From "An Elementary School Tries a ‘Radical’ Idea: Staying Open 12 Hours a Day/A Brooklyn charter school is experimenting with a new way to help families by expanding the school day. Students can arrive at 7 a.m. and leave any time before 7 p.m. For free."
We're going to need to do things like this as the birth rate drops. We can't expect the parents of the world to do all the work and cover all the expense, while the childless enjoy living cheaply. We need people to choose parenthood, and just hoping to impose it on people who stumble into it as a side effect of sexual activity and abortion denial is not enough. Whether the days are short or long and whether we pretend or openly admit it, school is child care. Make it good.
Posts
61 comments:
Let's see how it works before we celebrate, though. I can see pitfalls to having a child in an environment that they absolutely abhor for 12 hours a day and no loving parent to go to until nightfall.
The time from 3 pm to 7 pm can be used for athletics, other activities and doing homework.
This a great idea!
The man can't support the family because women get promoted exclusively.
So admitting education is day care for working parents who are forced to work multiple jobs to make ends meet and leave kids in someone else's care.
The kids would be better off home alone.
We are actually looking at going the other direction. We want half day's and to give our kids more freedom to study and play on their own. We are setting up a small farm for them to maintain.
Sounds hideous. What’s next?
Parents will be turning their children over to the state? And then there will be some people designated as breeders?
No wonder people are leaving and more people are choosing to homeschool.
I suspect childless homeowners will start demanding their property taxes be reduced, arguing they shouldn't have to pay for town services they don't use.
It's always been a losing arguument, but if a sizable percentage stop having kids they might have enough clout to get special treatment---especially if "empty nesters" join them.
So, in the great liberalization of society and liberation of women, we have now determined that kids need to be effectively raised by the state. De-emphasize the family, de-emphasize motherhood and create a crisis for children that can only be solved by de-emphasizing the family even more. I don't think you will encourage the birth-rate by removing the burden of child rearing. How many people will say "I can keep my career and have children, too. and the great thing is, I don't even have to be invested in their lives." I think people will just do what the childless couples do now. "Why bother having the children at all, since I really didn't want to take care of them in the first place. Why waste the money on feeding and housing them and cramping my ability to take more trips to Mt Everest and watching eclipses." The having of children but not raising them shtick worked for the wealthy in decades past, but I surmise that the creation of children was for legacy purposes, and not for emotional ones. Take the emotional investment of the equation and you simply remove the reason for having kids in the first place. If you really want to fix the problem make motherhood and fatherhood great (again?)
Are the students being fed dinner? Just keep them overnight and call it an orphanage already.
I suspect childless homeowners will start demanding their property taxes be reduced, arguing they shouldn't have to pay for town services they don't use
-----
Towns will argue that homeowners benefit from higher property values due to school quality and other services.
Run away from public schools as fast as you can. If you love your children.
This won't do anything to encourage people to have children. The problem is that marriage and children are no longer seen as either an entrance into adulthood, nor as some important goal for a man. Instead, we now have a widespread singles culture that allows young adults to put off marriage and family for years.
“Blogger effinayright said...
I suspect childless homeowners will start demanding their property taxes be reduced, arguing they shouldn't have to pay for town services they don't use.”
Well this will be expected. My school taxes are already the majority of my property taxes.
And the results have been abysmal. They certainly are not getting their moneys worth. If they want to get their moneys worth they need vouchers.
Another thing we need to try is having parents decide that one of them will be the earner and the other will be the homemaker. Homemaker is a person who compiles the hardware and software required to create a home out of the various parts required- a dwelling and its contents, groceries, self sacrifice and gratification deferment, and love.
That is the way I grew up. The default homemaker was mom, the mother, the one from whose loins the offspring were sprung. It required her to give up her pursuit of a career as (sometimes) a doctor or lawyer or engineer, but usually the alternative was office work or nursing or teaching.
The earner, OTOH, sometimes was the doctor, lawyer, engineer, etc., but far more often was a factory worker, salesman, laborer, law enforcement, or farmer. The earners had, and have, essentially all of the really bad jobs (defining a really bad job as one that kills; even today, 92% of occupational deaths are men). As Larry Summers said, men tend to have longer tails and therefore have more of the really good jobs, and all of the really bad ones. Women were/are more clustered in the middle.
