Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California’s new law bans schools from starting before 8am

qz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 404 posts

Re: California’s new law bans schools from starting before 8am

#251

Post by shakna »

bobthecowboy wrote: post #231
jclulow wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are lots of benefits to uniforms. In NSW (Australia) public schools have uniforms, and parents pay for them. Low income families are generally able to obtain financial assistance through some grant, or fundraising programme; sometimes through donated uniforms. Uniforms actually help with socio-economic gaps: everybody dresses the same, regardless of whether you can afford more expensive status symbol clothing o…

I'm not super knowledgeable on the topic of uniforms, but don't other things just become the status symbol? Phones, laptops, cars, purses? A lot of these things already have premium brands that most people on this site could name trivially.

Other things do, but it still does protect to a certain an extent.

It is much harder to tell the poor child from the one who may not have eaten today and might not tomorrow.

It is harder to tell the well-off child from the super-rich child, because the status symbols are in reach of both.

It's not a perfect fix, but it reduces the gaps.

Re: California’s new law bans schools from starting before 8am

#252

Post by conanbatt »

arcticbull wrote: post #202
pjkundert wrote: post #153

Ah, meddling central-planners preventing hard-working families from doing what it takes to achieve their dreams... Don’t you just have to shake your head at people who’ve literally never had to accomplish anything life-and-death in their entitled little lives, making rules to protect us? It brings a tear to the eye.

Nope, it's science ( https://www.cdc.gov/features/school-start-times/index.html ).

Science says 8:30, law says 8:00, so the state is not following the state's recommendation.

Also, what is best for an ideal scenario for the idealized kid is not the same as what is best for the parents.

Finally the biggest perpetrator of sending kids early is precisely public schooling, private schooling has variety that suits the parent's choices.

What is the best public policy then? school vouchers, and let parents decide.

Re: California’s new law bans schools from starting before 8am

#253

Post by hamandcheese »

shantly wrote: post #155
unqueued wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had similar experiences. I and many other students would sleep in our winter coats on the morning bus ride, and it was hard to focus until about 10AM. I strongly suspect that school hours are based around parents work hours, even if that is not what they say.

In high school, they're based around having time after school for sports practice and other extracurriculars, mostly, from what I understand (I know a lot of K-12 teachers). That's why so many districts still make elementary schools start like 2hrs after those kids are wide awake and already having some of their best hours of the day, while the high schools start before the damn sun's up for about half the school yea…

Why don’t they just shorten the duration of school? Why does a senior in high school need 7 hours of classes 5 days a week, but one summer later only need 4-5 hours of classes 3 times a week as a freshman in college?

Re: California’s new law bans schools from starting before 8am

#254

Post by shakna »

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #248
skissane wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a non-American I find this interesting, that school start times would be decided based on availability of buses. Here in Australia, most schools don't own their own buses (I see a few expensive private schools do). Buses are provided by private bus companies and/or by a government-owned bus company (depending on who provides regular non-school bus services in the area). The bus fare is either paid by the student's…

>Bus availability is something for bus companies to worry about, not schools. If you have all 3 classes of students going to school at the same time, your bus costs are going to be 3 times as high. It doesn't matter if it's public or private, that's just how it works.

> If you have all 3 classes of students going to school at the same time, your bus costs are going to be 3 times as high. It doesn't matter if it's public or private, that's just how it works.

In Australia, it is also normal that all 3 classes of students also start at around the same time. (8:45-9:00am).

This doesn't seem to be a problem that the public transit system seems incapable of handling.

Re: California’s new law bans schools from starting before 8am

#255

Post by aloukissas »

guiambros wrote: post #166
ThomPete wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not anectdotal and i would urge you to point to the scientific studies so we can debate their methodology and “scientific” base. I’m too old to just take these kind of studies as science without looking at the details. Now you dont have to take my examples for more than they are but they sure contradict the claims being made in this thread and onna state level.

