Are schools asking too much of parents these days?

[icantthinkofadifferenname]

I think back to my own childhood where my mum occasionally helped out as a spare pair of hands at a school trip and donated something for a raffle.

My kids' school seem to be asking more and more of parents to help out, or in some cases deliver, things that would historically have been the role of the teacher to do. I know times are tough and resources short but surely the answer is to recruit more teachers and argue that the budget needs to be increased for education instead of asking parents, many of whom will work, to step in for a cheap fix.

Parents offered to help in my DS school, thru were told that it wasn't necessary as they have enough staff to deal with it. Even on the class trip thru had staff to cover which I thought was great from the school point of view, but a lot of parents would have like£pd to have got Involved.
His teacher or TA also read with him at least 3 times a week on his own.

The school I work in however is struggling. They have 2 children that need 1:1 s but the children have not been through the assessment yet so no funding got it. The TA is now solely in charge of the child in the most need of 1:1. They are also understaffed at lunch times. It's a nightmare. I don't think they have parents in either to help but

Teachers are now so much more than teachers, so much has fallen under their umbrella, so actual teaching is alot harder.

What are schools asking of their parents ?

Parents need to do more parenting and stop expecting school to teach their children absolutely everything. Far too many children are unable to sit still, listen, do up their own coat, tie shoelaces, use cutlery and far too many children don't know how to behave in a school setting. We can't even begin to teach the basics because so much time is wasted picking up parental slack.

I kind of agree OP but then parental expectations have also changed. In my day, parents weren't listened to, the PTA didn't really exist in a meaningful way, and teachers had all the authority to do what they wanted in their classrooms - including abusing that authority if they wanted. The question is whether you really want to go back to those days.

I fear you just don't understand what being a primary school teacher is like these days. I am not one but I am office staff in one so I see for myself what the workload is. The pressure is horrendous for them, they barely have time to go the toilet or eat. They get into work around 7.30/7.45 and are there till 5.30 or later. That's nearly a ten hour day, with barely a break. Then they go home to try to eat or see their own children, and then get back on their computer for prep the next day.

Breaktimes are when they have to have the snatched phone call with a parent or outside agency, if they are not doing playground duty. Lunchtimes are the same except they might do dining hall duty. And then straight back to teaching for the afternoon. Meetings after school, with staff or parents, or trying to organise a school trip (for which there are now many many rules). It must be totally exhausting. I've sometimes looked after a class for 5 minutes during an emergency and that's mentally draining enough for me!

I've seen what the teachers do when they have PPA and I can assure you it's head down at a computer or at a desk trying to do paperwork/prep for curriculum and other projects/contact yet more parents and outside agencies/attend curriculum training courses/meet with the head or come to the office to order some resources or do photocopying.

It honestly is non-stop for them. If the teacher in your school is on a 4 day a week contract then surely you don't expect them to work on their unpaid day off? As for music and PE, do you mean they bring in specialist staff to do those lessons? How lovely for your children. Do you seriously think the teachers sit in the staff room having a gossip and filing their nails while those staff are there?

Look yes, they do ask too much of parents in this day and age when most families have 2 working parents. But that is because they still want to offer the children the "nice extras" that comes with primary school. If the playground equipment is old and needs replacing where exactly do you think that money comes from? It comes from fund raising. Would you prefer it if you just paid a monthly subs or something? (Genuine question, in my son's secondary school I do this rather than get involved in PTA stuff cos I don't have the time)

When my DC were at primary school in the late 90s,early 00s I mainly helped out with exchanging reading books,assisting on school trips and helping at the annual school fair.
I did get roped into actually teaching my DDs class when they were doing a topic related to my line of work.I was cornered by the class teacher who asked "oh Mrs Fair, maybe you could come in and give a short lesson on the topic" My head was thinking no,I don't fancy doing this ,but I heard my mouth saying "sure no problem".It actually worked out well,the class were very interested and asked questions at the end.

Like a few people have asked already, what are they asking you to do?

