Kids going back to school, a non-parent observation

[s0me0nesmind1]

We're one working parent household with 2 kids. I wouldn't say it was a breeze but definitely not as difficult as some might think. We live comfortably, not pay check to pay check. We own the home we live in and take family vacations at least once a year. We don't splurge on cars but drive decent cars that we keep longer than most families (8-10 years). We cook most of our meals instead of eating out.

We still manage to save for retirement (both 401k & IRA) and build up a rainy day fund. We are also contributing to, with some help of their grandparents, 529 accounts for both of our kids.

Yeah and part of it is just what folks are comfortable with.

I'm looking to fast-track to retirement, so I need dual income to do it. On top of that, I gotta pay for my kid's college because god knows why our government will only give secured loans to people with low income. You might as well have an insurance plan that asks the question "Let's get the most riskiest people and only insure them"

 

[shortylickens]

American public-school parents are more apathetic than American voters. And there is tremendous overlap between those two groups.
Europeans look at us and laugh because they know we're gonna collapse probably during Trumps second term.

 

[Exterous]

Does the 1-working parent household exist anywhere in the world anymore?

I have an employee who does it now. Granted the income is above median wages but its not astronomical. It certainly won't work for every income level\geographic region but many more could do it if they weren't lured in by the siren call of consumerism.*

*Not to be taken as a commentary that the system is fine except for the people

And let's face facts - we are like... #3 or something like that in spending for public education, yet the outcomes are dog-shit for a large portion of the states. I guess that's capitalism for you as charter schools, homeschooling, etc... continue to rise. The point being: Our education system isn't a money problem.

More money collectively won't fix the problem and neither will charter schools or home schooling. The problem is more structural but its hard to fix so usually money is just thrown at it as an easiest sign of Doing Something. The funding model is all screwed up. Often the schools who need the money the least getting the most. Meanwhile we expect schools to fix parental issues. District\state education leadership and direction is often a political position and not a merit position. And we think if we just throw technology at a kid's face the problem will magically be fixed.

Since the beginning of this, I've claimed that teachers these days are glorified babysitters for maybe 60% of the day. There's no way they're actively teaching a subject throughout the entire 42 minutes per period. In fact I think it's basically only 10 minutes of teaching and the rest is read-this-and-see-if-you-can-do-the-worksheet. The teacher is there for any questions and to keep order - and even then it's tough with 20+ kids with 5+ who feed off each other being very disruptive. We're in a very good district and we still have our share of kids who get 70s and can't pay attention for shit.

If that is truly the case that the teacher is only spending 10min of instruction then your district is a dumpster fire and you should move. Plenty of methods involve actively teaching for the majority of the class time. For example look up immersion learning

 

[Red Squirrel]

It's a tough one. I personally think they should stick to home based school for now, but I totally get the issues with that too. For young kids who can't stay home alone then that's a huge issue for the parents, but it's also an issue for their mental health. Even introverted kids need some form of interaction with others especially at a younger age. I'm super introverted myself but I still enjoyed being with my friends and such as a kid and I can't imagine having to learn basically on my own. You kind of need that interaction with teacher and other kids.

But at same time, the risk is still huge with reopening the schools. What they want to do here is have like 15 kids max on a bus and do staggered entry, and then have different groups, so like Monday-Tusday it's group A, Wednesday they sanitize the whole school, then Thursday Friday it's group B. or something like that, I forget the specifics. That is going to b an insane amount of work for bus drivers, teachers, school staff etc... At that point I think that they really should just stick to having at least the first semester at home. Maybe the government can have a special program for kids that can't be home alone, such as forcing employers to allow parents to work from home and accommodate at home learning.

But I think we need to look at the even bigger picture, why are costs of living so damn high that you need to work full time just to keep up with bills? Back in the old days you only needed one parent to work and the mom could stay home with the kids, but now a family with kids needs to have both parents work just to keep up with all the costs of living. It's crazy when you think about it.