Women today have it so much worse, in the aggregate. A few get to have the elite jobs, which were once reserved for a small fraction of the men. Now, most of them have routine/boring/poorly paid jobs in addition to the vast majority of the homemaking duties, which they are not capable of doing as well as their mothers due to limitations of time and other resources. They are unhappy, their kids are unhappy, their husbands are unhappy. Nobody has time to sit back and enjoy life.
What re really need to try is what worked for generations. You can't have it all.
I was, admittedly, a non-urban kid, but I was mostly a latchkey kid from kindergarten until I graduated from high school. If we weren't in a class but outdoors, my friends and I would have loved for elementary school to continue from 3-7 p.m. We were unhappy when the bus home appeared since we were playing basketball, football, or baseball in the 20-30 minutes we waited outdoors for the bus to arrive. High school was different since the bus was waiting when the dismissal bell rang.
Maybe the kids could spend their days at school pasting labels on bottles of shoe polish.
12 hours seems crazy long. Assuming 9 hours sleep, why even bother having parents?
Horrible idea.
A dream for some parents, and a nightmare for children.
Begley,
I think you missed the part where it said this was an elementary school? At least I hope that's the explanation for your enthusiasm about this terrible idea.
And exactly what part of the day do you spend parenting?
*Twelve* hours?!
My neighbors recently had child #13, about the time our daughter had twins. A lot more children live inside the school district boundaries then ever before in history.
School district enrollment is down again this year. Mennonite, like our neighbors, and Amish don't send their children to public school.
And there are more home schoolers then ever.
And for now, anyway, our rural public schools are still engaged in teaching.
Perple who show up for the future will be the ones populating it. A few months back I read projections that upstate NY, PA, and west will be majority Amish/Mennonite up to the borders of Mormon majority stares and counties. The rest of the country a mishmash of different immigrants.
There is a third and growing group not under the radar. In fact, surveilled by the FBI and other 3 letter agencies as potential terrorists. Latin Mass Catholics. When I visit my son in FL with his wife and 5 children, the only families at Mass with fewer then 5 children simply haven't been together long enough to have that many.
There's at least one country now that recognizes a different way to approach population implosion. If you don't have children you're not going to get old age pensions, which are in reality paid for by the working young, not by investments made with the money you put in.
Keep women affordable, available, reusable, and taxable.
Everyone who has seen kids in Afterschool Care programs knows no kid wants to be there.
It's soul sucking.
And kids need to be at school by 7am? That's a huge problem.
Bad Idea, much like Gulag.
Besides, look what public school did to Howard!
Pity, but that's actionable!
It only works if the extra time is for sports, art, crafts, shop, home ec, games, field trips. No more extra fucking reading writing arithmetic.
What @ Rosalyn C. said...
What parents would actually want the State to have their children half the day? What parents would choose to have their kids raised by others with (probably) no accountability? What parents would choose to have little or no input into their children's rearing?
Some would. There have always been parents who, for whatever reasons, believe that a "Red Diaper" upbringing is for the best. Just as there are parents who willingly put their kids into clearly failing public schools (obviously not all public schools are failing).
Birches said...
“Everyone who has seen kids in Afterschool Care programs knows no kid wants to be there. It's soul sucking.”
In my urban / inner city school days, after school programs were called “jug” (ie, “detention”).
This would be great for Night Shift people.
I suppose the kids could start the morning by cleaning the school, and then end with art and sports. Everyone wins.
No more extra fucking? I never got extra fucking. Didn't even get basic fucking. I missed out.
Don't blame the public schools, Bumblefuck, I was born this way.
Except there's so little genuine "educating" going on in most public schools these days. Seems more like institutional baby-sitting, with a big dose of politically-correct group-think propaganda-indoctrination, and finally the usual recess (bullying), lunch (more bullying) and gym (yet more bullying) periods.
Suspect that elementary school-aged kids would not want to be subjected to 12 hours of "school", ever.
Yikes. What about a child's need for attention and care from a loving parent/grandparent/aunt/uncle?
I'm a liberal, but why must we constantly make it easier for both parents to be working full time, more than one job?