My children’s PTA expect quite a lot of parents in terms of fund raising, but I don’t know of schools asking parents to teach lessons or run after school clubs etc. In contrast, in the 90s, my mum listened to readers and helped with things like cutting out displays etc.

To the person saying that teachers have half a day per week for ‘training’ I think you mean PPA. Planning, preparing and assessment. It’s 10% of our timetable.

I agree with all that @CurlyhairedAssassin says. Also, it isn't an unqualified TA when a teacher does ppa time as this isn't permitted. Most of the time that will be an HLTA (Higher Level), who are qualified to teach at these times. Many HLTAs are trained teachers who can't commit their whole lives to the job and dont want the stress it involves.

This is going the increase, there isn't the budget. Think about energy bills & any teachers pay rises won't be coming out of additional funding

I started school in the 1950s. We were 48 to a class and one teacher no TA no parents helping. I think the big differences were that there were special schools for children who needed that expertise whereas now lots of those children are in mainstream and we were generally angels as we got beaten if we weren't.

Not sure it was ideal really, I honestly think I was clinically depressed as a 7 or 8 year old. I used to cry all the time, I just had overwhelming waves of sadness, it started as a reaction to the corporal punishment and being shouted at but in the end it just happened whenever. I think it is something that has affected my whole life if I am honest.

Ok I’m not having a go at teachers or headteachers trying to work within budgets. I think they do a bloody marvellous job just turning up and doing what they do.

I don’t want to say exactly what parents are being asked as it’s too outing but there is currently a teacher in place who carries out certain duties. That teacher is being seconded and parents are being asked to fill in for said teacher

Please don’t get me wrong, I am not criticising teachers, but the system and successive governments, who have failed schools since the introduction of the National Curriculum. Education and teaching seems to be a no-win situation for all

This is a really good point. Schools are now expected to function like part of the social services (not to mention also fining parents for lateness as if they were police).

But I know what you mean OP, our school runs three different lessons every week (classes rotate) which can’t function without 3-4 parents assisting. The school expects, and gets, this time for free. The same few SAHMs have to do it all the time as otherwise the leasons will be cancelled.

I think some parents ask too much of schools nowadays e.g. how to use cutlery and tie shoelaces.

Schools are expected to plug so many gaps in society with little time and adequate funding to do everything justice. This includes things like the Prevent counter terrorism programme, looking for signs of domestic abuse in parents as they collect at the class door, mental health coaching and the list goes on. All of these areas are important but there is so much responsibility and pressure to get this right and often you’re just shown a PowerPoint as training and told to get on with it as a teacher. The PP who is office staff on this thread and described a teacher’s day in their school has got it spot on.

If you’re not able-willing to say then nobody can really comment on your situation which sounds like it could be wildly different to other schools.

The main difference is that there were no curriculum expectations and no accountability so, to be honest, it really didn't matter how those children in the class did. The teacher could teach whatever he/she wanted, in whatever way. If children didn't understand and didn't progress, so what? Progress wasn't measured anyway.

The system now is completely different.

The 11 plus was the judgement. In my class of 48 inner city mainly first generation British kids 23 of us went to grammar school. Believe me there were expectations.

If it's too outing then it sounds like you think it's not happening in other schools and so then it's an issue you have with your school not schools in general. Otherwise, not outing.

It may well be that the teacher was covering something that should have always been an extra role by simple good will volunteering.

No. All full-time teachers now are allocated half a day per week out of the classroom for PPA time, this half day is often covered by a higher level teaching assistant. In many schools HLTA's are left teaching the class for hours at a time to free up the teacher for other tasks. Early career teachers officially get 1 full day per week out of the classroom as PPA. That is not part-time working that is the standard work pattern. When mine were primary age there were often times their full time teacher only did 3.5 - 4 days actually teaching the class in person, and 1- 1.5 days on PPA, taking a small group out, marking, on external training, observing a lesson given by another teacher etc.

Not in the same way. Firstly, the amount of content and knowledge taught to primary aged children is greater now, included what they are expected to do with it. Secondly, for all those who didn't 'pass' the 11+, the teachers weren't accountable: the kids were just labelled as "too thick" and left behind.

