Sending kids to school until 6pm - how does this "help families"?

[gretagrape]

To me, it feels as though they are looking at this in totally the wrong way. The idea is that children will attend school until 6pm to help working parents. Why don't they look at it the other way around, eg, create an economy where it is normal for people (not just parents) to work flexible hours and to get part-time SKILLED jobs that pay a decent hourly rate, so children don't have to be holed up in school for longer than most office workers.
I'm so depressed at this government's lack of lateral thinking.

You just don't stop, do you, ggh. Fine, I'll just go out and buy a diamond-encrusted i-Pad and a Ferrari, because clearly that is the only reason I'm working.

Morning! What are you doing here? Shouldn't you be paying my taxes while I waste my life wiping bums?

Why has this turned into a sah Vs woh argument? I'm a sahm but have not suggested anything of the sort re working to fund an extravagant lifestyle. From what I can read on this thread that has only been mentioned by one or two dilusional posters who seem to have outgoings of £100 a month! So there's no need to suggest that those of us at home are draining the benefits system! We neither claim nor receive anything and have simply made different choices based on our circumstances namely DH's job taking him out the country so frequently.

Oh and flatpacked, I disagree. I don't want my children on a learning journey akin to Korean or Chinese kids. I opted for independent school for mine solely to avoid the crazy sats scoring, high achieving, academically pushy state school on my doorstep.

Hmnm well I am trying to write an essay on Virginia Woolf, psychoanalytic theory and modernism. And then this weekend I will do 2x early shifts in the call centre followed by 3x nightshifts.

Personally I think Mr Gove could do with a day in the classroom. ....working 9 -6 (more like 8-6).

I'll help him research this idea by lending him DS for the day. DS is autistic.....and struggles to cope with 8.45 to 3pm.

Add another two hours and he would not cope. More importantly neither would Mr Gove.

Good to see flatpack here slagging off state school children and the state school system. Am assuming she is a teacher in a private school.

I get benefits.....anyone want to "have a go" aat me for daring to exist.

I couldn't give a flying fuck what other parents do. Work or stay at home.....you make the decision based upon your circumstances, As I had to.

I don't want my child in school for that length of time. He will get nothing from it and will struggle as a result.

By all means offer childcare (appropriate for his needs) and I could go back to work, do not sit him in a classroom though.

Flat pack - on the contrary. State school
Kids are more stressed than they've ever been due to the endless tyranny of sats, testing, more testing, of average not bring average any more

That's why I sent mine private to avoid it

This should be about the needs of children not sham/pt/ft working mums. I've been all of them

My children would be hugely disadvantaged if this was compulsory & my small business (after school drama classes) would go bust.

Anyone who gets tax credits and childcare vouchers is receiving a 'benefit'. I do wish people would stop being so bloody pious. And people receiving state benefits also pay tax. And people that look after several children every day are working whichever way you look at it.

The reality of finding affordable housing near available work is what is forcing people away from their very young children against their will. By getting tied to an IO mortgage as it's cheaper than rent, people are trapped because if they want to take time out they would have to sell their homes.

But that's off topic of course. 9-6 is fine if parents and children are happy and benefit from it. But I feel it may be being used as a way to force SAH parents into (usually low paid) work.

The reason why this turned the way it did was because those people who don't want to use the optional wrap around care proposed, will insist that no one else should!

They will insist that working parents are damaging their DC and prioritising ipads over their families. It's even been suggested that it's preferable to be on benefits.

This kind of unintelligent extremism really ought to be challenged.

horseto I don't think anyone is proposing to force you to work. Heaven forfend. There won't be a knock at the door at midnight from the employment-police.

However, there may be a withdrawal of benefits.

Then the choice is yours. Cut your cloth accordingly or work.

horsetowater., we do not receive any kind of tax credits, childcare vouchers or child benefit. Not sure how that's being pious as I was responding to the accusation that sah means living off benefits. If I needed benefits, top ups or otherwise to sah then I'd go out to work. Unless if course I had a child with a disability. The benefits received by those parents need to be closer to a living wage than the disgrace they are at the moment.
Anyway, if its not compulsory and its of good quality then I'm not sure what the issue is. Well I am as the government are inevitably looking at it from an economic pov therefore it will not be well funded relaxing down time on offer but cheap, probably unqualified labour.

