Las dos horas que les cuestan miles de dólares a los padres en Estados Unidos

Redacción: BBC

En Estados Unidos, la jornada escolar promedio comienza a eso de las 8:00 y termina aproximadamente a las 15:00. Pero la mayoría de los padres trabaja de 9:00 a 17:00.

Esa discrepancia horaria es un problema para muchas familias, en especial las de menor poder adquisitivo, como explica la periodista estadounidense Kara Voght, de la revista Mother Jones.

Línea.

El horario escolar en EE.UU. es un vestigio de una era pasada, cuando era menos probable que ambos padres trabajaran fuera del hogar.

La mayoría de las escuelas brindan 180 días de clases, comenzando el año académico en agosto y finalizando en junio.

Permanecen cerrados los fines de semana y días feriados, y hay un promedio de 29 días sin clases, dedicados al desarrollo profesional de los maestros, las reuniones de padres y maestros y vacaciones adicionales.

Este calendario escolar no se ajusta muy bien a las demandas laborales de la mayoría de los padres estadounidenses.

Casi el 70% de quienes tienen niños en edad escolar trabajan en el clásico horario «de nueve a cinco».

Y el tiempo que permanecen cerrados los colegios cada año supera por casi dos semanas el total de días que un trabajador promedio puede tomarse, sumando feriados, vacaciones y licencias con goce de sueldo.

Un padre en un auto con dos niñosDerechos de autor de la imagenGETTY IMAGES
Image caption¿Qué hacer con los niños cuando salen de la escuela? Un problema que afecta a todo padre que trabaja.

Dado que menos de la mitad del total de escuelas primarias ofrecen programas de extensión escolar, la mayoría de los padres tienen que pagar por cuidadores privados, que cuestan en promedio unos US$6.600 por año.

La alternativa es reducir sus horas de trabajo para poder ocuparse de sus hijos pequeños.

El sacrificio profesional generalmente recae en las madres, un millón de las cuales trabaja menos que a tiempo completo para poder cuidar a sus niños en edad de escuela primaria.

Las madres de bajos ingresos y las madres negras, cuyos trabajos a menudo otorgan menos flexibilidad y tiempo libre, suelen tener que elegir entre cuidar a sus hijos o tener un trabajo.

Los expertos estiman que EE.UU. pierde US$57.000 millones en productividad económica cada año gracias al calendario escolar.

El proyecto que reabrió el debate

Tomando todo esto en cuenta, una de las precandidatas demócratas que aspira a la presidencia, la senadora por California Kamala Harris, propuso un proyecto para abordar esta discrepancia.

Su Ley de Escuelas Amigas de la Familia propone otorgarles a 500 centros educativos de barrios de menores ingresos hasta US$5 millones en subsidios, para desarrollar programas para estudiantes de 8:00 a 18:00, como mínimo, de lunes a viernes.

Según el proyecto, estos colegios permanecerían abiertos todos los días del año escolar, excepto los fines de semana y feriados federales.

Kamala HarrisDerechos de autor de la imagenGETTY IMAGES
Image captionLa propuesta de la senadora demócrata Kamala Harris generó mucha polémica en EE.UU.

Si desean cerrar por cualquier otro motivo, deberán proporcionar un día completo de actividades de enriquecimiento para los estudiantes.

La propuesta de Harris no es que los chicos permanezcan en el aula más horas. Ella sugiere que las escuelas y comunidades desarrollen «oportunidades académicas, atléticas o de enriquecimiento para los estudiantes».

Afirma que deben ser «de alta calidad, culturalmente relevantes, lingüísticamente accesibles y apropiadas para el desarrollo» de los niños.

La propuesta se asemeja mucho a los programas extracurriculares que ya existen en algunos distritos escolares.

La idea no sería que los maestros trabajen más horas sino contratar personal adicional, aunque también se les podría pagar extra a los docentes que se ofrezcan como voluntarios.

Cuando Harris dio a conocer su propuesta, recibió ataques de muchos frentes, incluyendo de demócratas.

Los conservadores la acusaron de debilitar el mandato de la educación pública. La revista de derecha National Review afirmó que convertiría a las escuelas en guarderías.

