Abbotsford schools fail recess

Vancouver, BC, Canada / (CKNW AM) AM980

Parents in the Abbotsford School dDstrict will soon join a growing list of adults either picking their kids up early from school or dropping them off later than usual.
That’s because Abbotsford is the latest district to cancel recess for elementary and middle schools as the teachers strike draws on.
Superintendent Kevin Godden says the cut was necessary because the district can no longer sustain the cost it takes for management to supervise the breaks.

“What I will say. It’s not the recess so much as the activity that goes on during recess. And so its about play and so that’s a part of the curriculum. And so I don’t doubt that the break that recess is, that it provides for kids, that an opportunity exists for teachers to give kids that anyway.”

He says school will start about 15-20 minutes later than usual to make up for the loss, starting May 12.

Comments

  1. Why would the district encounter extra costs for management to supervise breaks? Are they not salaried employees.

    It sound more like they think that doing supervisory duties on the school ground is beneath their stature or the government has put pressure on the superintendent to find a way to rile the parents of the children impacted by this decision.

  2. In most districts central office staff are paid mileage for using their vehicles. If a they are assigne to supervise a school that is 10 kilometres from the board office they would be paid for 20 kilometres of travel each day to go there and supervise recess. If they also have to supervise after school (perhaps a high school) they would be paid for an additional travel allowance to go to that school.

  3. I thought a recess was beneficial to children. Most businesses allow their employees coffee breaks as it is usually thought to be beneficial to productivity; even when it is normally not mandated in our labour standards.
    So, why wouldn’t this be beneficial for the younger kids? Especially when they are not as emotionally or physically developed as adults.
    Also, if the school day is 15-20 less, shouldn’t there be a commensurate reduction in pay? Just sayin’. But the teachers are really doing this for the kids. Yeah right!
    I’ve had enough of public sector unions; let’s open up our schools to competition.

      • Opinionated: Let my try to explain it to you.
        Part 1:
        - if breaks from work = beneficial to adults
        - young children = less emotionally/physically developed than adults
        - One therefore assumes breaks (we call them a recess) are beneficial to young children and their schooling
        Part 2:
        If recess is beneficial to young children’s schooling, then one would assume it is important to keep it in their schools and for administrators not to cancel it. Maybe there are hidden agendas behind this (see D and Dwight comments again)
        Part 3:
        If school starts 15-20 minutes later = less time at work for teachers
        If teachers are working less time, then one may look at paying them less as a result of the hours not worked (and duties not normally performed). And yes I know.
        You see this is a shot at some of the entitled attitudes that come with many employed (i.e. teachers) by taxpayer money and the never-ending screams for more money to be doled out by the taxpayer. FYI: This wallet is rapidly emptying; if not empty already.
        This also relates to comments from teachers that they are doing it (strikes, etc.) for the children. In this case their work ‘slowdowns’ are harming the children and the parents; thus shooting down their claims. Hence the “Yeah right” – it was an expression of my disdain.

        Part 4: Now this could be important so please pay attention.
        IF: Public schools = frequently performing in a less than satisfactory manner
        - competition = (usually) fosters better results
        - competition for public schools = fostering better results in our education system
        You see increasing availability to home schooling and alternative programs (outside of the public system) could lead to parents opting to send their children to the non-public sector. Teachers not wanting to lose their jobs to those working in the non-public sector should thus perform better (that’s called a response to competition) .
        This would also give an ‘out’ for parents not wanting their children indoctrinated by philosophies (such as socialism and PC) that are often pushed on our children in the public programs and by ‘educators’. The parents have an alternative.
        Now do you understand?
        Sorry for cutting corners. Because I tend to be “wordy”, I admit I may cut corners in order to get a point across. Most people don’t understand “zero” and can draw the proper conclusions. Just a question, did you spend a lot of time in the public system? Also, to let you know I put this up without really proofing it, so sorry for any slight misteaks you may find.

        • Schools are not businesses.

          Students are not widgets.

          Schools should not have to “compete”. There’s enough of that when these children reach adulthood.

          Teachers aren’t doing supervision, but they’re salaried, not paid per hour.

    • You had me all the way down to your last sentence. The schools ARE OPEN TO COMPETITION!!! Haven’t you heard of private schools? And if you’re suggesting completely closing public schools, that is outright regressive-conservative thinking, turning back the clock by 2 centuries, when only the rich afforded to school their children and poor people were condemned forever to poverty. Not gonna happen!

Leave a Reply