Children can sometimes get stomach aches when rushed to eat, so I hope they’re not being unreasonable and rushing children too much when ending their snack time.  Hope some parents weigh in with their observations.

As far as I am concern, the kids must adapt to the needs of the adults and union contracts. There is drawbacks to nutrition breaks, As I see it, it is almost like preparing kids for the work world, of breaks and shortened lunch breaks. Throw in the rules where food and drink should be eaten, no wonder food that is provided goes half uneaten. Also kids go through stages of nibblers, eating throughout the day, and stages of eating full meals, without a whole lot of nibbling in between the meals. The nibblers are ones the usually gets in trouble for eating in the classroom. My youngest was a nibbler and still is during the summer and other holidays, Her nibbling has been cut to more than half, and full meals of breakfast and lunch is the norm at this time in high school. But when school is finished for the day, she is famished, Much like the days of elementary school, and it was because of the lunch schedules, and the morning break, By time I figured it out, home-made trail mix and other such easy snacks that leaves no noise or mess behind was the order of the day, so she could continued to nibbled throughout the day. At around the same time, my youngest caught the eye of the cook of the cafeteria, plus other children who brought lunches, or half-lunches and the rest were purchased at the school. More often than not, these children did not get to purchase because of the long line-ups. Or there was not anything left, because the students with the meal cards had first dibs. Soon the rule was change, where certain foods were allowed to eat in the classroom, as well as eating outside. The nibblers were no longer famished when they came home from school, and an apple cut and slice was enough to keep my youngest happy, until dinner time.

A few links to the pros and cons

http://www.ehow.com/info_7994475_pros-cons-longer-school-lunches.html

http://www.ehow.com/list_5958350_reasons-school-lunches-should-longer.html

http://www.wechealthunit.org/school-health/nutrition/nutrition-tools-for-schools/Fact Sheet Appropriate Scheduling of Nutrition Breaks.pdf

As for discussions that take place under those who work within the education system, few and all written what is best for the adults, and not necessarily for the nutrition and welfare of the students.

You can thank the Balanced School Day push for the “nutrition” breaks Nancy.

Waterloo parents fought hard against that schedule that didn’t work for parents whose children came home for lunch.

I understood that the director of education back then, when the Balanced School Day was put in place told the parents on school councils in Waterloo that there was nothing they could do about this because it was being union driven.

Eventually all school boards hopped on the BSD train, did the old sell job to parents about the nutrition breaks, and more focused attention on math and reading, PLUS, more time on physical education and exercise.

The smoke and mirror meetings were held I’m sure, as they were in my school community.  Parents canvassed as to their thoughts…..but in the end because it was being driven by the teacher unions I bet you can guess what kind of clout parents had??

Oh, by the way - the Catholic school in my area did NOT opt for the Balanced School Day - two breaks.  They still offer the same day schedule as before - two recesses, one lunch time…..and the teachers still get their lunches too.

Makes a nice choice doesn’t it?

Public school = BSD
Catholic = traditional day

Thanks Chuck,
When a child comes home and says that he doesn’t want “veggie straws” anymore because there isn’t enough time to eat them, there’s a problem. Veggie Straws are a treat much loved but seldom offered.
Part of the problem one day was that the teacher was late opening the lunch room, and there is no flexibility to extend the “nutrition break”.
Yes I know this is union driven.
I can’t believe the average teacher cares about the minutiae of exactly how many minutes are allotted to teacher lunches.
Frankly, their unions frequently make teachers look foolish and petty.
No greater example of this can be found than the union control of the discipline committee at the College of Teachers. Ex union officials hold 2 of 3 spots. So when a teacher comes before the committee we have the specter of the union defending and prosecuting.
As we read in The Star, this leads to a teacher who was referring to his female students as sluts and pole dancers receiving a mere slap on the wrist.
To the many wonderful, hard- working and dedicated teachers out there, are you not embarrassed by this?
Parents are helpless to change any of this. No political party will act because they’re all afraid of the power of the teacher unions.
It is up to teachers to take a stand and return teaching to professional status.

