For people who say "school is not for childcare"...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can only even have this argument because technology allows for "distance learning". A few decades ago, schools would just have closed, and then they wouldn't have been providing education OR child care. Before now, the child care and education were inseparable because kids had to be in person to do it.

Right, and I think that's clouding the discussion. I have an incoming kindergartener who can't read. (We're working on it, he knows some sight words and is getting better at sounding them out, but he isn't a comfortable, fluent, independent reader.) I'm frankly quite skeptical that they ARE separable. I suspect the parents or whoever is doing the childcare will also be doing an equal amount of the education as the teacher, if not more. I suspect kids will not learn as much if they have working parents, which would indicate that education is not something you can deliver at arm's reach. These are just my suspicions. I'd like to be wrong.

Then teach your kid to read like the rest of us did. You still need to supplement at home.

I'm working on it, thanks. My point in mentioning that was that my kid can't even do the first step in DL on his own, which is read the schedule. This is going to take intensive parental involvement. Did you "supplement at home" by leaving your workplace, showing up at your kid's school, finding the right workbook, and turning to the right page for every lesson, every day? Supplementing at home is practicing sounding out words after school and work. This is not the same at all and you're being totally disingenuous.

+1 and rude. Your kid is completely a appropriate with the reading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really hate how the phrase degrades the valuable work of childcare providers, who are nearly all women.

When teachers union leaders say this, it comes across as incredibly out of touch and degrading. I don't understand why they do not see how awful they sound when they talk like this.

Agree. That’s another reason it’s cringey

Except teachers themselves are predominantly women and childcare providers are not expected to write legal documents, take data, conduct assessments, prepare children for state tests, etc.
If childcare providers want to become teachers, they are certainly free to work through school to make that happen. I was a nanny and I got my transitional license, went to school at night, and worked my way through my certification. The two jobs are not the same, and one of them requires a master's degree, while the other does not require any educational qualifications. That's reality.

Just stop.

I know. Lol. The 2nd to last sentence tipped it over the edge...

Why, because you think it's unkind to point out that some jobs require qualifications and degrees while others do not? Because it's true, and it isn't an opinion. Just like you can become a restaurant worker, a factory worker, or a bus driver without a diploma but you can't become a doctor, a nurse, a lawyer, an accountant, or many many other professions. If daycare providers decide they want the high salaries and prestige of teachers (sarcasm) then they should become teachers. The primary function of daycare is childcare, the primary function of school is education. That is the difference. It's not like daycare workers are primarily women and teachers are primarily men.
Lots of people who want to cry that school closures are a feminist crisis while conveniently ignoring the people who actually run our schools.

It's not true. let's start with one lie.. being a teacher does not require a master's degree.

Please don't tell me what's preferred or competitive. You can also get a degree in knitting and become a teacher through teach for America- placed in a school.

People come on this board and just say whatever.

Teachers ARE required to hold a master's degree or be working toward one (a transitional license expires after three years) in many states, including mine. Not sure where you get your information. A bachelor's degree is not sufficient. Teach for America places people in high need areas WHILE they receive a master's degree in education. You seem to think that just anyone can teach, and you are wrong. There are a ton of licensing requirements, from subject area tests to the edTPA or Praxis (depending on your state). You need supervisory hours under a mentor. You are observed and rated throughout the year on 22 components (you can google the Danielson rubric if you want to) and your student's test scores are factored into your year long rating.
You clearly have no idea.

More than half the country does not require masters degrees. Just look at the openings.
Hell many places only require ANY degree to be a sub, they are in such shortage. I say pull every new grad you can as they are ready/willling to work and give them the jobs these other teachers don't want. And not just for a year.
WHy we are holding jobs for teachers wanting to take a year off I don't know. That is crazy. They are not producing research papers like college Profs do, why would we save their jobs??? When so many grads want them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really hate how the phrase degrades the valuable work of childcare providers, who are nearly all women.

When teachers union leaders say this, it comes across as incredibly out of touch and degrading. I don't understand why they do not see how awful they sound when they talk like this.

Agree. That’s another reason it’s cringey

Except teachers themselves are predominantly women and childcare providers are not expected to write legal documents, take data, conduct assessments, prepare children for state tests, etc.
If childcare providers want to become teachers, they are certainly free to work through school to make that happen. I was a nanny and I got my transitional license, went to school at night, and worked my way through my certification. The two jobs are not the same, and one of them requires a master's degree, while the other does not require any educational qualifications. That's reality.

Just stop.

I know. Lol. The 2nd to last sentence tipped it over the edge...