 

[local]

Does the 1-working parent household exist anywhere in the world anymore?

I mean even in the likes of Europe?

Yep, almost 7 years and counting. Three kids. Thankfully having the wife at home when everything shutdown made it quite easy. It also make our decision to keep the kids home this year easy as well. Although I don't know what is wrong with people putting their house over possible permanent brain damage in their children. If half or whatever giant percent of the working population quit over putting their kids first right now the gov wouldn't have a choice but to step in or watch the country collapse into an ash pile.

 

[ondma]

Does the 1-working parent household exist anywhere in the world anymore?

I mean even in the likes of Europe?

Did you ever hear of single parent households?

 

[BarkingGhostar]

I think what I was offering could apply at least to a portion of households. These would be the households already reduced to having a parent at home. Seriously, unless parents are right now leaving their kids unattended during the pandemic to work, the someone is watching them and that someone could use the at-home program. That is all I am saying. I see no reason why keeping kids at home and doing nothing is any better than sending them to school. One impede physical health, the other mental.

 

[dullard]

What I would like to know is, who has looked into the European schools that opened up earlier in the year? Were there any spikes, or issues from that? I know there are more schools that have opened recently around the world, so I am sure not much info yet on those.

The initial data is just now coming out. Unlike most other diseases, where kids are great incubators and spreaders, kids do not seem to catch and spread Covid as much as adults seem to catch and spread it.

German study shows low coronavirus infection rate in schools

Very few of 2,000 school children and teachers tested in the German state of Saxony showed antibodies to COVID-19, a study found on Monday, suggesting schools may not play as big a role in spreading the virus as some had feared.

www.reuters.com

Note: it is quite early on and more needs to be studied. Also Germany has a much lower level of Covid than the US does and Germany is regularly testing kids and teachers unlike the US.

 

[dullard]

Gotcha, so mind defining it for me? Is it basically just a single parent directly of the child teaching them?

There is no clear-cut iron-clad definition that all agree to. But, a common definition is more along the lines of this: a child's own parent knows the child best--the weaknesses, strengths, and interests. As soon as you pass the child on to other caregivers, some to all of individual customization is lost.

Evaluating School Choice: Homeschool vs. Private School - Brightmont Academy

Evaluating School Choice: Homeschool vs. Private School - Brightmont Academy

www.brightmontacademy.com

"Homeschool is designed to provide individualized attention to your student. In a traditional private school setting, a teacher needs to accommodate for several students in one classroom who have different abilities and interests."

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Since the beginning of this, I've claimed that teachers these days are glorified babysitters for maybe 60% of the day. There's no way they're actively teaching a subject throughout the entire 42 minutes per period. In fact I think it's basically only 10 minutes of teaching and the rest is read-this-and-see-if-you-can-do-the-worksheet. The teacher is there for any questions and to keep order - and even then it's tough with 20+ kids with 5+ who feed off each other being very disruptive. We're in a very good district and we still have our share of kids who get 70s and can't pay attention for shit.

Completely agree with this - but it will never get addressed because people keep putting teachers in ridiculous positions.

They aren't these amazing heros doing shit that no one else can do... It's just mostly babysitting and very little actual teaching. As much as I want to blame schools and teachers - I mostly will blame the parents. First, for not fucking teaching their kids right in the first place. The concept of "bulldozer parents" where they try to get out every obstacle in life for their kids is truly in full force. It's not your kids fault/problem, it's YOUR TEACHERS fault/problem.

Christ is it really that difficult to teach your kids to not be COMPLETE shitheads in school?

 

[dullard]

Completely agree with this - but it will never get addressed because people keep putting teachers in ridiculous positions.

They aren't these amazing heros doing shit that no one else can do... It's just mostly babysitting and very little actual teaching. As much as I want to blame schools and teachers - I mostly will blame the parents. First, for not fucking teaching their kids right in the first place. The concept of "bulldozer parents" where they try to get out every obstacle in life for their kids is truly in full force. It's not your kids fault/problem, it's YOUR TEACHERS fault/problem.