My oldest son just started JK this year (!) and the BSD was presented as a way of balancing the nutritional intake of students. Under the model at my son’s school, they begin school at 9:15, have break from 10:55 to 11:45. The second Nutrition Break is shorter, from 1:25- 2:05.

But, here’s a link that counters the idea that this whole thing is union driven. My own experience, having gone through the discussion several years ago, was that it was inspired by the idea that more consistent and evenly spaced blocks of time would allow for a better balance in the school day…the goal is better learning.

Here is one principal’s reflection on the process at his own school

http://www.cpco.on.ca/News/PrincipalConnections/PastIssues/Vol11/Issue2/Balance.pdf

Note the paragraphs on OECTA involvement.

This relates to the extensive conversation started by Malkin a few days ago.

Well, two of my family are also teachers and have young children in elementary. Knowing my anti-union bias both have said that the BNB is totally union driven. Apparently it was instituted to allow for the number of minutes teachers’ unions negotiated for their members lunches. I am open to being convinced that this format is better for students, but you will never sway me to thinking it wasn’t union-driven.
Why? Because one of these two family members is himself one of these union leaders for his board. When he tells me this came about as a result of a contract, I believe him.
Any comment on returning teaching to its’ former professionalism?

Hi Nancy,

I have lots of comments on returning to a sense of professionalism, but I’m still wondering about the evidence that this was union-driven.

I know that 40 minutes uninterrupted lunch is contractual, but I would need to go back in the minutes of union meetings to find the push towards Balanced Day.

I know that my wife has taught under the balanced day program and, initially both breaks were 40 minutes in length. That made it easy to say that teachers were only permitted to supervise one of the breaks. The reality, however, is that, even though you are not scheduled to supervise one of the breaks, by the time students got ready, and the supervision arrived, it was never a clear 40 minute break.

I began teaching when there was no planning time, no rules for uninterrupted breaks. We just did what we needed to do to make our days work.

I remember the start of the balanced day discussions, but I can’t remember who started them. My own recollection was that it was the folks pushing for literacy blocks.

Well Stephen, the changes made by the board staff, and principals were in response to the union’s demands and contracts. Sure it was presented in balancing the nutritional intake of students, and who would object, within the education system. What happens to the kids who are bused?  The kids around here are standing at the bus stop, at 7:45, and I am sure glad that I don’t have any small kids. and their day starts at 8:15. When the morning break comes along, they are eating their lunches, and at lunch time, questionable if they have no money, or already have eaten their lunches. I shuddered to think about the kids on the longer bus rides, or the food bill of the parents.

Than there is the kids who take medication, and are on schedules that conflict with the established breaks of the schools. For youngsters, medication is usually taken within certain time frames., and not easily moved up and down, without doing harm to the child. Than there is the nibblers, who are the usual ones that get in trouble for eating when it is not in the schedule break. In the article, teachers said they were putting on weight, but also the kids are putting on weight, which is another factor added to the growing numbers of overweight children. At the end of the article, better behaved children in the playground, and that is if they are allowed to play in the playground. A drop of rain, or a chill in the air, is enough to call off playing outdoors. A complaint often aired by parents, in all its various forms.

There is growing evidence in the medical files, referring to sugar levels of children, and their actions in school. The nibblers, are nibblers for a reason, to keep their sugar levels stable, and if force to adapt to a time schedule of food intake, their sugar levels drop, and they have far less focus in the classroom. Of course the SEC factors are pulled out, as the handy excuse to explain to parents.

From a blog of a parent: “All in all my personal feelings are that the only people this new Balanced Day program benefits is the staff of the schools.  I only see disadvantages for the students and if there are any pros they are well outweighed by the cons.”
http://coolravings.ca/archives/759

The goal is not better learning, but rather better learning conditions for the staff.