Los liberales, mientras tanto, criticaron a Harris asegurando que se enfocó en el problema equivocado. Según ellos el día escolar no es demasiado corto. Es el día laboral el que es demasiado largo.

A su entender, los niños no deberían tener que soportar «la carga de las ambiciones capitalistas», permaneciendo en la escuela por más horas.

Una madre de la mano con su hija pequeñaDerechos de autor de la imagenGETTY IMAGES
Image captionMuchos padres en todo el mundo enfrentan el mismo dilema, un problema que afecta laboralmente más a las mujeres.

Un problema a nivel mundial

Las dificultades que sufren los padres estadounidenses les son familiares a muchos progenitores en todo el mundo.

En Reino Unido el calendario escolar es similar al de EE.UU.: los estudiantes asisten a la escuela durante 190 días al año y la jornada empieza a las 9:00 y termina a las 15:00. Allí tampoco se suelen ofrecer programas fuera del horario escolar.

En Alemania, los estudiantes asisten a la escuela por un período aún más breve, de cinco horas por día. Comienza alrededor de las 8:00 y acaban alrededor de las 13:00.

En cambio, los estudiantes franceses tienen un día que refleja más de cerca la jornada laboral francesa. Están en la escuela aproximadamente de 8:30 a 16:30 (tienen dos descansos y un período de almuerzo que dura al menos una hora y media).

Pero solo asisten a la escuela durante 162 días al año.

Tanto en Alemania como en Francia, hay subsidios nacionales que ayudan a pagar el cuidado de niños antes o después de que vayan a la escuela.

En general, las naciones europeas también ofrecen sustancialmente más tiempo de vacaciones que EE.UU.

De acuerdo a datos de la Unesco, en Latinoamérica los estudiantes tienen un promedio de 200 días de clases al año, excepto Argentina y Paraguay, donde asisten a la escuela durante 183 días.

Estudiantes chinosDerechos de autor de la imagenGETTY IMAGES
Image captionLos niños en China van a la escuela durante 9.5 horas por día, 245 días al año.

La experiencia contrasta fuertemente con la de algunos países asiáticos, donde los estudiantes pasan mucho más tiempo en la escuela.

En China los niños arrancan su año escolar en septiembre y terminan a mediados de julio, sumando la friolera de 245 días escolares al año.

Además, sus jornadas escolares son largas: de 7:30 a 17:00, aunque tienen un largo receso de dos horas en el medio, para almorzar.

Los padres también trabajan largos días y el cuidado de los niños después de la escuela históricamente recayó en los abuelos.

En estos días, es cada vez más común que los padres paguen costosas tutorías después de la escuela para darles a sus hijos una ventaja académica sobre sus compañeros.

La correlación entre la duración de la jornada escolar y la productividad de los estudiantes es tenue.

China superó a EE.UU. y a los países europeos en una evaluación internacional de ciencia, matemáticas y lectura, pero no por mucho.

Fuente: https://www.bbc.com/mundo/noticias-50581137

Comparte este contenido:

EEUU: Trump deshace los programas de Michelle Obama para nutrición y educación

EEUU / www.mundohispanico.com / 3 de Mayo de 2017

El Gobierno del presidente, Donald Trump, dio hoy pasos para deshacer parte de dos programas clave que impulsó la exprimera dama Michelle Obama durante el mandato de su marido, uno destinado a mejorar la nutrición infantil y otro dedicado a la educación de las niñas en todo el mundo.

Sonny Perdue, el nuevo secretario de Agricultura, anunció hoy que su departamento congelará la implementación de los estándares impuestos por Obama para los programas de almuerzos escolares financiados por el Gobierno federal.

Las normas impulsadas por Obama exigen que las escuelas sirvan más comida integral y frutas y verduras frescas a millones de niños, además de que se limiten las cantidades de sodio y leche grasa, y se eliminen las grasas saturadas en los menús escolares.

La orden firmada por Perdue busca “dar una mayor flexibilidad” a las escuelas, al retrasar hasta 2020 la imposición de límites al sodio que pueden contener los menús escolares, y al conceder excepciones a aquellos centros que no quieran acogerse a la exigencia de servir alimentos con cereales integrales.

Hasta ahora, el máximo de sodio en los menús escolares es de 1.230 miligramos para la educación básica, 1.360 miligramos para la educación intermedia y 1.420 para la superior.