Christ is it really that difficult to teach your kids to not be COMPLETE shitheads in school?

Study after study shows that there is only a little difference in success based upon what type of school you go to. Success is almost entirely based upon how you are raised by your parents.

 

[Mai72]

Kids are all different even in the same age group, so to prove any broad statements would be tough. We know younger kids will have issues with attention span which is why you can't expect them to get much done at home (parental supervision, thus defeating the purpose). My kids are pretty good students who just finished 6th grade and I witnessed their laziness first hand. Slouching on the sofa or under the covers with their Chromebook only half paying attention. Watching instructional videos at 1.5x or 2x speed because it was long/boring. I ask them to sit at a desk and they do for a short while or maybe a day and it's back to the comfy areas. Now imagine kids who are not good students - their education will suffer, no doubt. There needs to be organization and structure for them. Even I would suggest that my kids need the traditional classroom. None of this finish all your work within 2 hours and video games for the rest of the day. That can't be their educational days going forward.

Since the beginning of this, I've claimed that teachers these days are glorified babysitters for maybe 60% of the day. There's no way they're actively teaching a subject throughout the entire 42 minutes per period. In fact I think it's basically only 10 minutes of teaching and the rest is read-this-and-see-if-you-can-do-the-worksheet. The teacher is there for any questions and to keep order - and even then it's tough with 20+ kids with 5+ who feed off each other being very disruptive. We're in a very good district and we still have our share of kids who get 70s and can't pay attention for shit.

My biggest gripe along the way (and I've mentioned it here before) is that we pay a stupid-high tax for our schools... we're up to $14k annually for schools alone (MOST of which is salaries avg. $120k/yr & benefits), plus $6k general taxes. Our home is maybe valued at $850k so we're paying $20k in property taxes. There's another house at $1.2mil a few blocks away as new construction and they have to pay $52k/yr in property taxes. It's ridiculous how much goes into the schools here - and yet, as I mentioned above, how much are the teachers actually doing for our kids? How much is even possible for a teacher to do? We can move to a mediocre district and still get the same level of education there if we go remote. No, I want the in-classroom attention for what we pay. And even if we aren't paying that amount, it is still the most effective for kids. The alternative, what we've seen in the last 3 months, is extremely ineffective as a whole.

Teachers today are held to much higher standards than read this book, complete this worksheet. First, they have observations. If they are being observed by the principle, or superintendent that teacher will get low marks if all they told their students was to read this book while not giving effective instruction. If it's a teacher without tenure he/she will be let go, or at least given a stern warning. And, that teacher will lose trust with their superior, and their coworkers. A teacher with tenure will have it easier, but even then they run the risk of getting put in very difficult classrooms because they are deemed ineffective. Teaching today is so much different than teaching was back in the day. Thirty years ago an educator could get away with handing out worksheets. Now, an effective educator has to differentiate instruction, teach to the curriculum, keep student attention while they make lessons interesting, become parent and psychologist all in their time at school. If teaching was so awesome why are teachers leaving the profession in droves? Burnout, low pay, and no respect are just a few reasons why they end up leaving. Also, most teachers don't make $120k. The average salary is more like $45k a year. It just depends on where they teach. Districts with nicer homes, and higher property taxes pay their teachers better than an educator who works in a low/moderate income area. Also, it can take decades for an educator to reach the top of the pay scale. My sister who is a computer programmer reached $130k in less than 5 years. To reach six figures as an educator it would take at least 20 plus years, if it's even possible. Most educators don't make six figures. It's why you see many become a superintendent, or principle.