Nancy, in all of the union meetings that I’ve sat through, and all of the contracts that I’ve voted on, I’ve never heard these conversations before. Not that unions don’t push for things, but I don’t recall this conversation.

Not saying that you’re wrong, only that all of the discussions around Balanced Day that I can put my finger on seem to lead to this being a grassroots, school-based movement that, most often, had to convince unions that teachers’ rights were going to be respected.

This is a policy that has not been universally adapted…but still, I’m just looking for the evidence that it was the union that pushed for it.

Hi Stephen,
I really don’t want to pick a fight over who is responsible for the balanced day.
Reading your posts, you seem like a very engaged teacher.
I’m a grandmother of 4 littlle boys. I have known many fine teachers over the years. Certainly more competent teachers than otherwise, by far.
Last year, the oldest had his classroom teacher leave at Xmas time for personal reasons. When we met her young replacement a few weeks later we were super impressed. She was very young, but a real crackerjack.
My beef is not with teachers per se, but with the union mentality that pervades the classroom. Frankly, it’s depressing! And the reason I find it depressing is the sure knowledge that there’s not a dam thing I can do about it.
It is the teachers themselves who have to reign in their unions.
I get it that you need an association. As a Reg. N. I am familiar with superiors who don’t have your back, patients who wanted to sue if you made them wait more than 5 min.
But your unions, more than any other have gotten so big and powerful that no one seems willing to confront.
Every time a union leader declares he is fighting for the kids, I want to vomit. Their job is to get the best contract they can for their clients - teachers. It is not their job to represent children or parents.
Your unions do an excellent job at contract time. But if you want to be seen as a professional rather than as a union member, you must tell your union that accountabity is not a dirty word and incompetence must be dealt with!

Stephen, balanced day was also union driven in the United States, to satisfied contracts.

I agree that the origins of balanced day is not something to argue about. My question, as I move through it, as a parent, is whether or not it is good for my child.

I intend to raise the question at an upcoming parent council meeting. Sometimes we move into a practice, like BD and it becomes part of our culture, so much so that its original value is never questioned or revisited.

One of the things that my wife has complained about, outside of the fact that “lunchtime” can come earlier than expected, is the lack of time to run traditional “lunch hour” clubs and activities. In her school, with two 40 minute nutrition breaks, little time was left to run drama, choir, etc.

The effort to get more balanced learning periods, which was her school’s impetus for the move, has left it difficult to do other things that are important as well.

With many students taking buses, after-school activities at elementary level becomes contentious.

This will be an interesting conversation to move forward.

As always…

Nancy,

Although you admit that the origin is irrelevant, you go on to include American unions.  So, a little perspective is important.  One of the purposes of any labour union is to ensure that labour laws are properly observed by employers.

From the time I started teaching, we were under the watchful eye of the Education Relations Commission (ERC).  They allowed that to make sure that students were adequately supervised, teachers may not have a normal lunch break.  In our school, we have always had a one hour lunch period.  We used to have teams of teachers on lunch duty - two at the beginning of lunch for half an hour, and two for the last half hour - leaving teachers on duty half an hour for lunch.

In 1998, someone came along wanting to eliminate government waste and inefficiency.  He decided to merge the ERC with the OLRB (Ontario Labour Relations Board - the government body for all other workers).  When the ERC was merged, it was decided to have one set of rules for all workers.  Oddly enough, they felt uncomfortable reducing the lunch hour for all other workers to half an hour.  So, they enforced the common rule of “40 minutes of uninterrupted lunch” for education workers.  From that point on, although we still have teams of teachers on lunch duty, they are only on duty for the first and last 20 minutes only - leaving the intermediate 20 minutes unsupervised to give the teachers on duty 40 minutes of uninterrupted lunch.

Notice that all these different “Balanced Day” schedules in Ontario have at least on forty minute break in there.  Coincidence?

It is ironic that unions get criticized for being sneaky and underhanded, if not doing something illegal.  However, they also get criticized for following the law as well.