Estaba previsto que el próximo julio esos límites se recortaran a 935, 1.035 y 1.080 miligramos, respectivamente, pero la nueva directriz aplaza ese proceso hasta dentro de tres años; y permite a las escuelas servir leche baja en grasa con sabores añadidos, como chocolate.

El cambio responde, según Perdue, a las quejas de muchos administradores de comedores escolares, que mantienen que las nuevas exigencias hacían que los almuerzos atrajeran menos a los niños y aumentaban el desperdicio de alimentos, que además resultaban más caros.

“Si los niños no están comiéndose la comida, y acaba en la basura, no están obteniendo ninguna nutrición, y eso socava el propósito del programa”, dijo Perdue en un comunicado.

Los cambios en los menús escolares fueron impulsados por Michelle Obama, quien en 2010 lanzó su programa “Let’s move” (Movámonos) para cambiar las costumbres alimenticias de los más pequeños, en un país donde, por ejemplo, se han disparado los casos de diabetes infantil a causa de la ingesta de comida basura y bebidas azucaradas.

Por otra parte, las autoridades han pedido a los empleados del Cuerpo de Paz estadounidense, una agencia federal que coordina esfuerzos de voluntariado en el extranjero, que dejen de usar el nombre de otra iniciativa de la exprimera dama, llamada “Let Girls Learn” (Dejemos que las niñas aprendan).

Ese programa, lanzado en 2015, tenía como objetivo dar acceso a la educación a 62 millones de niñas y adolescentes en todo el mundo que no acuden a la escuela, lo que las hace más vulnerables a enfermedades como el sida, a contraer matrimonio de modo forzado y a otras formas de violencia.

“A partir de ahora, no seguiremos usando la marca ‘Let Girls Learn’ ni mantendremos un programa único” para fomentar la educación de las niñas en el extranjero, indicó la directora en funciones del Cuerpo de Paz, Sheila Crowley, en un correo electrónico a sus empleados obtenido por la cadena de televisión CNN.

“Todos estamos orgullosos de lo que ha conseguido ‘Let Girls Learn’ y les agradecemos a ustedes su éxito”, añadía el correo.

En un comunicado, el Cuerpo de Paz matizó que, pese al fin del programa, esa agencia continuará con sus esfuerzos para “convertir la educación de las niñas en una prioridad”.

Fuente:http://mundohispanico.com/noticias/nacionales/trump-deshace-los-programas-de-michelle-obama-para-nutricion-y-educacion

Comparte este contenido:

Shutting Down American-Style Authoritarianism

By Henry A. Giroux

Editor’s note: A shorter version of this piece appeared in CounterPunch.

It is impossible to imagine the damage Trump and his white nationalists, economic fundamentalists, and white supremacists friends will do to civil liberties, the social contract, the planet, and life itself in the next few years.

Rather than address climate change, the threat of nuclear war, galloping inequality, the elimination of public goods, Trump and his vicious acolytes have accelerated the threats faced by these growing dangers. Moreover, the authoritarian steam roller just keeps bulldozing through every social protection and policy put in place, however insufficient, in the last few years in order to benefit the poor, vulnerable, and the environment.

A neo-fascist politics of emotional brutality, militant bigotry, and social abandonment has reached new heights in the United States. Think about the Republican Party call to eliminate essential health benefits such as mental health coverage, guaranteed health insurance for people with pre-existing conditions, and the elimination of Meals on Wheels program that benefit the poor and elderly.
As the Trump regime continues to hollow out the welfare state, it builds on Obama’s efforts to expand the surveillance state but with a new and deadly twist. This is particularly clear given the Congressional Republicans’ decision to advance a bill that would overturn privacy protections for Internet users, allow corporations to monitor, sell, and use everything that users put on the Internet, including their browsing history, app usage and financial and medical information.

This is the Orwellian side of Trump’s administration, which not only makes it easier for the surveillance state to access information, but also sells out the American public to corporate demagogues who view everything in terms of markets and the accumulation of capital.

On the other side of the authoritarian coin is the merging of the punishing society and permanent warfare state with a culture of fear and cruelty. Under these circumstances, everyone is viewed as either a potential terrorist or narcissistic consumer making it easier for the Trump machine to elevate the use of force to the most venerable national ideal while opening up lucrative markets for defense and security industries and the growing private prison behemoth.