I agree that high property taxes are an issue. I live in NJ. We have the highest property taxes in the nation. But, we all have choices. If you're going to buy a home in NJ you should know what you're getting yourself into. TBH, I'd think twice about moving here. Like California, people are moving out of the state in mass. It's an expensive state to live in. IMO, a single person who buys a home in NJ and has to school property tax is unfair. Again, we all make choices in life. People should move somewhere else if they can't stomach the high taxes.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Teachers today are held to much higher standards than read this book, complete this worksheet. First, they have observations. If they are being observed by the principle, or superintendent that teacher will get low marks if all they told their students was to read this book while not giving effective instruction. If it's a teacher without tenure he/she will be let go, or at least given a stern warning. And, that teacher will lose trust with their superior, and their coworkers. A teacher with tenure will have it easier, but even then they run the risk of getting put in very difficult classrooms because they are deemed ineffective. Teaching today is so much different than teaching was back in the day. Thirty years ago an educator could get away with handing out worksheets. Now, an effective educator has to differentiate instruction, teach to the curriculum, keep student attention while they make lessons interesting, become parent and psychologist all in their time at school. Finally, if teaching was so awesome why are teachers leaving the profession in droves. Burnout, low pay, and no respect are just a few reasons why they end up leaving. Also, most teachers don't make $120k. The average salary is more like $45k a year. It just depends on where they teach. Districts with nicer homes, and higher property taxes pay their teachers better than an educator who works in a low/moderate income area. Also, it can take decades for an educator to reach the top of the pay scale. My sister who is a computer programmer reached $130k in less than 5 years. To reach six figures as an educator it would take at least 20 plus years if it's even possible. Most educators don't make six figures. It's why you see many become superintendent, or principle.

I agree that high property taxes are an issue. I live in NJ. We have the highest property taxes in the nation. But, we all have choices. If you're going to buy a home in NJ you should know what you're getting yourself into. TBH, I'd think twice about moving here. Like California, people are moving out of the state in mass. It's an expensive state to live in. IMO, a single person who buys a home in NJ and has to school property tax is unfair. Again, we all make choices in life. People should move somewhere else if they can't stomach the high taxes.

It's not teachers being held in higher standards - it's just parents being douchebags and blaming their child's retardation on someone other than themselves. It's still the same shit of teaching the same boring subject.

Computer programmers gain additional skills constantly, they learn to code faster, better, and more accurate as they continue to climb the ranks and even learn additional languages. Eventually they get to the point of managing the other programmers and managing full-projects.

Teachers.... do the same thing over and over and over again. Quit putting teachers on pedestals like they are amazing, I'm really getting sick of that notion.

 

[ponyo]

Fulton County, GA, just announced it's going virtual only Aug. 17th for the new school year with no end date yet. So at least a semester. Likely the entire year. Fulton is the most populous county in metro Atlanta. I expect the rest of the metro Atlanta counties to follow Fulton in offering virtual only learning option for K-12.

 

[Kaido]

Moot, not "mute".

* moo

 

[Kaido]

• Parents might not know the subjects to be able to teach them.
• Parents might know the subject but might not know how to teach. I can't count the number of times I've worked with great experts that had no ability to describe what they are doing.
• Parents might not be alive, might not be together, or might not be around. It is really hard to be a single-parent teaching your kids for 8 hours while you are working 8 hours at the same time. A large number of parents are working two or three jobs to make ends meet. When can they possibly have the time to also school their children?
• Many places don't have internet access for remote learning.
• Parents might not be able to have a 3 month old, 2 year old, 4 year old all needing attention and still be able to give proper 8-hours of attention to the 8 year old student that is learning.
• Parents might not have the cash for technology, subject lessons, etc.
• Kids treat parents differently. All my nieces and nephews on both sides of the family have a 100% personality change the instant a parent is in the room.
• I could go on and on.

And I'm pretty sure the consensus from the loss of the end of the spring semester was that the sudden homeschooling was close to worthless. Yes, you can have kids at home with a few minutes per day Zooming their teacher, but that doesn't mean that they learned.