Stephen we have some confusion here. There are 2 Nancy’s blogging. Henceforth, I am Nancy W.
I have no idea where you are getting the American union reference. I didn’t make it, and I don’t see it in the other Nancy’s posts. (Hers are the ones referring to “nibblers”)
I am much more concerned about accountability.

Hi Nancy W.

I don’t think the American reference was mine. I don’t much about the U.S. union situation

We were told that the move to the BSD was the only way teachers could guarantee their prep. time minutes AND a lunch hour.

It was rolled out and sold as being the best thing since sliced bread for learning, kid’s nutrition, physical activity, etc.etc.etc. and the boards did their bit by going through the motions of consulting with parents but in the end guess who won out? Waterloo parents fought long and hard as I recall.

“From the time I started teaching, we were under the watchful eye of the Education Relations Commission (ERC).  They allowed that to make sure that students were adequately supervised, teachers may not have a normal lunch break.  In our school, we have always had a one hour lunch period.  We used to have teams of teachers on lunch duty - two at the beginning of lunch for half an hour, and two for the last half hour - leaving teachers on duty half an hour for lunch.”

And: ” So, they enforced the common rule of ?40 minutes of uninterrupted lunch? for education workers.  From that point on, although we still have teams of teachers on lunch duty, they are only on duty for the first and last 20 minutes only - leaving the intermediate 20 minutes unsupervised to give the teachers on duty 40 minutes of uninterrupted lunch.”

ERC from what I have seen and read, not so.

“In April of 1998 the Education Relations Commission and College Relations Commission were administratively merged with the Ministry of Labour. Operational support for both commissions is provided by the Ontario Labour Relations Board. The Director/Registrar of the OLRB serves as the Chief Administrative Officer for both commissions.

The role of the Education Relations Commission is to determine when, in its opinion, students’ courses of study are in jeopardy due to a strike or lock-out of a school or schools and advise the government accordingly. The Commission also monitors collective bargaining in the school and college sectors.”
http://www.olrb.gov.on.ca/english/ERC.htm

As far as I can see, it acts like a tribunal, for disputes within given parameters for unions and their employers. Each ruling, is separate, and will not necessarily applied to all unions. More than likely, either the teachers’ union applied at Labour Relations or the school board did, but more than likely it was the union. The union, because sometime after 1998, if I remember my history correctly, the balanced day, playground supervisors of volunteer or pay parents did not become an issue until sometime after 1998. Whatever public records on the Labour Relation site has, are very general, and no details. I came to the conclusion, that a district union, negotiated the 40 minutes into the contract, and the board was not following through, and the union took it to the Labour Relations for redress. Assuming that 40 minutes is the general contract clause currently, the 40 minutes fits in quite nicely with the union’s demands of prep time, instruction time, and their dislike to supervising time.and all the heat over it.

But the 40 minutes does not have anything to do with the 30 minute breaks of other labor unions. The 40 minutes is directly related to union demands from Ontario, and than streak across Canada. The Balanced Day was pushed by the boards and unions, and if one believes the parent blogs, which I lean to only from what I have observed, both went to work to brainwash the public and sell the parents on it.

From P4E discussion: ” don’t like to make statements on this issue unless I am able to cite the sources.  The following are a selection of direct quotations from the Report to Committee of the Whole - June 20, 2005 (by) Bob Cassidy, Superintendent of Instruction, Waterloo Region District School Board:

“The terms of the Collective Agreement, and the memorandum of Settlement which implements it, accelerated the implementation of the Balanced School Day.  A key factor was that the recently ratified Collective Agreement includes a provision which provides teachers with an uninterrupted forty minute lunch break. “
http://schools-at-the-centre.ning.com/forum/topics/balanced-school-day

Union pushed for it, and P4E provided the material for the balanced day.
http://www.peopleforeducation.ca/?s=Balanced+Day

Gosh, from the material presented here, I had a totally different read on the situation. It was difficult to sift through all of the peripheral comments to get to the Waterloo statement but, in the end, I was left with the distinct impression that the District wanted to implement the BSD, piloted it in a few schools and was able to accelerate its implementation plan once the agreement of the union was obtained.