At the level of everyday life, the merging of corporate and political brutalism into a war culture were on full display in the savage beating of a United Airlines passenger who refused to give up his seat because the airlines over booked. Couple this with the Star War spectacle of the United States dropping a 21,600 pound non-nuclear bomb on the Achin district in Afghanistan, which has a population of around 95,000 people. Nobody on the plane came to the aid of the passenger as he was being assaulted and dragged from his seat as if he were a dangerous criminal suggesting that brutality, fear, and powerlessness have become normalized in America.

Moreover, the relative silence of the American public in the face its government dropping the “Mother of All Bombs” in Afghanistan and unloading endless weapons of death and destruction in Syria testify to the amnesiac state of the country and the moral coma which has settled like a dense fog on so many of its inhabitants. As historical memory is erased, public spheres and cultural spaces are saturated with violence and the endless spectacles of civic illiteracy. Pedagogies of repression now enable the suffering produced by those most vulnerable, who disappear amidst the endless trivialization produced by the mainstream media, which anxiously awaits for Trump’s next tweet in order to increase their ratings and fuel the bottom line.

The government propaganda machine has turned into a comic version of a failed Reality TV series. Witness the daily spectacle produced by the hapless Sean Spicer. Spicer dreams about and longs for the trappings of Orwell’s dystopia in which he would be able to use his position as a second rate Joseph Goebbels to produce, legitimate, and dictate lies rather than be in the uncomfortable scenario, in which he now finds himself, of having to defend endlessly Trump’s fabrications. For Spicer, the dream of the safety of Orwell’s dystopia has given way to the nightmare of him being reduced to the leading character in the Gong Show. Actually, maybe he is the confused front man for our stand-in-president who increasingly resembles the psychopath on steroids, Patrick Bateman, from the film, American Psycho—truly a symbol for our times. Ignorance is a terrible wound, when it is the result of systemic constraints or self-inflicted, but it is a pathology and plague when it is willful—the active refusal to know- and translates into power. Trump and his mostly incompetent and ignorant government appointees are not just stupid and offensive in their ideological smugness, they are a threat to the very act of thinking and its crucial connection to memory, justice and truth.

Neo-fascist policies and practices now feed a war culture and demand more than a political and moral outrage. At the very least, it must be recognized that neo-fascism must be restored as Paul Gilroy has argued “to its proper place in the discussions of the moral and political limits of what is acceptable.” This would suggest making visible not only the elements of neo-fascism that animate the new policies and political formations being produced in the Trump administration, but also unveiling how power is reproduced through those architects, managers, and intellectuals and institutions for hire that legitimate this distinctively American neoliberal-military machine.

The supine response of the mainstream press and the general public to ongoing acts of state and corporate violence is a flagrant and horrifying indication of the extent to which the United States government has merged the corporate state with the military state to create a regime of brutality, sadism, aggression, and cruelty. State sovereignty has been replaced by corporate sovereignty. All the while, militarized ignorance expands a culture awash in public stupidity and views critical thought as both a liability and a threat making it all the more difficult to recognize how authoritarianism appears in new forms.

The established political parties and politicians are nothing more than crude lobbyists and shock troops for the financial elite who believe everything is for sale. The boundaries of humanity are now inscribed and defined exclusively through the metrics of the twin logic of commercial transactions and the politics of disposability. The horrors unfolding under the Trump administration are not only abetted by white supremacists, religious evangelicals, but also by liberals who still believe that capitalism and democracy are synonymous, and who appear to delight and rush to support any military intervention or act of aggression the United States wages against a foreign power. Liberals are affronted over alleged charges of Russian spying but say nothing about their own country which does far more than spy on other countries it disagrees with, it overthrows them through either illegal means or military force.

Trump’s brand of authoritarianism is a combination of the savagery of neoliberalism and civic illiteracy on steroids. This legacy of neo-fascism represents more than a crisis of civic literacy and courage, it is a crisis of civic culture, if not politics itself. As civic culture wanes, a market based ideology increases its grip on the American public. This militant ideology of sadism and cruelty is all too familiar and is marked by unbridled individualism, a disdain for the welfare state, the elevation of unchecked self-interest to an organizing principle of society, the glorification of militarism, and a systemic erosion of any viable notion of citizenship.