Why, because you think it's unkind to point out that some jobs require qualifications and degrees while others do not? Because it's true, and it isn't an opinion. Just like you can become a restaurant worker, a factory worker, or a bus driver without a diploma but you can't become a doctor, a nurse, a lawyer, an accountant, or many many other professions. If daycare providers decide they want the high salaries and prestige of teachers (sarcasm) then they should become teachers. The primary function of daycare is childcare, the primary function of school is education. That is the difference. It's not like daycare workers are primarily women and teachers are primarily men.
Lots of people who want to cry that school closures are a feminist crisis while conveniently ignoring the people who actually run our schools.

You keep demonstrating the point by being insulting and degrading. You should really think about how you come across.

Such condescending snobbery. Such weirdly fragile egos. I really don't get it to be honest.

[Anonymous]

I think they don't care what you do for childcare.

Once again, it's the US government and individual American citizens passing the buck and saying you are on your own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So this whole debate is basically about the fragile ego of some teachers? Then get over yourselves, most if not all jobs have a less glamorous side! Society is not going to set up a massively wasteful parallel child care system just to coddle you.

Yes. Unfortunately.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So this whole debate is basically about the fragile ego of some teachers? Then get over yourselves, most if not all jobs have a less glamorous side! Society is not going to set up a massively wasteful parallel child care system just to coddle you.

Yes. Unfortunately.

Great. Go set that up. Until then, teachers can -- and have -- refused to work in person. Some quit, and some relied on union support, but here are many, many teachers who are not available to supervise your kids in person, and that's the breaks. So, go change it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So this whole debate is basically about the fragile ego of some teachers? Then get over yourselves, most if not all jobs have a less glamorous side! Society is not going to set up a massively wasteful parallel child care system just to coddle you.

Yes. Unfortunately.

Great. Go set that up. Until then, teachers can -- and have -- refused to work in person. Some quit, and some relied on union support, but here are many, many teachers who are not available to supervise your kids in person, and that's the breaks. So, go change it.

I don't need childcare for my kids. And I don't think kids should be back in person yet. But I think saying "school isn't childcare" is pretty awful and at best out of touch, at worst racist and classist.

You can keep saying it if you want, but understand that for many people who might otherwise support teachers, it is very, very off-putting.

[Anonymous]

Schools don't provide lunch because they're not restaurants...oh wait...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really hate how the phrase degrades the valuable work of childcare providers, who are nearly all women.

When teachers union leaders say this, it comes across as incredibly out of touch and degrading. I don't understand why they do not see how awful they sound when they talk like this.

Agree. That’s another reason it’s cringey

Except teachers themselves are predominantly women and childcare providers are not expected to write legal documents, take data, conduct assessments, prepare children for state tests, etc.
If childcare providers want to become teachers, they are certainly free to work through school to make that happen. I was a nanny and I got my transitional license, went to school at night, and worked my way through my certification. The two jobs are not the same, and one of them requires a master's degree, while the other does not require any educational qualifications. That's reality.

Just stop.

I know. Lol. The 2nd to last sentence tipped it over the edge...

Why, because you think it's unkind to point out that some jobs require qualifications and degrees while others do not? Because it's true, and it isn't an opinion. Just like you can become a restaurant worker, a factory worker, or a bus driver without a diploma but you can't become a doctor, a nurse, a lawyer, an accountant, or many many other professions. If daycare providers decide they want the high salaries and prestige of teachers (sarcasm) then they should become teachers. The primary function of daycare is childcare, the primary function of school is education. That is the difference. It's not like daycare workers are primarily women and teachers are primarily men.
Lots of people who want to cry that school closures are a feminist crisis while conveniently ignoring the people who actually run our schools.

It's not true. let's start with one lie.. being a teacher does not require a master's degree.

Please don't tell me what's preferred or competitive. You can also get a degree in knitting and become a teacher through teach for America- placed in a school.

People come on this board and just say whatever.

Teachers ARE required to hold a master's degree or be working toward one (a transitional license expires after three years) in many states, including mine. Not sure where you get your information. A bachelor's degree is not sufficient. Teach for America places people in high need areas WHILE they receive a master's degree in education. You seem to think that just anyone can teach, and you are wrong. There are a ton of licensing requirements, from subject area tests to the edTPA or Praxis (depending on your state). You need supervisory hours under a mentor. You are observed and rated throughout the year on 22 components (you can google the Danielson rubric if you want to) and your student's test scores are factored into your year long rating.
You clearly have no idea.

More than half the country does not require masters degrees. Just look at the openings.
Hell many places only require ANY degree to be a sub, they are in such shortage. I say pull every new grad you can as they are ready/willling to work and give them the jobs these other teachers don't want. And not just for a year.
WHy we are holding jobs for teachers wanting to take a year off I don't know. That is crazy. They are not producing research papers like college Profs do, why would we save their jobs??? When so many grads want them?

I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. There is a teaching shortage because there are not enough new grads willing to replace older teachers as they retire, or because of attrition. People burn out and leave the field because teaching is a black hole where you give and give and it's never enough. Common sense dictates that we need to seriously look at the job conditions, expectations, and compensation when trying to determine why there's a shortage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really hate how the phrase degrades the valuable work of childcare providers, who are nearly all women.

When teachers union leaders say this, it comes across as incredibly out of touch and degrading. I don't understand why they do not see how awful they sound when they talk like this.

Agree. That’s another reason it’s cringey

Except teachers themselves are predominantly women and childcare providers are not expected to write legal documents, take data, conduct assessments, prepare children for state tests, etc.
If childcare providers want to become teachers, they are certainly free to work through school to make that happen. I was a nanny and I got my transitional license, went to school at night, and worked my way through my certification. The two jobs are not the same, and one of them requires a master's degree, while the other does not require any educational qualifications. That's reality.

Just stop.

I know. Lol. The 2nd to last sentence tipped it over the edge...

Why, because you think it's unkind to point out that some jobs require qualifications and degrees while others do not? Because it's true, and it isn't an opinion. Just like you can become a restaurant worker, a factory worker, or a bus driver without a diploma but you can't become a doctor, a nurse, a lawyer, an accountant, or many many other professions. If daycare providers decide they want the high salaries and prestige of teachers (sarcasm) then they should become teachers. The primary function of daycare is childcare, the primary function of school is education. That is the difference. It's not like daycare workers are primarily women and teachers are primarily men.
Lots of people who want to cry that school closures are a feminist crisis while conveniently ignoring the people who actually run our schools.

It's not true. let's start with one lie.. being a teacher does not require a master's degree.

Please don't tell me what's preferred or competitive. You can also get a degree in knitting and become a teacher through teach for America- placed in a school.

People come on this board and just say whatever.

Teachers ARE required to hold a master's degree or be working toward one (a transitional license expires after three years) in many states, including mine. Not sure where you get your information. A bachelor's degree is not sufficient. Teach for America places people in high need areas WHILE they receive a master's degree in education. You seem to think that just anyone can teach, and you are wrong. There are a ton of licensing requirements, from subject area tests to the edTPA or Praxis (depending on your state). You need supervisory hours under a mentor. You are observed and rated throughout the year on 22 components (you can google the Danielson rubric if you want to) and your student's test scores are factored into your year long rating.
You clearly have no idea.

More than half the country does not require masters degrees. Just look at the openings.
Hell many places only require ANY degree to be a sub, they are in such shortage. I say pull every new grad you can as they are ready/willling to work and give them the jobs these other teachers don't want. And not just for a year.
WHy we are holding jobs for teachers wanting to take a year off I don't know. That is crazy. They are not producing research papers like college Profs do, why would we save their jobs??? When so many grads want them?

I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. There is a teaching shortage because there are not enough new grads willing to replace older teachers as they retire, or because of attrition. People burn out and leave the field because teaching is a black hole where you give and give and it's never enough. Common sense dictates that we need to seriously look at the job conditions, expectations, and compensation when trying to determine why there's a shortage.

I agree we should look at the licensing requirements. Einstein didn't need a teaching certificate to teach physics, but Becky needs one to teach addition and subtraction?

[Anonymous]

I think multi-generational families may be the answer to childcare. Or having neighbors (SAH) provide childcare in DL situations. My DH thinks that robots are the answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think multi-generational families may be the answer to childcare. Or having neighbors (SAH) provide childcare in DL situations. My DH thinks that robots are the answer.

A lot of those "answers" would only become financially feasible if we also gave families school vouchers. So let's also look into that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think multi-generational families may be the answer to childcare. Or having neighbors (SAH) provide childcare in DL situations. My DH thinks that robots are the answer.

That’s not really an option for most of us. It also assumes reliance on unpaid labor. Yes you can pay the SAH neighbor but how many really want to watch other people’s kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think multi-generational families may be the answer to childcare. Or having neighbors (SAH) provide childcare in DL situations. My DH thinks that robots are the answer.

What about multigenerational families with multiple siblings, who gets the grandparents? Or younger grandparents who are still working? And the many many DC area families who moved hundreds of miles from their hometowns to work here? I think this is a sad situation, SAHMs willing to take an extra kid could help a TON and so could max flexibility from workplaces, but i don't think any of these could really patch the gap. There's no one size fits all solution short of kicking women out of the workplace.

Maybe robots. Damn that's sad.

[Anonymous]

I just don't know why it's society's problem, or why it needs a government solution. You had the kids. Their care is your responsibility. "Parents" relying on others to raise their family needs to stop.