I did not, in any way, get the impression that the union proposed it, pushed for it or had any real stake in it beyond the supervision requirements of its members.

But I am open to being corrected on my interpretation.

““The terms of the Collective Agreement, and the memorandum of Settlement which implements it, accelerated the implementation of the Balanced School Day.  A key factor was that the recently ratified Collective Agreement includes a provision which provides teachers with an uninterrupted forty minute lunch break.  Staff saw three main solutions to the challenge of providing adequate student supervision during the longer teacher lunch break.

“One option was to hire lunch supervisors at a cost of approximately 1.5 million dollars.  In order to budget for this expense, significant cuts to student programs and services would have been necessary.

“Another alternative would have been to use principals and vice-principals to supervise the students during a portion of the lunch break.  This option would present an unreasonable burden on our administrators, and would create some serious concerns around not having sufficient supervision to provide a safe and secure environment for our students.

“Given the consistently positive reactions from school communities to the Balanced Day, in contrast to the challenges posed by the previous two alternatives, it became apparent that the Balanced School Day was the best alternative.

———-

“It is important to note that the timing of the ratification of the Collective Agreement did not allow for our preferred plan for implementation (over the next few years).  Unfortunately time did not allow for a full consultation with our stakeholders, particularly our parents.”
http://schools-at-the-centre.ning.com/forum/topics/balanced-school-day

Union wanted it, the 40 minutes lunch period. What nobody knows, is what went on at the negotiation table between the board and the union. The board had no choice, but to free up 40 minutes. Balanced day has been the best choice for boards, keeping the unions happy. But note, parents here in this case parents were not consulted, and it appears to be the case for many schools. But what I have not determined who was the first board or the first school to institute the balanced day?  Hard to determined and to connect the dots. On the other side, the national organizations such as the teacher federation, or the principals , all have glowing articles on balanced days. Still trying to find the year when it all started, but I lay odds it started sometime back in the late 1990s in Canada.  I remember reading stuff back in the 1990s on balanced days in the newspaper, and when I had no real interest or concern.

Stephen, you soon wake up that balanced days are not good for you kids, and your pocketbook. And any studies that have been done on, are very subjective, and inferences being made. I highly doubt it increases learning, or have any academic benefits. The only benefits are going to the staff and the janitors. No doubt, what will be next is a big fan blower, like the car wash, for all students to passed through, before entry into school. Than the school can cut cleaning down to once a month. You haven’t seen nothing, until your kid come home with mysterious rashes and hives. Or the mysterious cough that goes away on the weekend, only to return on Monday afternoon. Air quality is another issue parents bring up, but to no avail, and the chemicals that are used for cleaning. Whatever is being used, my youngest would break out in a rash when the desks were clean, and she was fine as the grime increased on the desk top.

Apparently, from what I read on P4E, grumpy teachers who are supervising, where there is no hire help to do it. Soon, the only time the kids see the teacher is in the classroom, and that is if they are instructing. What’s next?  A few adults,in the classroom that take over when a kid needs help in the work, or to cut something, or to button up their coat.

I think Mr. Hurley’s playing with you Nancy.
The process used to move the BSD by school boards was purposeful and planned.  Going through the motions of “consulting” school communities ran the same route as to all of those other union driven, school board towed ideas.

Not so, Chuck. I’m really just trying to put my finger on the origin of the idea. It’s not ubiquitous in its implementation, and I’m wondering why some schools and not others.

Union-driven stuff usually becomes pervasive.

I do play, sometimes…but, nope, just some honest questioning. That’s all!

I also know that we have likely strayed miles from where Nancy W. wanted to go with this originally.

I just get so grumpy, over the union driven items. Many of them are hijacked to served the best interests of the various arms in the education system, and not necessarily good for the students or the taxpayer.

