Schools should 'provide sleepovers' to help parents with cost of childcare

[Itchyandscratchy]

Here

Speechless.

rabbitstew - sorry for not picking up on the sarcasm. I think there will be a certain amount of symbolic capital involved in "working" rather than "caring" though - a kind of psychological/ideological push to further get people out there working away in a model worker kind of way. so, since I think that myself, I overlooked your (very justifiable) sarcasm.

There never has been credible suggestion that school staff are involved
Only teachers on here protesting they don't want an extended day
Given teachers are not staffing existing after school why would they be involved in new scheme

Even in a recession people still require payment for work.

Schools already do operate extended hours and their facilities are already used for holiday clubs.

It all costs money.

Recent Newsnight feature on state boarding schools

Of course work is paid,you're the only one suggesting unpaid workers
The scheme runs if adequate demand,and is run dpor profit
As existing after school is.all paid child care is for profit,why would this differ?

Oh, yes, the catfromjapan - there is a colossal ideological push to make people think that caring is not working unless done on an industrial, paid-for scale for profit. Heaven forbid anyone should do it just for love -unless you are actually only fit for menial work, unpaid work done through a sense of love, duty or commitment is a waste of a good economic resource and makes the giver of the unpaid work weak, vulnerable, exploitable and foolish.

Can you accept people can get approbation,satisfaction outside home
Paid work is good for economy it contributes to tax,ni govt should support those wish to work
It's wholly legitimate to have paid external folk provide childcare if that's what required

I'm not suggesting unpaid workers. My point is that none of the suggested changes make childcare more accessible, because fundamentally it is expensive to get somebody else to look after your children, unless they are providing substandard care.

No,that's your opinion not reality of majority of childcare
Applying your logic cm can't be good as its cheap
Is good only expensive nannies?

But I see no reason why any of this should be the responsibility of the head teacher and their staff to organise, or why their hours or responsibilities should change - they would just become another organisation that uses the premises (with the first priority).

Isn't that already happening? I remember someone talking about one of the local schools, which is a PFI. The school is just a user of the building. They get 'kicked out' at a certain time so that the next user (evening classes) can get their use.

My DS2 is 4 and is in a nursery attached to a school. We are in Wales where 3 years get half a day in nursery every day. Our school offers a "stay and play" option on a flexible, sessional basis costing £3 an hour.

It is brilliant - so flexible as if does not need to be booked in advance. This is the kind of thing schools should offer IMO. My DS2 stays and plays in a lovely little nursery in a caring environment.

I suppose I could choose not to work but as a single parent I get slagged off enough as it is by the Daily Mail.

No, it means that as childcare is seen as 'women's work' many childcare workers including childminders are underpaid.

By substandard care I mean increasing ratios.

So we encourage our daughters to work in a range of career not solely so called women work

rabitstew

First school I went to was a private school where punishment was still allowed (not in the UK). Cane, etc. still in existence. You got a few slaps on your hands for not having a clean handkerchief / socks in the morning!!! We had trouble-makers, too, but they were pretty subdued, given what the outcome would have been.

I'm confident children can learn the recorder / flute / violin - not as expensive as a piano.

Also, not everyone has to go to the wraparound care. If parents want to use it, then their DCs better be well-behaved. Otherwise, they should just be able to "reject" them...

Horrid idea :( School days are long enough. Imagine being with a bully or disruptive child for 24 hours without a break. School is not childcare ffs.

purits - it may happen in some schools (especially PFI where the buildings aren't state-owned), but I think that facilities management (caretakers, maintenance, providing someone to open the school for out of hours events, set up non-school events etc.) is still the responsibility of the HT and governors in most primary schools.

A bully will bully in any setting inc classroom,not solely at after school
The article doesn't suggest 24hr provision.at all
Occasional sleepover in limited amount schoo, isn't 24hour care

School isn't being asked to provide childcare.the site will be used by external provider
There is no suggestion this is school,or that school staff are engaged in this role

Or we choose to pay the people who look after our children properly, whether they are male of female.

Actually, according to the article, providing inexpensive childcare does seem to be the responsibility of the school. Parents are supposed to trust the childcare because it is happening in the school according to Truss. Even if they get somebody else to do the work, it seems that the head is expected to provide his/her stamp of approval.

Not sure if its really been thought through.

We encourage our children into wide range career,and stop seeing job by gender eg womens work
No job is naturally women's work,isn't useful to jobs conceive as such
Not so long ago firefighter wasn't considered suitable work for women

Well actually I am sure it hasn't been thought through.

As goes on now,ht has role in approving after school quality,if it is lacking ht can intervene

But why should the HT have a role to approve the quality of the after school care? Surely that would be OFSTEDs role?

Yes it's ousted,but if a ht (or any staff) were to have concern/comment I'd expect they flag it up