Personally I would benefit from this bill due to the hours my wife and I work. I actually think it is a good idea if it is treated as study hall or recitation classes. However, if we expect teachers to become glorified daycare employees after school then that would be a massive mistake and demeaning to them and their profession.
That's definitely fair, as I've made clear previously that the biggest issue of the bill is more about how the funds will actually be provided, and how the staff will actually be properly compensated for this.
The reason this works at the private and well-funded schools is because teachers there are already better compensated for their time there, so it makes sense, and works out for them since they would have already known about those programs, and joined those schools as something they already knew they would be contributing to.
It's more difficult to implement here as many teachers didn't sign up for this, and nor were they properly compensated to begin with for regular school hours. This bill needs to do a better job addressing that, and also defining exactly what that extra hourly rates would be, and how it would be compensated fairly for their time. They will also need to start thinking about additional resources and candidates outside of the basic curriculum of staffing, as many teachers who were at schools found themselves without a job when extra-curricular activities were cut, so there's many teachers out there, but how will they be able to engage those additional faculty to contribute to this program, rather than just having existed faculty, who may not even be equipped for these extracurriculars, to be properly implemented?
The bill isn't perfect for sure, but I also feel we should start thinking about how to improve it, rather than how to take it down, as I still feel the core of this bill, though many people seem to be missing it, is not only practical, but already exists, but just not for low-income communities.