The Results Are In for Remote Learning: It Didn’t Work

The pandemic forced schools into a crash course in online education. Problems piled up, including lack of access to technology and trouble keeping students and teachers connected.

www.wsj.com

imo social interaction is one of the biggest benefits of going to a public (or private) school. Kids are social & being in a school with other kids for learning & play seems pretty important to the growing-up process.

Plus the financial aspect is really difficult. I have some friends who are single moms (and a single widowed dad) who are really struggling because their jobs can't be done remotely, but they don't have a local safety net available of family (ex. out of state) or friends (COVID restrictions, plus everyone else is working too). Many of us here on ATOT are in technical jobs that pay decent to well & also allow for remote work, but a lot of people don't have that luxury. My neighbor is pretty upset because she has a pre-teen kid, her husband passed away recently, she works in fast-food, gets no hazard pay, and isn't able to collect the extra $600 a week from the government for staying at home. The system wasn't structured as good as it could have been to help people who are truly in need.

A large part of the public education system really just boils down to crowd control. It helps the economy function, helps kids get educated, and keeps kids out of trouble by keeping them off the streets. Same deal with college...what you learn in school vs. what you actually do every day for the next forty years are often entirely different things. Like in my job in IT, I pretty much pitch stuff to get business & then install and fix stuff. It's mostly googling & following checklists. Any teenager with sufficient experience could do what I do, but college & school in general is important in other ways, including networking, social growth, becoming a well-rounded person, etc.

It's just a really difficult situation. The silver lining is that, for the most part, kids aren't getting hit with COVID, so it could be a lot worse than it is. I think schools are just going to have to re-open at some point to get the economy moving again, unfortunately.

 

[PingSpike]

It's just a really difficult situation. The silver lining is that, for the most part, kids aren't getting hit with COVID, so it could be a lot worse than it is. I think schools are just going to have to re-open at some point to get the economy moving again, unfortunately.

Even if you aren't worried about kids themselves, kids live with their parents. Parents who (on average) have no sick days and no savings and terrible health insurance if any at all. The kids rely upon their parents so you can't just say "well, that kids aren't really dying from it much it will be fine" because if the kids get it then their parents will. I have kids, when my oldest was in kindergarten I was never so sick in my entire life!

 

[kt]

I think what I was offering could apply at least to a portion of households. These would be the households already reduced to having a parent at home. Seriously, unless parents are right now leaving their kids unattended during the pandemic to work, the someone is watching them and that someone could use the at-home program. That is all I am saying. I see no reason why keeping kids at home and doing nothing is any better than sending them to school. One impede physical health, the other mental.

I can't speak for everyone but your assessment of the situation is oversimplified. Your solution is equivalent to all or nothing when it should be some where in the middle. The population like you who just want marginalize this dilemma and pretend the solution is obvious don't truly understand the problem in the first place. So I will just place you in the same crowd as ignorance is a bliss and move on.

 

[snoopy7548]

Kids are dumb.

 

[BarkingGhostar]

I can't speak for everyone but your assessment of the situation is oversimplified. Your solution is equivalent to all or nothing when it should be some where in the middle. The population like you who just want marginalize this dilemma and pretend the solution is obvious don't truly understand the problem in the first place. So I will just place you in the same crowd as ignorance is a bliss and move on.

Thanks, we appreciate your feedback.

 

[GodisanAtheist]

I have a 7 and 4 year old. My wife and I are both essential workers and due to our roles often have to be in the office. Grandma (and Grandpa) have really stepped up and taken on a huge portion of the childcare burden.

Given the economic situation and our jobs, my wife and I are actually spending more time at work now than we were before (what are we going to do, quit in an economy with these employment numbers?).

Luckily both my kids are sharp and my wife and I are fairly high earners. We have always done additional extra curricular work on the core subjects with our kids and we read to the younger one every night.

The biggest issue my kids are facing is a lack of structure in their day and a lack of social interaction with kids their age. We've found some like-minded parents and made a point of meeting up for hikes or other outdoor events to maintain some level of safety.