Shouldn't we be making it easier for working parents to work less by increasing paid parental leave for parents with babies, or increasing the child tax credit or the earned income tax credit, so our country can be creating happy children who feel loved?
Why not start Boarding School at age 6? The children can see their parents during the breaks in the school year. Unless that becomes to inconvenient for the parents.
The Cat's In The Cradle indeed.
“We're going to need to do things like this as the birth rate drops.”
There are over 300 million people in the country. We put men on the moon with half that. So of course we need more, so we can fulfill the dream of putting a woman of color on the moon in Biden’s second term. Thank God for illegal immigrants!
"It's always been a losing arguument, but if a sizable percentage stop having kids they might have enough clout to get special treatment---especially if "empty nesters" join them."
Not being forced to pay for a very expensive service you don't use is "special treatment"?
Porn, trans bullshit, and grooming for 12 hours.
Nice...
The school is not *requiring* a 12-hour day. It's making optional day care available before and after school. My county's public school system offers after-school day care too. My own elementary school had after-school day care, back in the 1970s. Not sure why everyone is so horrified to discover it. Not everyone can make their schedule conform to school hours.
I have a better idea: change the hours so one or both parents can work part time, so spouses are no longer exhausted at the end of the day and can have time for family.
Sounds like a living hell for the poor kids.
School homing. It is the opposite of home schooling. The children do home at school. This was already trending 15 years ago when I began to homeschool my daughter. It is merely an extension of free preschool, the purpose of which is to get the kids perceived as at risk for underperforming out of the home environment as early as possible to prevent bad role modeling by the parents (and create jobs for poor urban women). Since that didn't raise educational performance or close the white/black education gap, they want to keep the kids out of the home for as many hours per day as possible.
By the time the adverse effects on the kids (and parents) become clear, how many lives will have been ruined?
There's an element here that's sort of creepy. Hillary Clinton said it takes a village to raise a child. Well now the head man or head women in that village is going to be one, or a series of state workers--aka "teachers". I say series, because where are you going to find a school teacher willing to sign up for a 60 hour week?
But the element is one of state control During college--several decades ago, I worked two summers as a YMCA camp counselor in the Cuyamaca Mountains in San Diego County. Over the course of three months or so, we'd have a bit less than a dozen camp sessions. The kids would come up for an 8 or 9 day session, then go home and the new batch would arrive. The campers were housed in cabins with 8 or 9 kids and one camp counselor in each cabin. We of course would have the occasional problem child. I had one 8 year old camper who'd supposedly put his grandmother's head in the overn and turned the gas on.
But I was a new authority figure. And I came away convinced that no matter how unruly the child--give me 24 hours a day every day with that young boy, and at the end of 8 or 9 days he was civil enough to get along with his fellow campers. No guarantee of course whether that improved behavior would stick when he got home.
Then during the school years, I was counselor--one night a week--for a boys club in a local community center. The club usually about 15 or so kids from the 6th and 7th grades. There were some behavior problems and inability to get along with the other kids. I could work with that--but I had the boys for two and a half hours each week. And at the end of a club meeting they went right back to the environment they came from.
You give the state control of a child for 60 hours a week and he or she will become a child of the state. And I say that like that's a very bad thing.
I work in an elementary school. 4th Grade to 5th grade. I can tell you when arr8ve 15 minutes before my shift, and see children already there, and on my way out, these same children in the after care program, I feel bad. They are here linger than me
We've come full circle. America used to let kids work in coal mines 12 hours a day to support the ruling elite. Then, until we woke up and realized that was a moral crime.
Now, we're going to lock them in Lia Thomas elementary school for 12 hours a day; governed by some overweight, green-haired Nurse Rachet...so both parents who have to work, can support the ruling elite.
In both cases, kids don't have any time to just be a kid and enjoy the adventures of the one childhood life allows.
Makes you realize Huckleberry Finn had it pretty good...
"school is child care. Make it good."
Yeah, use only the sharpest scalpels and the most powerful drugs to take care of other people's kids.
But you are correct. That is the way hives operate.
The school will no doubt continue to assign massive homework to make up for the poor classroom management where even 10 years ago, only 10 minutes of the 50 minute class period was in actual instruction.