This ideology has produced over the last forty years an agency killing form of depoliticization that paved the way for the election of Donald Trump and an updated version of American authoritarianism. This homegrown and new edition of neo-fascism cannot be abstracted from the cultural spectacles that now dominate American society and extend from the trivializing influence of celebrity culture and the militarism of video game culture to the spectacles of violence that dominate Hollywood and the mainstream media.

The new technologies increasingly lock people into orbits of isolation and privatization while the wholesale deformation of the formative cultures and public spheres that make a democracy possible disappear at a terrifying pace. Neo-fascism feeds on the spectacle, a misplaced populism, and a “mood economy” that reduces all problems to matters of self-blame and defective character. Under such circumstances, the militarization of society expands more readily and reaches deeply into everyday life producing militarized subjects, exalting military-style discipline, criminalizing an increasing range of social behaviors, transforming local police into paramilitarized soldiers, and normalizing war and violence. Rather than viewing war and militarization as a source of alarm, they become sources of national pride. The curse of the theatrical performance so endemic to fascism has been updated with the Internet and new digital technologies and allows the legacies of fascism to live on in a distinctively American modality.

The war culture must be stopped and hopefully more and more efforts will be made in the name of collective struggle to think anew what an effective form of resistance might look like. Any struggle that matters must acknowledge “that eradicating racial oppression ultimately requires struggle against oppression in all of its forms… [especially] restructuring America’s economic system.”

There is no shortage of diverse movements operating in multiple spheres that extend from the local to national levels. Some aim at winning general elections, conduct sit-ins, or engage in direct action such as blocking the vehicles of immigration officers. Others provide support for sanctuary movements that include institutions that range from churches to institutions of higher education. Many of these movements do not call for a qualitative change in fundamental institutions of power, especially in the economic realm, and as such offer no long term solutions. But, no viable form of collective struggle will succeed if it fails to link resistance efforts among the local, state, federal, and international spheres.

There are a wealth of strategies available that contain the possibility of becoming more radical, capable of merging with other sites of resistance, all of which look beyond tactics as diverse as organizing massive protests, direct resistance, and rebuilding the labor movement.

Martin Luther King, Jr. in his speech at the Riverside Church spoke eloquently to what it meant to use non-violent, direct action as part of a broader struggle to connect racism, militarism, and war. His call to address a “society gone mad on war” and the need to “address the fierce urgency of now” was rooted in an intersectional politics, one that recognized a comprehensive view of oppression, struggle, and politics itself. Racism, poverty, and disposability could not be abstracted from the issue of militarism and how these modes of oppression informed each other.

This was particularly clear in a program put forth by The Black Panther Party, which called for “equality in education, housing, employment and civil rights” and produced a 10 Point Plan to achieve its political goals. A more recent example of a comprehensive notion of politics and can be found in the Black Lives Matter movement’s call to connect police violence to wider forms of state violence, allowing such a strategy to move from a single-issue protest movement into a full-fledged social movement.

Such struggles at best must be about both educating people and creating broad-based social movements dedicated not merely to reforms but transforming the ideological, economic, and political structures of the existing society. Social transformation has to be reconnected with institutional change. This means rejecting the notion that global capitalism cannot be challenged successfully at any of these levels alone, especially if such resistance, however crucial, is not connected to a comprehensive understanding of the reach of global power. Lacino Hamilton is right in arguing that “institutional patterns and practices will not change unless protesters go beyond rallying, marching, and what usually amounts to empty slogans. “The function of activists,” he writes, “is to translate protest into organized action, which has the chance to develop and to transcend immediate needs and aspirations toward a radical reconstruction of society.”

Clearly, resistance to this impending and ongoing reality of neo-fascism is more urgent than ever and necessitates challenging not only the commanding structures of economic power but also those powerful cultural apparatus that trade in the currency of ideas. A formidable resistance movement must work hard to create a formative culture that empowers and brings together the most vulnerable along with those who inhabit single issue movements.