Grandma is not an educator, she is an artist. She doesn't "get" math, reading, writjng, and is used to a carefree lifestyle. she does a great job being a grandma, but is less suited to look after the kids education.

We are seriously looking into private school options for the older and day care options for the younger so they can get what they need educationally without having to relay on grandma and grandpa, who are themselves in a high risk group. I dont look forward to a significant portion of our income going to kids schooling, but if it keeps my kids on track then I guess I'll have to do it.

If folks like us, who are in a relatively great position in terms of employment, support, and options, are having a hard time with this, I can only imagine what other people are going through.

Public school teachers in our district are in contract negotiations and are playing hardball: not going to remote learning training sessions, not planning for the upcoming school year, etc.

Kids don't have the ACE 2 receptor density in most cases to fully contract the virus and are not particularly good incubators *for this particular disease*. As mentioned previously in this thread, outdoor education would not only be great for kids but would substantially cut into the risk of infection of teachers from students. There are a number of inventive ways this problem could be handled so all parties come away partially satisfied, but the lumbering carcass of the America political system will ensure that any outcome will be the worst possible outcome for all.

People can scream about parents being self interested assholes all they want, but at the end of the day we live in a system and society that requires children go to school for more than just their house educational needs but for the whole system to function.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

I have a 7 and 4 year old. My wife and I are both essential workers and due to our roles often have to be in the office. Grandma (and Grandpa) have really stepped up and taken on a huge portion of the childcare burden.

Given the economic situation and our jobs, my wife and I are actually spending more time at work now than we were before (what are we going to do, quit in an economy with these employment numbers?).

Luckily both my kids are sharp and my wife and I are fairly high earners. We have always done additional extra curricular work on the core subjects with our kids and we read to the younger one every night.

The biggest issue my kids are facing is a lack of structure in their day and a lack of social interaction with kids their age. We've found some like-minded parents and made a point of meeting up for hikes or other outdoor events to maintain some level of safety.

Grandma is not an educator, she is an artist. She doesn't "get" math, reading, writjng, and is used to a carefree lifestyle. she does a great job being a grandma, but is less suited to look after the kids education.

We are seriously looking into private school options for the older and day care options for the younger so they can get what they need educationally without having to relay on grandma and grandpa, who are themselves in a high risk group. I dont look forward to a significant portion of our income going to kids schooling, but if it keeps my kids on track then I guess I'll have to do it.

If folks like us, who are in a relatively great position in terms of employment, support, and options, are having a hard time with this, I can only imagine what other people are going through.

Public school teachers in our district are in contract negotiations and are playing hardball: not going to remote learning training sessions, not planning for the upcoming school year, etc.

Kids don't have the ACE 2 receptor density in most cases to fully contract the virus and are not particularly good incubators *for this particular disease*. As mentioned previously in this thread, outdoor education would not only be great for kids but would substantially cut into the risk of infection of teachers from students. There are a number of inventive ways this problem could be handled so all parties come away partially satisfied, but the lumbering carcass of the America political system will ensure that any outcome will be the worst possible outcome for all.

People can scream about parents being self interested assholes all they want, but at the end of the day we live in a system and society that requires children go to school for more than just their house educational needs but for the whole system to function.

Pretty sad commentary on our society isn't it? What are you doing to change it for your kids?

 

[GodisanAtheist]

Pretty sad commentary on our society isn't it? What are you doing to change it for your kids?

-Since I'm not going to pick up a gun and start shooting people, I guess I'll argue with the school board and threaten to remove my kids from the public school system so they lose the associated funding that comes from having my children enrolled.

I'll also try to work as much "think of the children" stuff into the discussion as possible and champion the really poor latino kids that attend our school that the district has essentially "lost" (literally, they cannot locate them, dunno where they are, they do not participate in any remote learning at all) since the start of shelter in place.