1. Small class sizes
2. Inclusive classrooms
3. Differentiated instruction
4. Social Justice policies
5. Critical pedagogy

Throw in the BSD, all work for the best interests of those who work within the education system. Number 2 , 3, and 5 works directly against the best interests of my child. It prevents remediation of weaknesses, in favour of the child to accept their lot in life, and if they want to get anywhere, work the system of opportunities. But they have no choice, since they do not have the tools and skills to avail of the opportunities. As for the BSD, it tells students that eating, talking and playing with friends, are not important compared to the learning of the classroom. No doubt, where BSD is present, they probably have a higher number of bully incidents, compared to schools that do not have BSD. They should be a study on it, like the current study that is ongoing,  of why children are not playing in the school playground, in the London area. Interesting how the kids huddled around, playing with their video games, rather than going for a swing or slide. Could it be, it is not worth the hassle, and easier to whipped out their hand-held devices, so they can avoid the hassles that will meet them in the classroom.

For those school communities that fought to keep a regular schedule as did the Catholic school in my area, it’s still possible to work off of a block schedule AND meet the criteria of the union contract.

Also, where school communities fought hard and had to go to the media with their fight - there may have been boards that made amendments to the BSD schedule but they are few and far between. A clear example would be in a school community where you had a majority of students going home for lunch, who thanks to the BSD now have to stay, created new problems for families, and schools that didn’t have cafeterias.

Stephen, you’ve been in the system long enough to know how it - (meaning union, boards, and gov’t) play parents and make them feel like they’re being consulted and partnered with when really they’re just helping drive a precluded agenda….likely their own.

Nancy - you can add “semestering”  and the Early Learning Program to that list.

Off my radar, but yes semestering and ELP as well, must be added. I shuddered to think, how many children at the beginning, are having their future doors shut for them, because of practices and programs that work best for the adults within the education system.

I won’t disagree that parents are often left out of the “real” consultation that goes on when many decisions are made around education. In Ontario, practice and policy have become so centralized and I think that local input from everyone “on the ground” including parents is one of the victims.

But this thread has me very interested to trace back some of the items that have been listed here in order to see from whence the original impetus came.

I would be hesitant to assume that all of them were union-driven. But I may, in fact, be wrong!

Hi Guys,

Some more about the origin of the BSD:

“While some school scheduling options have been examined, new approaches should be studied
to ensure that they meet the needs of the school community. The Balanced School Day (BSD)
schedule is a new alternative to the traditional school day schedule. Originating within the Peel
District School Board in Ontario Canada ....”  This quote from: http://www.nipissingu.ca/oar/PDFS/V831E.pdf

Then I went to the Peel Board website and found this: “In addition, this year the Peel board will honour Michael Walmsley, principal of Treeline Public School in Brampton, as Education Champion for his contributions to public education locally, provincially and beyond. Walmsley is known throughout Ontario and beyond as the orginator, developer and champion for the Balanced School Day, a day that boosts students learning capacity.”  You can find it here:  http://www.peelschools.org/media/news2002/050414.htm

Principals are not part of the union.  This would be a Board-driven; not union driven initiative.

Parents have been left out, as well as the students needs, and it really started in earnest at the beginning of the 1990s. It would serve you well, to remember the arms of the public education system are interconnected, laterally as well as vertically all working for the best interests of those who work within.

School closures, already decided, and than the pseudo-consultations begin. Just like many of the IEP meetings,  already decided, and it is a matter of ‘lets all pretend they are consulting the parents and that parents have real say. P4E, did not developed because they was a call from parents, but it was deliberately planned and executed compliments of the union and the ministry of education. And I might add, both arms had different agendas and reasons, but fit nicely to calm the waters where parents were asking questions, and criticizing the education system.

Often policy decisions are made long before parents and taxpayers , by working cooperatively with the other arms within education. Than a plan is devised ahead of time, to sell the parents and the taxpayers, who are at a disadvantage concerning knowledge and the lack of information needed to be full participants. .