It's daft. I know my kids by 6pm are exhausted, and they get home at 3pm, do homework, relax, play and by the time they've had dinner around 5.30 all they want to do is chill out on the sofa/have bathtime, stories then bed!

What pray tell me will the 6pm kids do? Home by 7, dinner by 8, bed by 10? Exhausted? Downtime where? Will they experience more colds flu by being in school so long? Where is their home life going to be?

It just sounds sterile like a mini boarding school schedule, not how I'd want childhood for our kids anyhow

Worriedthistimearound

Oh and flatpacked, I disagree. I don't want my children on a learning journey akin to Korean or Chinese kids. I opted for independent school for mine solely to avoid the crazy sats scoring, high achieving, academically pushy state school on my doorstep.

This is what I love about Mumsnet. It's so totally unlike the real world. Real people living in the real world would be thrilled to have a decent state school in their area.

On Mumsnet it's all "Gooodnessss nooooo. Jocasta and Toby won't grow as people if they're forced in to an intellectual straitjacket. We want them to really express themselves. We're taking them to Thailand during the summer term so they can really experience life. Mwaa mwaa dahhling you're so right."

Yes, that's it! It's got to be pompous and ridiculous simply because it doesn't fit with your viewpoint.

It can't possibly be because I think we're exam and results obsessed in this country and I don't want my Y6 child spending half the year cramming for a pointless exam just so the school can prove to Ofsted that they're up to scratch. And I have been that very bright kid at the comp who along with the rest of my set were pressured into two languages or two sciences. No suggestion of balancing things out by maybe taking typing or textiles. Oh no, 11gcses and 4 Alevels and then off to uni to do a professional qualification without anyone stopping to ask what I wanted and whether it would make me happy. Well, I don't want that for my kids and I'm fortunate enough to have the choice so I choose the day to day experience and enjoyment of education for its own sake over obsession with exams every time.

I think it's about balance. I have a DD who is likely to be doing GCSEs in Yr10 because she is very academic and hard-working, but her school will allow her to do a couple of art subjects alongside the academic ones. It will be tough, it will stretch her and that is fine, but she will also have time to develop in other directions.

On the whole I think the UK school system isn't brilliant at stretching the brightest (not that my DD1 is, there are several children in her group brighter than she is). Alongside an obsession with data collection on everything, endless futile testing, a complete lack of good vocational education (because only academia is valued) and constant political interference, it's not a good mix.

Not that I have nothing against testing. DD has subject tests every half term for which she is expected to study hard. That is useful because it tells her teachers where her weaknesses are and where she can move forward. SATs for the sake of league tables are a waste of time though.

I am actually thrilled to have a good state school practically next door to us. I just don't want my DDs to spend 9 hours a day and 45 weeks a year there.

word I am a carer. I wish I could blimmin work. Every time do I get called away for another emergency.

There are too many mixed up issues here. I agree that the 'attachment police' will be horrified that children are away from their parents for 9 hours a day but I concluded (to myself) earlier that as long as children are happy and it suits the parents there's nothing wrong with it per se - unless of course it's used as a reason to withdraw benefits/tax allowances from people who do want to SAH with their under 5s at the moment.

But that's not going to happen as far as I can make out.

Anyway people don't stay at home with their children on benefits because they get something out of it financially. They will get far more out of it in the long term if they work and earn their own money, developing their career and increasing their income as they go along. They do it because they want to spend a few years with their children - and they sacrifice their potentially increased earnings for that. It's their choice and that should be OK. Perhaps it should be subsidised by the State on an indefinite basis but for a reasonable number of years it should be (and still is according to the governement) acceptable. These people do a lot more than stay at home and watch daytime TV.

If I had the opportunity to go back to work, even part time, I would probably be earning twice what my potential is now. That's slipped back almost to starting levels now.

Worriedthistimearound

It can't possibly be because I think we're exam and results obsessed in this country and I don't want my Y6 child spending half the year cramming for a pointless exam just so the school can prove to Ofsted that they're up to scratch. And I have been that very bright kid at the comp who along with the rest of my set were pressured into two languages or two sciences. No suggestion of balancing things out by maybe taking typing or textiles. Oh no, 11gcses and 4 Alevels and then off to uni to do a professional qualification without anyone stopping to ask what I wanted and whether it would make me happy. Well, I don't want that for my kids and I'm fortunate enough to have the choice so I choose the day to day experience and enjoyment of education for its own sake over obsession with exams every time.