And just think what the teachers can do to the children when they have them for most of their waking hours. Your kid coming home from school with surgical gender changed will be the least of the problems.
"Colleges really are big pet cemeteries, aren't they?" said Kyle. "You send people there, and they come back wrong."
--'Danielle's Passion', Tired Moderate
"It sounds like a dream for some working parents: school for 12 hours a day, starting bright and early at 7 a.m. and ending after dinner, at 7 p.m...." "... all completely free. One elementary school, Brooklyn Charter School, is experimenting with the idea as a way to tackle two problems at once. The first is a sharp decline in students in urban schools. Families are leaving city public schools around the country, including in New York City, which has led some districts to consider merging schools or even closing them. The second is the logistical nightmare many parents face as they try to juggle jobs and child care...."
That is one take. Another is: existing overly expensive [via taxes] "public" schools that already captures kids for 8+ hours a day while indoctrinating them in new-age crap all the while critically failing to teach basic reading, writing, and math (demonstrated by continually lower test scores), and worsening discipline issues NOW wants the little darlings for an additional 4 hours a day. Cause 8 hours is just not enough time to destroy them enough. Need to make sure they are separated from their parents enough not to give them time to undo all of these educator's hard work.
We are not going to have to anything. We will close empty schools.
We didn't trust the teachers when our children were only there for 7 hours. That was small rural schools where it was almost impossible for teacher and such to hide there vices and bad character.
Today we cant trust what the schools are indoctrinating our kids with. With an extra 5 hours of free time. (education hours will not be increased)
Other than the fact educators have an entirely different agenda than the parents, and with having the kids for an extra 5 hours. This a big NO.
Pretty soon they'll be having sleepovers...
Whether the days are short or long and whether we pretend or openly admit it, school is child care. Make it good.
If it’s run by members of a teacher’s union, you can safely assume that “good” is one thing it will not be.
Unlike at school, there will be a shift change for the adults working these jobs, as we recognize that much time in one facility is not healthy.
But sure, great idea for 6 year olds to have almost no time with their parents (in elementary school, my kids went to sleep around 8 and slept until 6)
Yes. Make it good.
The teachers union will demand time-and-a-half pay for anything over 8 hours per day, which will put an end to this rather quickly.
I don’t think this is simply a bad idea, I think it’s an evil idea, and I am immediately skeptical of the character and intentions of anyone who thinks it’s a good one.
- Rafe
From the post:
"We're going to need to do things like this as the birth rate drops. We can't expect the parents of the world to do all the work and cover all the expense, while the childless enjoy living cheaply. We need people to choose parenthood, and just hoping to impose it on people who stumble into it as a side effect of sexual activity and abortion denial is not enough. Whether the days are short or long and whether we pretend or openly admit it, school is child care. Make it good."
This is a State solution tho something that really is a surrender of freedom. That's what the statists have been pushing, one way or another, for years, but lately it's been amped up to 11.
Why should the childless be responsible for the work and expense of others' children? That sounds to me like "It takes a village." Give parents the freedom to make their family life work. One way would be to decrease the costs of running public schools, and another would be to make homeschooling, and private cooperatives, easier to do.
The article's claim that the new approach is completely free, is laughable. TANSTAAFL.
It isn't the birth rate decline that is emptying urban public schools. It is the schools themselves that are the reason for the loss of their paying customers. Nothing they do will keep students going to a place dedicated primarily to preservation of administrator salaries and the Teachers Union and teachers' salaries, in that order, followed by promotion of a long list of progressive leftist indoctrination programs, run by grifting and grafting the maximum dollars from the federal, state and local resources, and dedicated not at all to teaching students to read, to write, to do math, or know history, civics and science.
The public education model is broken beyond repair. To fix it, eliminate Union involvement, eliminate 90% of the administration overburden, require teacher certification through objective testing rather than diploma mills, and stabilize a simplified curriculum such that students progress only via high scores on real tests. Literacy and numercy first, followed by STEM, History, Civics, and not a lot else.
This is how you get more school shootings. Although most of the intelligent introverts will just commit suicide. The Atlantic has a new essay on George Orwell that suggests that the true message of 1984 is the horror of never being able to be alone: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2024/05/george-orwell-1984-isle-of-jura/677843/
Post a Comment