The school councils is another such beast created to give the appearance that parents are participants in the education policies of the school and beyond. How often a new rule comes down, such as no car can leave before the buses , or any student who is walking cannot leave before the buses leave, and no parent was informed about it. By the way, the above rule, the origins of it came from the city schools, and through the school councils, is now a policy for all schools.  Or the new one, which is insane for the rural areas, no parking on the side of the road, in front of the school. Another policy, that arose from the urban areas, that really does not make any sense in rural areas.

Tracing it back to the roots is relatively easy, compared to understanding and knowledge needed to discerned the many different agendas at play, in a system where parents and the taxpayers virtually have no say. Sometimes I think, it might be better for parents, to stopped volunteering, no more participation in school councils, no more fundraising, no more attending parent-teacher interviews, no more of anything to captured the attention of those who strive to have all policies working for the best interests of those within the system. Just like I did, when I withdrew home support for my child in grade 3, and within a month, it became urgent by the school, for my child to have an assessment, that should have been done in grade 1. Wishful thinking on my part, because unlike unions and school boards, parents as a group are not uniformed in their goals, but their very nature, opens them to be taking advantage of by those who have different agendas that serve their own best interests.

It’s not that parents are “left out” Stephen.

It’s the pretending by the system - the elected and non-elected board folks, the school administration and educators who go to great pains to make it appear like they are “consulting” and listening to parents, that’s at play here.  Most often this occurs when the blob in the system wants to actually steer parents to a desired and usually already agreed upon result.

Call it what it is - a sham that parents need to be well aware of so that they’re not made to feel like they have to settle for less.

Even lines drawn for parents and consultation with parents are drawn from inside the system - and usually have little to do with parents or students.

And I suspect that, as decision-making, financing and curriculum development became more centralized, the traditional methods associated with parent involvement didn’t disappear, but lost some of their meaning and power.

Stephen thanks for the name, “. Walmsley is known throughout Ontario and beyond as the originator, developer and champion for the Balanced School Day, a day that boosts students learning capacity.” and which allow me with the ever handy google search engine to prove once more again the public education system is always truly bereft of original ideas, as well as twisting innovative practices of others, and shaped them into practices that benefit those who work within the education system.

The BSD became the solution, to solve the problem of the union contracts, demanding uninterrupted lunch time periods, and reduced supervisory duties. Walmsley, was the original guy to introduced it, but it is a watered down version of the Waldorf schools, who originated the typical two breaks of meals and recesses. The difference is, the Waldorf schools, and their school practices are geared to the children and the stages of development. Their times and schedules were developed a long time ago, based on their unique philosophy of child development, and Walmsley came along, and developed a model along the lines of the Waldorf model, for much different purposes to satisfied the union contracts, as well as the needs of a typical school. Not much to do with the students, except the cherry-picking of the Waldorf schools and its philosophy, and the typical schedule found in Waldorf schools.

“Over 80 percent of respondents indicated that their
school program included the following practices: balanced school day, teaching in a main lesson format, student-written and illustrated
notebooks, meditation/prayer at the beginning of the day, form drawing in grades 1 to 5, and a continuous teacher from grades 1 through 8..”
http://www.waldorflibrary.org/Journal_Articles/RB7108.pdf

A typical schedule on a parent forum:

“3rd Grade Schedule

Mon - Fri, 8:15 - 10:15 - Main Lesson (see below for Main Lesson Blocks)

Mon - Fri, 10:15 - 10:45 - Snack and Recess

Period One, 10:45 - 11:35

Period Two, 11:40 - 12:25

Mon - Fri, 12:30 - 1:10: Lunch and Recess

Period Three, 1:15 - 2:00

Period Four, 2:05 - 2:45

Mon - Fri, 2:45 - 3”
http://www.mothering.com/community/t/272270/what-is-a-typical-day-in-a-waldorf-grade-school

An article from a Waldorf school, that indicates the differences between a Waldorf education and a public education.
“REFLECTING ON THE PACE OF SCHOOLING
http://www.waldorf.cyberus.ca/Articles.html

In the next post, the profit and benefits from the BSD.