The 1950s and 60s were far from a golden age in education.

Yeah they do ask a lot.

But I just avoid, refuse and decline. That way I don't have to worry 🤣 and I also don't care if all the kids miss a school trip because there aren't enough volunteers, they'll survive, don't try and sad face me from behind the reception desk. 🤷🏻‍♀️

I'm not sure how you know what we were taught. As I said poor innercity area, most of us first generation born here (Catholic school and majority of parents were Irish, Polish and Italian but we did have some Spanish and Greek children) and to get virtually 50% into grammar school was pretty impressive whatever you think. It wasn't unusual for the reception teacher to be coping with children who knew no English, my best friend was Polish and by the time she was in year 6 she would spend some time helping when children in reception were distressed. I know our pass rate was higher than the private school that was staffed by nuns from the same convent, our nuns were a bit sinful and full of pride about that.

I have GC at primary school now and I know what they are doing. I'm not sure how good their maths/arithmetic would be compared to ours without metrication and calculators. We could cope with times tables for 12/14/16/20 as we needed it for calculations. English grammar was also very well taught and history well we did English and Irish history (as majority of us were from Irish families and several of the teachers were Irish.) Remember we didn't have any of the aids that schools can use now, no computers, not being able to watch history and geography programmes so that children now can access.

You are totally wrong about the kids who didn't pass the 11 plus, they almost all went to the local Catholic secondary mod which also had good O level and CSE results, I knew some went on to teaching/librarian/nursing/skilled jobs like mechanics.

I wonder how many equivalent schools would get similar results now?

I don't actually think beating education into kids is a good thing but the reality was strict discipline was the only way they could teach 48 kids. I think discipline at home was different as well, again for us in a Catholic school with families of 10plus children not unusual and the biggest family I knew was 23 kids, mothers also had to run a tight ship.

Not all schools were the same just like now so to decide what my school did is rather arrogant of you. You sound like you really want to put down education in the 50s and 60s but maybe there is something to learn from it, not a replica but some ideas. When I listen to Katharine Birbalsingh I think her philosophy (minus the beatings) is not that different to the nuns who taught me.

We know that what was taught then was less than the current National Curriculum for a few reasons. Several subjects taught now didn't exist then or were more than one subject that have since been combined into one. The curriculum of study is also broader: for example, children study a broad world history as well as British history. Copies of the 11+ from the 1950s are available and the difficulty of the exams is lower than the current difficulty of the Y6 SATs. The pass rates of the Y6 SATs are higher than the typical pass rates of the 1950 11+ exams.

I didn't say that your school's pass rate wasn't good. For the time, it was very good! But what I'm saying is that a higher pass rate would be expected now. If teachers weren't achieving a higher rate than that, they would be held accountable and possibly put on a capability plan as it would be seen as a flaw in their teaching.

That's also what I meant when I referred to those who didn't pass. I wasn't saying that they didn't go on to study but that them not passing the 11+ was seen very much as that's just how they are or that it was just beyond what they were capable of. Now, if a child was not to reach that level, it would be the fault of the teacher and school and actions would be taken to "address" that.

Discipline was different in those days and I would agree that behaviour was, in general, better. But that was also connected with the abusive beatings that took place to enforce that discipline.

I'm not asked by the school to do anything other than read with my children. Are others being asked much more?

Mine have long since left primary school but I remember the Cycling Proficiency scheme (Bikeability here in Scotland). When my eldest started it in P6, the teacher organised it in conjunction with an outdoor education teacher from the council. The OE teacher delivered it and they only required 2/3 parents to help out. The final proficiency test was done by someone from the police.

This was slowly whittled away so by the time my youngest was doing it, parents had to organise the whole thing from liaising with the teacher as it was always done during class time, to conducting the training and also conducting the test. The class teacher came along but everything else was done by the parents.
So the reality was parents/volunteers were being asked to do what had previously been a paid post i.e. outdoor education teacher and police.

Perhaps that's what the OP is getting at, that parents are being asked to step up to fill gaps that previously had been done by paid members of staff.

Don't forget there are more and more assessments than there were years ago and that takes time!