It is no secret that here at Kohelet we have profound differences with labor unions in general and with the Israel Teachers’ Union in particular. Generally speaking, we are interested in a freer system; one that is less influenced by the whims of committees and their vested interests, which are often at variance with those of the general public. However, in the spirit of the conciliatory atmosphere of the month of Elul, we would like to take a look at two issues on which we actually agree with Director-General Yaffa Ben David.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The first \u2013 the idea that the long school day program (known as Yocha<\/em>) should be canceled, the sooner the better. This program, legislated almost 30 years ago, was meant to gradually be expanded to the entire education system, but such full implementation has been repeatedly delayed. Approximately one quarter of Israeli students benefit from the program, including many from stronger neighborhoods. This privilegerests on no clear rationale, and around a month ago Yaffa called for removing its burden from teachers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Parallel to the long school day program is the Nitzanim<\/em> program for afternoon hours, under which local authorities run after school programs (tzaharon<\/em>) subsidized in accordance with each authority’s socio-economic cluster. As flawed as these programs are, they incorporate extra-curricular activities rather than teaching hours (Israeli students already learn more hours than the OECD average); they are cheaper and more flexible; providers whose services are inadequate can be replaced; and they are not mandatory \u2013 parents choose whether or not to send their children to the afternoon program and carry at least part of the cost. There is no reason not to cancel the long school day and implement the Nitzanim<\/em> framework across the entire system instead. We’ll save our recommendations for improving the afternoon programs themselves for another day.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yaffa’s second proposal was made as the school year’s commencement \u2013 she agreed to shorten the school week to five days. This is indeed a watershed moment, since the transfer to a five-day school week, in line with the rest of the world, was advocated by various commissions but blocked by the Teachers’ Union for years. As an aside, for those who are loath to give up their quiet Friday morning coffee, or those who simply work that day and need a framework for their kids – the Bank of Israel recommended the option of subsidized Friday frameworks, similar to the afternoon programs. Free education for days in which most parents don\u2019t work is an extreme waste of enormously expensive public resources.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, Yaffa consented to this change on one condition \u2013 that teachers work four days a week, retaining their eligibility for a day off that can be utilized for higher learning, advanced courses (hishtalmut<\/em>) and professional development. To her credit, the Bank of Israel’s 2019 paper proposing the move to a five-day school week accepted this condition, but also suggested canceling no less than 22 vacation days to free working parents from the hassle of scrambling for solutions throughout the year. Yaffa Ben David would rather get the goody without paying for it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In point of fact, we’re not strictly opposed to the idea: a full-time teaching position consists of a certain number of hours; in some cases, teachers and school principals will find it convenient to spread them over four days, in others, over five. Why should we stipulate the number of days for everybody? Can a work day not include both teaching hours and advanced courses? They sure can. Additionally, the distinction between homeroom teachers (mechanchim<\/em>) and subject teachers matters \u2013 it is important for the former to be in school for all five days, as the class they teach is under their responsibility, and classes are not the same when the homeroom teacher is absent. By the way, we recommended a long time ago that homeroom teaching – as well as grade or subject coordination functions – be recognized as sub-administrative positions and compensated according to the degree of responsibility taken on, rather than the low premium they are granted today. The hours of other teachers should be decided, as noted, between them and the school principals, according to timetable constraints and personal preferences; there is no need for Yaffa to dictate from above and impede the necessary flexibility. There is no known national system that defaults to five days of school for students while teachers are required to attend only four, and there is no reason to be the first to try it. \u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n In any case, canceling both the long school day program and the Friday school day can cut back on teaching staff as well as save many billions of shekels, so despite our various reservations, we endorse Yaffa’s position, albeit on these two issues alone.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"It is no secret that here at Kohelet we have profound differences with labor unions in general and with the Israel Teachers’ Union in particular. Generally speaking, we are interested in a freer system; one that is less influenced by the whims of committees and their vested interests, which are often at variance with those […]","protected":false},"featured_media":12775,"template":"","article-category":[],"custom-tags":[1048,1055,624],"ppma_author":[49],"class_list":["post-12783","article","type-article","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","custom-tags-israeli-education-system","custom-tags-teachers-union","custom-tags-unions"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n