Why We Sleep [1], by Matthew Walker, PhD. Page 92: " Adolescents face two other harmful challenges in their struggle to obtain sufficient sleep as their brains continue to develop. The first is a change in their circadian rhythm. The second is early school start times. " Also: " ... the circadian rhythm of a young child runs on an earlier schedule. Children therefore become sleepy earlier and wake up earlier than the…

100% this - I read the Why We Sleep book earlier this year and this quote immediately came to my head when I read this news.

Re: California’s new law bans schools from starting before 8am

#256

Post by skissane »

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #248
skissane wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a non-American I find this interesting, that school start times would be decided based on availability of buses. Here in Australia, most schools don't own their own buses (I see a few expensive private schools do). Buses are provided by private bus companies and/or by a government-owned bus company (depending on who provides regular non-school bus services in the area). The bus fare is either paid by the student's…

>Bus availability is something for bus companies to worry about, not schools. If you have all 3 classes of students going to school at the same time, your bus costs are going to be 3 times as high. It doesn't matter if it's public or private, that's just how it works.

Maybe we just spend 3 times as much money on busses than Americans do??? (I wouldn't know.)

Children and teenagers starting school at a reasonable hour seems far more important than saving money on buses.

Re: California’s new law bans schools from starting before 8am

#257

Post by kick »

sologoub wrote: post #236
shakna wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are grade schoolers doing assignments that can't reasonably be completed on a raspberry pi grade computer or lower? Any assignment that makes use of a proprietary software that the school has purchased. That is to say that there are plenty of times when a student _must_ use X software that only runs on platform Y, and the school very rarely takes into account what platforms the student may have available to them. I…

That’s why Chromebooks are a lot better choice - $150 buys you a reasonable example and you also don’t have to worry about kid breaking it and loosing weeks of work. Example: https://www.bestbuy.com/site/dell-11-6-chromebook-intel-cele... And for older kids, there’s Linux support, etc.

How long is a single Chromebook supposed to be viable? $150 is $150, but $150 for a Celeron and a nice display might not handle web standards for much longer.

Re: California’s new law bans schools from starting before 8am

#258

Post by AYBABTME »

crooked-v wrote: post #237
gundmc wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying teachers don't deserve to be paid more, but I was surprised to see how much Bay Area teachers make. It's public info for public schools.[1] In Santa Clara County, with no experience, starting salary is $71000. It increases on a schedule each year up to over $131000. Honestly, the job security, structured pay, and 3 months vacation per year is a pretty darn good deal. [1] - https://www.santaclarausd.org…

> 3 months vacation per year This perception is usually pretty inaccurate. There's no time given during the school year for essentials like curriculum development, continuing education requirements, training new teachers, etc, so that eats up time during the summer 'break'. https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/07/myth-o... > Klem says she’s spending the rest of her summer this year attending meetings, d…

As an engineer, I have to pursue a lot of "keeping up with trends" on my own time. I spend my own time setting up my computers. I get a stipend for professional development, but I bare the bulk of the cost and time (most of the time). I often work a lot more than 40h. I think all that you mention is not uncommon for professionals who want to develop their skills in a continuous manner. I could say the same for lawyers, business people, etc.

Re: California’s new law bans schools from starting before 8am

#260

Post by rdlecler1 »

_coveredInBees wrote: post #134
meristem wrote: post #34

Unfortunately, the school systems still rely on one parent at home. It is not just drop off and pick up times: school activities, parent-teacher conferences, etc. For example, in the SF Unified District, school tours for parents of kids entering kindergarten, middle school and high school are during the school hours, mostly in the morning. It is all built around the expectation of a parent at home or a job structure…

I understand the frustration, but I think it is absurd to expect teachers and school administrators (who are woefully underpaid, especially in the Bay area) to accommodate working parents by working extra hours just for the parent's benefit. It's a hard enough job as it is, what with the poor pay, large workload, dealing with entitled, helicopter parents and the diminishing societal appreciation for their contributio…

There’s a 20:1 to 30:1 ratio so are you suggesting it’s better for 20-30 working, single parent families? Maybe the government should pay teachers more and pay less on defense and we’d have a more productive society.
Post reply on HN