The power of such a broad-based movement could draw inspiration from the historically relevant anti-war, anti-racist, and civil rights movements of the sixties and the ACT UP movement of the late eighties. At the same time, current social movements such as Podemos in Spain also offer the possibility of creating new political formations that are anti-fascist and fiercely determined to both challenge authoritarian regimes such as the Trump regime and dismantle the economic, ideological, and cultural structures that produce them. What all of these movements revealed was that diverse issues ranging from the war abroad to the racist and homophobic wars at home were symptomatic of a more profound illness and deeper malady that demanded a new understanding of theory, politics, and oppression.

There is certainly something to be learned from older proven tactics such as using education to create a revolution in consciousness and values along with broad-based alliances to create the conditions for mass disruptions such as the use of the general strike. Such tactics combine theory, consciousness and practice as part of a strategy to paralyze the working of this death dealing machinery of casino capitalism and its recent incarnation in the Trump administration.

One of the most powerful tools of oppression is convincing people that the conditions of oppression they experienced are both normal and cannot be changed. At the same time, this oppressive ideology of normalization prevents any understanding of the larger systemic forces of oppression by insisting that all problems are individually based and ultimately a matter of individual character and responsibility. Dominant ideology spread its message through a range of cultural apparatuses extending from the schools to the mainstream media. The message was generally the same in that it insisted that there are no structures of domination only flawed individuals solely responsible for the problems they experience and that the system of capitalism as a whole was organized for their own good. The sixties produced a range of critical thinkers who challenged this central element of oppression, and included Herbert Marcuse, Malcom X, W. E. B. Du Bois, James Baldwin, Robin Morgan, and Susan Willis to brilliant theorists such as Stanley Aronowitz, Mary Daly, Louis Althusser, Pierre Bourdieu, Zygmunt Bauman, and many others. For them structures of domination were rooted in both subjectivity itself as well as in larger economic apparatuses.

Those who believe in a radical democracy have got to find a way to make this regime ungovernable. Planting seeds and local actions are important, but there is a more urgent need to educate and mobilize through a comprehensive vision and politics that is capable of generating massive teach-ins all over the United States so as to enable a collective struggle aimed at producing powerful events such as a nation-wide boycott, sit-ins, and a general strike in order to bring the country to a halt.

The promise of such resistance must be rooted in the creation of a new political party of democratic socialists, one whose power is rooted in the organization of unions, educators, workers, young people, religious groups, and others who constitute a popular progressive base. There will be no resistance without a vision of a new society and new mechanisms of resistance. In this instance, resistance registers as a form of total paralysis for the financial elite, religious fundamentalists, and neo-conservative warmongers. In doing so, it gives birth to what we might term a politics of ungovernability.

America now chokes on its claim to innocence. Up until now, it has been successful in both evading that fact and covering up its lies—lies about its history, about social mobility, about freedom, about justice, about the end of racism, about the value of meritocracy, about spreading democracy abroad, and so it goes. The era of hiding behind this mythical innocence has passed. In the age of Trump, the raw brutality of casino capitalism, with its highly visible acts of violence against all aspects of ethical and political decency, is enacted without apology.

A moral political coma now drives an authoritarian society that embraces greed, racism, hatred, inequality, stupidity, disposability, and lawlessness, all of which are celebrated as national virtues. The dark present is now the endpoint of a history of violence and barbarism that can no longer be camouflaged, in part, because it is unapologetic about the viciousness of its practices and the savagery of its effects. I want to hope that this moment of unmitigated violence, this period of punitiveness, and era of unimaginable cruelty will provoke people to wake up from the nightmare that has befallen the American public. Hopefully, in that wakefulness, in a resurgent act of witnessing and moral outrage will grow and provide the basis for a new kind of politics, a fierce wind of resistance, and a struggle too powerful to be defeated.

 

Henry A. Giroux is a Contributing Editor for Tikkun magazine and the McMaster University Professor for Scholarship in the Public Interest and The Paulo Freire Distinguished Scholar in Critical Pedagogy. His most recent books include The Violence of Organized Forgetting (City Lights, 2014), Dangerous Thinking in the Age of the New Authoritarianism (Routledge, 2015), coauthored with Brad Evans, Disposable Futures: The Seduction of Violence in the Age of Spectacle (City Lights, 2015), and America at War with Itself (City Lights, 2016). His website is www.henryagiroux.com.
Comparte este contenido: