Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What working parents need SHOULD come before families with SAHP. Those families literally have the flexibility to make any plan work. Two working parents families have less flexibility and there’s more of them. Sorry nobody cares what is more fun for SAHPs...

Who forced them to reproduce with no condoms?

It’s difficult to reproduce with condoms.

Anonymous wrote:No one is mentioning here the stress that kids have already been under and for that matter the teachers have been under due to the stress of learning only online and being on screens all day for the kids, and the teachers also have been under a lot of stress in this environment. I don’t think as a parent that it would serve to reduce stress levels to switch to a year round model and take away from our kids’ or their teachers’ usual summer break.

During summer break, most kids are in some kind of program outside their homes. Many teachers work at those programs. I don't think that's less stressful. The choice is not between school and relaxation, for most people, it's between school and a school-like thing.

I'm a PP and I mentioned above that I can take non-consecutive two-week breaks. For me, I'd spend more time relaxing and traveling with my kid under a modified schedule. I recognize others don't even have that. But the smallest number of us are in a position to just take the summer off.

Anonymous wrote:What working parents need SHOULD come before families with SAHP. Those families literally have the flexibility to make any plan work. Two working parents families have less flexibility and there’s more of them. Sorry nobody cares what is more fun for SAHPs...

Who forced them to reproduce with no condoms?

What working parents need SHOULD come before families with SAHP. Those families literally have the flexibility to make any plan work. Two working parents families have less flexibility and there’s more of them. Sorry nobody cares what is more fun for SAHPs...

Anonymous wrote:It’s probably the working parents who want year round school. They want the childcare.

And that makes sense. Because today in 2021, in the DC metro area, more parents than ever work outside the home.
And it's not going to change and will likely continue to increase.
So pretend it's 1970 or move on and finally acknowledge stay at home parent is less the norm today

Anonymous wrote:No one is mentioning here the stress that kids have already been under and for that matter the teachers have been under due to the stress of learning only online and being on screens all day for the kids, and the teachers also have been under a lot of stress in this environment. I don’t think as a parent that it would serve to reduce stress levels to switch to a year round model and take away from our kids’ or their teachers’ usual summer break.

Actually across 14 pages this was discussed plenty.

No one is mentioning here the stress that kids have already been under and for that matter the teachers have been under due to the stress of learning only online and being on screens all day for the kids, and the teachers also have been under a lot of stress in this environment. I don’t think as a parent that it would serve to reduce stress levels to switch to a year round model and take away from our kids’ or their teachers’ usual summer break.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also would staff salaries change anyway, given that they'd be teaching the same number of weeks? It's just that their time off is more distributed throughout the year, so why would it cost more?

It wouldn’t! People hear year round and think it means more days. It doesn’t. It means the breaks are split up more evenly throughout the year to prevent slide and promote info retention better.

So funding is not an issue. The only thing stopping this from happening is political will.

Well that and parents who don’t actually want their kids in school when they would prefer to be at the pool and traveling

+1 As a parent I would not send our kids to year-round school. I like the nice block of summer time so that we can go away for extended vacations and trips. It would be ridiculous to try to deal with a bunch of 2-week breaks here and there.

I think a 5-6 week summer seems to still serve this purpose... Some places are nicer to visit in non-summer months.

I love the idea (or should I say, the fantasy, because it is never going to happen). I wonder if teachers would support it. Some teachers take full on second jobs during the summer, which would be harder to do in smaller breaks.

Most teachers in this thread said we would. It is truly the better schedule.

Yeah no, but keep lying to yourself. I abhor the idea and so do my colleagues. For every teacher I’ve come across supporting and wanting this foolishness I had no less than 10 despising the thought of losing the nice summer break.

It's not "foolishness" just because you don't like it. Plenty of countries with better educational outcomes AND higher QOL scores than the US have this system. You can say you prefer the current schedule, and there's nothing wrong with that preference, Im sure most teachers at least considered that when thinking about the profession in some way or another. But to try to call the system foolish or "bad" on it's merits makes you look like the fool

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also would staff salaries change anyway, given that they'd be teaching the same number of weeks? It's just that their time off is more distributed throughout the year, so why would it cost more?

It wouldn’t! People hear year round and think it means more days. It doesn’t. It means the breaks are split up more evenly throughout the year to prevent slide and promote info retention better.

So funding is not an issue. The only thing stopping this from happening is political will.

Well that and parents who don’t actually want their kids in school when they would prefer to be at the pool and traveling

+1 As a parent I would not send our kids to year-round school. I like the nice block of summer time so that we can go away for extended vacations and trips. It would be ridiculous to try to deal with a bunch of 2-week breaks here and there.

I think a 5-6 week summer seems to still serve this purpose... Some places are nicer to visit in non-summer months.

I love the idea (or should I say, the fantasy, because it is never going to happen). I wonder if teachers would support it. Some teachers take full on second jobs during the summer, which would be harder to do in smaller breaks.

Most teachers in this thread said we would. It is truly the better schedule.

Yeah no, but keep lying to yourself. I abhor the idea and so do my colleagues. For every teacher I’ve come across supporting and wanting this foolishness I had no less than 10 despising the thought of losing the nice summer break.

K

Yay

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also would staff salaries change anyway, given that they'd be teaching the same number of weeks? It's just that their time off is more distributed throughout the year, so why would it cost more?

It wouldn’t! People hear year round and think it means more days. It doesn’t. It means the breaks are split up more evenly throughout the year to prevent slide and promote info retention better.

So funding is not an issue. The only thing stopping this from happening is political will.

Well that and parents who don’t actually want their kids in school when they would prefer to be at the pool and traveling

+1 As a parent I would not send our kids to year-round school. I like the nice block of summer time so that we can go away for extended vacations and trips. It would be ridiculous to try to deal with a bunch of 2-week breaks here and there.

I think a 5-6 week summer seems to still serve this purpose... Some places are nicer to visit in non-summer months.

I love the idea (or should I say, the fantasy, because it is never going to happen). I wonder if teachers would support it. Some teachers take full on second jobs during the summer, which would be harder to do in smaller breaks.

Most teachers in this thread said we would. It is truly the better schedule.

Yeah no, but keep lying to yourself. I abhor the idea and so do my colleagues. For every teacher I’ve come across supporting and wanting this foolishness I had no less than 10 despising the thought of losing the nice summer break.

K

Anonymous wrote:The real obstacle to a modified schedule isn’t teachers or parents, who would largely support it. It’s lobbyists representing businesses and chambers of commerce from Ocean City Maryland, Virginia Beach, Williamsburg, etc. these groups have a lot of power and a lot of $$; kids who would benefit from a modified schedule have neither. Who do you think Northam wants to make happy?

This. Even getting school to start before Labor Day was an uphill battle.

The real obstacle to a modified schedule isn’t teachers or parents, who would largely support it. It’s lobbyists representing businesses and chambers of commerce from Ocean City Maryland, Virginia Beach, Williamsburg, etc. these groups have a lot of power and a lot of $$; kids who would benefit from a modified schedule have neither. Who do you think Northam wants to make happy?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also would staff salaries change anyway, given that they'd be teaching the same number of weeks? It's just that their time off is more distributed throughout the year, so why would it cost more?

It wouldn’t! People hear year round and think it means more days. It doesn’t. It means the breaks are split up more evenly throughout the year to prevent slide and promote info retention better.

So funding is not an issue. The only thing stopping this from happening is political will.

Well that and parents who don’t actually want their kids in school when they would prefer to be at the pool and traveling

+1 As a parent I would not send our kids to year-round school. I like the nice block of summer time so that we can go away for extended vacations and trips. It would be ridiculous to try to deal with a bunch of 2-week breaks here and there.

I think a 5-6 week summer seems to still serve this purpose... Some places are nicer to visit in non-summer months.

I love the idea (or should I say, the fantasy, because it is never going to happen). I wonder if teachers would support it. Some teachers take full on second jobs during the summer, which would be harder to do in smaller breaks.

Most teachers in this thread said we would. It is truly the better schedule.

Yeah no, but keep lying to yourself. I abhor the idea and so do my colleagues. For every teacher I’ve come across supporting and wanting this foolishness I had no less than 10 despising the thought of losing the nice summer break.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also would staff salaries change anyway, given that they'd be teaching the same number of weeks? It's just that their time off is more distributed throughout the year, so why would it cost more?

It wouldn’t! People hear year round and think it means more days. It doesn’t. It means the breaks are split up more evenly throughout the year to prevent slide and promote info retention better.

So funding is not an issue. The only thing stopping this from happening is political will.

Well that and parents who don’t actually want their kids in school when they would prefer to be at the pool and traveling

+1 As a parent I would not send our kids to year-round school. I like the nice block of summer time so that we can go away for extended vacations and trips. It would be ridiculous to try to deal with a bunch of 2-week breaks here and there.

I think a 5-6 week summer seems to still serve this purpose... Some places are nicer to visit in non-summer months.

I love the idea (or should I say, the fantasy, because it is never going to happen). I wonder if teachers would support it. Some teachers take full on second jobs during the summer, which would be harder to do in smaller breaks.

Most teachers in this thread said we would. It is truly the better schedule.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also would staff salaries change anyway, given that they'd be teaching the same number of weeks? It's just that their time off is more distributed throughout the year, so why would it cost more?

It wouldn’t! People hear year round and think it means more days. It doesn’t. It means the breaks are split up more evenly throughout the year to prevent slide and promote info retention better.

So funding is not an issue. The only thing stopping this from happening is political will.

Well that and parents who don’t actually want their kids in school when they would prefer to be at the pool and traveling

+1 As a parent I would not send our kids to year-round school. I like the nice block of summer time so that we can go away for extended vacations and trips. It would be ridiculous to try to deal with a bunch of 2-week breaks here and there.

I think a 5-6 week summer seems to still serve this purpose... Some places are nicer to visit in non-summer months.

I love the idea (or should I say, the fantasy, because it is never going to happen). I wonder if teachers would support it. Some teachers take full on second jobs during the summer, which would be harder to do in smaller breaks.