Exactly my point. You have the luxury of being able to sit back and enjoy the fact that it doesn't matter. And you think that's normal. For 99% of the country, it isn't normal.

Let's hope they thank you when they're unemployable.

Nope. Still no idea what point you're making. What's not normal? That I pay? Well, no, I believe it's 7% nationally and around 12% where I live. That I don't appreciate that I'm lucky to have that choice? Of course I do and I expressed that clearly. Why would they be unemployable? I'm not expecting them to leave without qualifications because they're able kids and I believe that if they're happy and enjoying school and it's not being thrust down their throat then the rest will follow.

My kids are often at school that late or later so I personally wouldn't have an issue with it. I am intrigued that some posters have children home by 3pm-what school hours do they do. (This is interest not criticism). So many people claim are unable to get work because of the issue of childcare so surely this is an attempt at providing a solution. If kids were in school longer then they could do more of the arts, music and sports subjects that seem to have fallen away from the curriculum, so the day wouldn't be as pressured. I haven't trawled through all 12 but was surprised at the volume of people against this as a proposal.

Arts, music and PE are always bandied around as being good options to be covered during these fictional after school sessions. These sort of subjects not only require a lot of resources and risk assessments (carried out by qualified people in a usually onerous and time-consuming manner) but also need space. My primary has 24 classes. We have one hall, 2 small playgrounds and a small field. Not a lot of classes could do sport/drama at once. We have two trollies of musical instruments which would do a class or two at most each.

If you expect the teachers to run and plan music/drama/art within their own classrooms until 6pm, when would they do all the marking/planning/assessment/
displays/meetings/speaking to parents/setting up lessons that they normally do then?

If you don't want teachers to run them, but someone else, where will they take place? I can't mark/assess/do displays etc in my classroom if someone else is doing music/art etc in the same room! I also tidy the class when the children go home ready for the morning-I don't want some other adult doing activities in my room and getting everything out again!

I cannot see how this, 'oh, let them do art-it's fun!' plan would ever work in practice!

"On Mumsnet it's all "Gooodnessss nooooo. Jocasta and Toby won't grow as people if they're forced in to an intellectual straitjacket. We want them to really express themselves. We're taking them to Thailand during the summer term so they can really experience life. Mwaa mwaa dahhling you're so right."

Well, sometimes it is. Sometimes it's "Oh, Jocasta and Toby are so very bright you see, the state school just wasn't stretching them enough. They were both so desperate to read Catullus that we had no choice but to go private."

If private schools can do it... why can't state schools?

Private schools, at £15K + per pupil p.a. are able to provide all sorts of activities because they have the funds.

This imbecilic idea would never work for state schools, which only receive around £4K to £5K per pupil p.a.Where would the money come from to fund extra lessons? Sports and music coaches cost money; extra teaching time costs money; resources cost money; extra heating costs money. My school is entering next year with a £30K deficit, with no clue about how much to budget for next year's special needs provision, school meals (we have no kitchen); curriculum resources; and building maintenance.While we run at a deficit, no less than four local secondary academies are building multi-million pound music and sports blocks.

IMHO our whole state school system is a shambles caused by fag packet ideas being implemented with no regard to the consequences of the actions. This shambles, which will undoubtedly affect thousands of children, has been caused by Mr Gove and his whacky idiotic friends. Meanwhile, the teachers battle on, taking on additional responsibilities as social workers, OTs, and physiotherapists are culled and funding is cut to PRUs and ARPs.

The whole bloody thing stinks and I can't wait until summer when I'm getting out of it.

Rant over (for now).

Our private schools only do it because they have boarders.
It's a sodding nuisance for day pupils wanting to go to Guides, Rangers, dancing etc.

If they do sport clubs they still end up with prep to do after they have traveled home and they don't get fed a full evening meal meal.

Voluntary 6pm is one thing, having to stay to six unless you really put your foot down is quite another.

As for academies having extra money?

I wish that was true

ipad you are right.

The reasons why DC's prep school could offer tons of wrap around care was primarily because the teachers who worked there knew it was part of the job and were numerated accordingly. New teachers were expected to bring with them fresh ideas for after school clubs.

Also, there was cash to pay for anyone who needed to be brought in specifically for supervision/activities. And to pay the catering staff to stay/return for tea.