Walmsly, has made a pretty good living attending conferences across the world, spreading his BSD gospel, based on two schools. Apparently, without further ado, each and every school is producing the same results, increased learning, and better behaved kids. When BSD is introduced, glowing reports of all the benefits, based on the original studies of the first two schools. Walmsly second career after retirement, is now traveling the globe, under leadership. “As an extension of the session “Schools With Solutions” presented at the 2010 RAPSA San Diego Conference, this Chat will delve into strategies to empower school staffs to effectively meet teaching-learning challenges. Based on the premise that every school holds the key to solving its own unique challenges, the discussion will seek to define the skills that the school leader can employ in order to guide his/her staff to creative solutions.”

http://www.atpromiseconference.org/eblast/2010_05_27_Chat1.html

“MICHAEL WALMSLEY
Creator of ?The Balanced School Day? and ?Focus Curriculum Delivery Model?
SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 9:15 ? 11:45 am
Michael Walmsley is an elementary school principal with over 20 years of school leadership experience. He is the creator of the Balanced School Day ? an alternative school day schedule in use across Ontario, Canada ? and the Focus Curriculum Delivery Model ? a school-wide/multi-grade/cross-curriculum design for programming with an emphasis on unique school/student interests. An ?outside the box? educational
leader, Michael has presented his ideas at numerous provincial conferences in Ontario and was a key presenter at a recent session of the Oxford Round Table at Oxford University in England.”
http://www.atpromiseconference.org/pdf/RAPS_2010program.pdf

Just a couple of the conferences attended, and no doubt being paid a handsome sum.

Profit is being made at the marketing end, developing new product lines for the BSD, as well as the new line of recipe books, for parents to buy to guide their decisions on lunches and meals. Now I know why busy parents end up buying the pre-made snacks such as cheese and crackers in a package, because it is cheaper. Also, I now understand why lunch bags have gone under a new transformation, because of the BSD. My 16 year old commented as we passed the lunch bags, look at that, the kids are carrying a lunch bag that is almost as big as their school bags. Did not took notice back than, besides the price.

“Introducing the Balanced Day Lunch Kit!

Originally created to be used for the Balanced Day School system that is becoming widely used in Ontario, the functionality, versatility and design have made it a world wide sensation!”

http://www.balanceddaylunchkit.com/about.html

And one of the owners had a teacher gig for 21 years, before starting this venture with her sister.
Nothing wrong with it, but it sure seems that every new thing within the public education system, there is offshoots of profit being made within and outside of the education system. As well as creating new jobs after retirement, for the talking circuit. No wonder they do not want to consult with parents in a transparent and open fashion because most of would think of the costs to their pocketbooks. The BSD would be an example, that certainly would hit the pocketbooks of parents, especially in schools that do not provide any cafeteria or canteen services.

Parent “involvement” has been dumbed down considerably since the NDP actually believed and recommended that parents be “partners” in the decision-making.

The PCs legislated those school councils so the they could evolve to be more than just “involved” parents but also on par with the trustees and school community decision-makers.

We’ve effectively dumbed parents down from being “partners” (NDP), to being “advisors” (PC), back down to being “involved”.

Yet, this gov’t saw fit to put school council right up there on the ARCs when most councils have never evolved beyond the bake sale.

Nancy,

I wasn’t the one who brought forward the name of Walmsley…

Oops sorry Stephen, it was Wayne. That hurts me, and I feel as though I have a few teachers of the past looking over my shoulders, glaring down at me.

I need to do a better job, as the old teachers of the past would have said to me, handing out the graded essays.

LOL! Don,t worry about what I think Nancy…I just didn’t want to take credit for something that I didn’t come up with!