less work to take home because spread over longer instead of crammed into the school year arbitrarily as it is now.

'The thing is five, yes many teachers work extra, I amazed if any teacher can do the job without working extra, but the thing is in their pay & conditions they don't have to'

That's just stupid. What's the advantage of 'not having to' if, in fact, you do have to.

Why not change our hours to reflect what is necessary and what we already do but at the same time as making the workload more manageable?

i am not reteaching the same skills over and over throughout different modules

if you miss the month or so where i teach mole calculations because you are on holiday, then there is a good chunk of later aspects of our course, and the a level course which you will struggle to complete

will there be a selection of teachers on standby ready to swing in to action to teach modules that students miss?

FGS, chibi, it's not that hard. There, of course, would need to be compulsory modules - maths, English etc where everybody covers the same content and then optional catch up sessions and extra curricular. Basically the same curriculum (although that too would change in my ideal world) but spread over the whole year so that you could take holidays flexibly and fit in more consolidation/independent work/extra curricular. If there was more overall teaching time you wouldn't have to cram it all into arbitrary chunks you could balance it out.

I don't teach in 6-8 week modules. It depends on the needs of the class. I won't automatically start something new just because it's a new half term, and equally, I won't keep going with something unnecessarily because it's only a fortnight til the next holiday.

In your modular system, do parents have to take their kids out for the whole of a module (in which case, how does that solve anything?) or is it that they can take holidays whenever they fancy? In which case teaching in a joined-up way would be near impossible?

No I agree tiggy, I don't think it is for teachers to change, sorry if it came across that way. I just think they need to be open to change and clearly many are. But it's the whole system that's not working. I think flexibility from employers is a big factor - the term time only contracts mentioned above for example. I know quite a few people who are highly qualified professionals but have chosen to work in school admin or retrain as TAs. Some maybe because they want to, but many I think purely because the hours mean they can be around for their children. If there were more jobs offering this sort of balance it could only be a good thing.

'childcare is a genuine issue but it doesn't follow that it is up to teachers to solve it. '

But, why not, if it is easily soluble by changing the school year which would also bring with it other economic, social and academic advantages?

The objections ultimately end up being purely selfish - along the lines of I like my holidays/my kids like their holidays but it is taxpayers who are funding those nice long holidays when there may be no advantages and may be many disadvantages of those holidays to them. The system needs to be more equitable and more suitable for the economy and society as it is now. Our education system also needs to improve, most importantly, for the kids themselves.

In theory teachers appear to get a lot of 'perks' (long holidays and short working day being the most obvious

A short working day? What a load of absolute bollocks!

There is little point debating with you Five given that you refuse to accept any POV that disagrees with yours.

Well, that's the way it works in most secondaries Evil but the unit ends are dictated arbitrarily by the agrarian calendar (harvest) or Christian calendar (where Easter falls).

Is it really so strange to suggest that the school year should instead be structured around what make sense for the kids, their parents and society and the economy as a whole????

Not quite sure what makes you think I don't get that Suffolk. I am arguing that govt policy needs to change - not quite sure how you missed that.