It'd be a real bitch to survive Covid only to get shanked by one of these kids that fell through the cracks a couple years down the line.

 

[Aikouka]

Even I would suggest that my kids need the traditional classroom. None of this finish all your work within 2 hours and video games for the rest of the day. That can't be their educational days going forward.

When reading about your situation, it makes me wonder something a bit different. I guess it can be summed up with... why is it that your children normally go to school for six to seven hours a day for what should the same learning that they're currently completing within two hours? Is the work too easy? Is there not enough work? Is remote learning limiting the amount that can be taught, and consequently, the amount of work that can be assigned? Or are your kids too good for the current coursework?

Now, I do understand where you're coming from with wanting to ensure that they receive an adequate day's worth of education, and especially how two hours doesn't seem adequate. I've been around my girlfriend's children (10 and 13) a lot more lately, and my goodness... all the huffing and puffing, and whining about schoolwork is far more draining than helping with schoolwork. Although, I've also seen the quality of some of the coursework, and I haven't been very impressed. I recall this one Social Studies lesson that looked like a mish-mash of Wikipedia summaries with post-lesson activities that had questions that weren't even covered by any of the material (default or supplementary). There was also this one math lesson where it wasn't even clear if some of the concepts being used in the multi-answer question were ever covered.

It's ridiculous how much goes into the schools here - and yet, as I mentioned above, how much are the teachers actually doing for our kids? How much is even possible for a teacher to do? We can move to a mediocre district and still get the same level of education there if we go remote. No, I want the in-classroom attention for what we pay. And even if we aren't paying that amount, it is still the most effective for kids. The alternative, what we've seen in the last 3 months, is extremely ineffective as a whole.

I think the problem likely has to do more with class size and overall level of engagement. Ultimately, classes tend to involve a large number of children with varying levels of natural aptitude, willingness, and learning styles, and generally, only the far outliers get weeded out (e.g. gifted and special education). Even with the wide range that persists, teachers ultimately have to teach to some sort of average that can often leave higher performers (such as your kids) bored and without nearly as much to do. As an awkward anecdote, I remember one time in 5th grade when I was so bored that I actually asked for more math homework.

One thing that I try to push is relating things that we learn to actual real world situations. Back when I was younger, I was one of those kids that would ask "why?" a lot. I wasn't doing it to be a pain, but rather, I wanted to understand. I kept hearing remarks about why they had to learn certain things. You know... the usual "we'll never use this!" sort of thing. So, I've been throwing out more real world problems and pointing out scenarios. Math is usually an easy one since we use it so much without realizing it. For example, one of the kids asked how many rolls they could have, and I just asked "How do they divide between us?"

Although, speaking of math and the quality of education, one thing that has made me raise a brow lately. I've been around my girlfriend's kids (10 and 13) a lot more lately, and I was taken aback when I watched them perform single-digit multiplication (e.g. 4 * 5) on their fingers. We had to memorize the times tables up to 10 x 10 back in third grade, and I went to a small school out in the boonies. I've also noticed a significant increase in difficulty when the kids approach an explicitly written problem (e.g. solve 4 * 5) versus a word problem. That worries me more given that solving word problems involves skills that transcend just math, and I'd argue that they're quite important.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

I have a 7 and 4 year old. My wife and I are both essential workers and due to our roles often have to be in the office. Grandma (and Grandpa) have really stepped up and taken on a huge portion of the childcare burden.

Yeah similarly I only have 6 month old and a 3 year old - but thank the fuck christ for my Mother-In-Law.

She fits the stereotype of being a pain in the ass on some things - but god damn watching our kids through the work-day is just the most awesome thing ever.

I would fucking HATE and dread everyday to have to get up at 6am just to drop kids off at a daycare and pick them up after work everyday.

Plus it saves shitloads of money.... Last I checked daycares were wanting $200 - $250/week depending on the age of the kid. Saves us roughly $20k a year.

Bonus points because she is old-school so she makes us dinner and shit too