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

131–140 of 404 posts

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

#131

Post by freddie_mercury »

ThomPete wrote: post #129
jjeaff wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not true according to multiple studies. On mobile, but you can Google them. Kids were found to do better when starting later, regardless of how early the kids go to bed. The effect is more pronounced in high school aged kids. Additionally, there is something to be said for accommodating kids who don't have a stable enough home life or parents that care or realize the damage caused by not enough sleep.

I dont know what you mean with better, my two sons are top performers in their school and the school network is top 3% performing in NY state. They are in school at 7:45 latest each morning. There are many benefits to getting an early start in the morning as ling as you have had a long nights sleep. So i would like to see the base if those studies as they dont reflect the reality and statistics i know of. Edit to tho…

Your single anecdote does not outweigh the many, many scientific studies that been conducted on this subject (or any other subject for that matter).

I would have that would be obvious to a HN reader.

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

#132

Post by jcims »

socalnate1 wrote: post #3

My high school started at 7am. I also took the bus; which picked up around 6:15am; so I usually woke up around 5:45am during the week. I would often nod off during my first or second period; and routinely took 2-3 hour naps when I got home from school; which screwed up my ability to fall asleep early at night or get much homework done. I sometimes wonder what my academics would have been like if I was actually awake…

Grew up in Ohio in the 80's same deal from 6th through 11th grade. Hour long bus ride, class started at 7am. Nice thing was we were the first off the bus on the way home, so we were home by ~3pm and got to sleep for a couple hours before parents came home.

Another benefit of delaying start is fewer kids driving in the dark in winter and more time for morning fog to burn off on those marginal days that weren't bad enough in town for a delay.

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

#133

Post by selectodude »

ThomPete wrote: post #129
jjeaff wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not true according to multiple studies. On mobile, but you can Google them. Kids were found to do better when starting later, regardless of how early the kids go to bed. The effect is more pronounced in high school aged kids. Additionally, there is something to be said for accommodating kids who don't have a stable enough home life or parents that care or realize the damage caused by not enough sleep.

I dont know what you mean with better, my two sons are top performers in their school and the school network is top 3% performing in NY state. They are in school at 7:45 latest each morning. There are many benefits to getting an early start in the morning as ling as you have had a long nights sleep. So i would like to see the base if those studies as they dont reflect the reality and statistics i know of. Edit to tho…

Getting out of bed before ten no matter when I went to sleep was a mortal struggle until I was probably 25. Now I’m gassed by 11 and up by 6. The research has shown that circadian rhythms change with age.

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

#134

Post by _coveredInBees »

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 contributions and importance to society.

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

#135

Post by corey_moncure »

plughs wrote: post #120
Hermitian909 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can tell you that, through most of the bay area at least, those policies are mostly about intentional socioeconomic segregation. My family has deep ties to local education infrastructure and its well known that most of the advocates for these policies are trying to keep poor kids out of their schools. While they don't say it in public forums they're generally more than happy to tell you in private.

Every year I see what a insurmountable advantage my kid has by having educated, comfortably well off parents. He's in 3rd grade and last week he had a homework assignment that had to be completed on a computer. What, your kid doesn't have their own computer at home? Tough luck! We're also already into 'projects' - more hours of work, more resources to buy. "oh you can do it with stuff around the house" (no you can't)…

Are grade schoolers doing assignments that can't reasonably be completed on a raspberry pi grade computer or lower? It's difficult for me to imagine it, or the family that has two working parents yet legitimately can't fit $40 into the budget over the entirety of their child's career in school.

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

#136

Post by PeterisP »

ThomPete wrote: post #117
pbreit wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

8am or later start probably has more to do with kids being sufficiently awake, an important state when attending school.

Kids put properly to bed at proper time is more than fresh at 7. Thats the least of the problems here.

If school starts at 7:30, then that kid isn't waking up fresh at 7, they have to be woken up significantly earlier. I shudder to think of the other examples in the comments which have to already be in school at 7.

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

#137

Post by SchoolNDaycare »

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…

Uhhh, ya think? It's "school" not "free childcare" -- entitled parents ahoy!

Maybe people should consider the cost of having children BEFORE actually having them. Jesus Christ.

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

#138

Post by topkai22 »

skissane wrote: post #67
topkai22 wrote: post #61

This is a great move by California. My family engaged with school district officials a few times on why we started school so early, when there is so much research showing it is harmful for teenager. The answer we got was... buses and sports. And little kids. Basically, the district needed to make sure that elementary school kids weren't walking to school or waiting for buses in the dark, so they had to start around 9…

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…

School bussing in the United States has an incredibly complex legal history related to desegration and civil rights. Moving to a fee for use system is probably legally impossible(or at least very difficult) in most of the United States.

There are also reasonably strong public sector unions representing school bus drivers, who in many areas have gotten various job requirements codified that make outsourcing difficult.

Even with all that, my school district runs the bus system fairly efficiently-around a $2.25/trip with all overhead included.

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

#139

Post by Hermitian909 »

lonelappde wrote: post #83
Hermitian909 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can tell you that, through most of the bay area at least, those policies are mostly about intentional socioeconomic segregation. My family has deep ties to local education infrastructure and its well known that most of the advocates for these policies are trying to keep poor kids out of their schools. While they don't say it in public forums they're generally more than happy to tell you in private.

You are claiming that poor parents will changed their school choice based on the availability of parent-teacher conferences? And that the problem of poverty is overemployment, not underemployment?

So the following is a true story:

In a district in the bay area, one of the elementary schools was given a certain special designation that allowed them to accept kids from the district by lottery. The condition of entering the lottery was as follows:

1. A parent must take a 2 hour tour of the school, tour times were between 9 am and 3 pm.

2. A parent must sign an agreement to volunteer at the school at least 3 days a year.

Number 2 was unenforceable, and many flouted it, but poorer (mostly non-white) families who actually managed to schedule the tour generally backed out upon hearing that requirement.

Diversity plummeted, the school went from 60% white to 90% white in 5 years (though the district as a whole became less white).

This lasted over a decade, and only recently was the system overturned by popular vote. Every incoming class since then has been significantly more diverse.

--------------

The point is that those who can afford to live in the bay area and not work every weekday are the well to do. As a software engineer I can usually just tell my boss "I've got an important personal matter" and get the day off. People I know who work as janitors or barista's often get told "well, if you don't show up you're fired" for the same request.

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

#140

Post by kbrackbill »

corey_moncure wrote: post #135
plughs wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every year I see what a insurmountable advantage my kid has by having educated, comfortably well off parents. He's in 3rd grade and last week he had a homework assignment that had to be completed on a computer. What, your kid doesn't have their own computer at home? Tough luck! We're also already into 'projects' - more hours of work, more resources to buy. "oh you can do it with stuff around the house" (no you can't)…

Are grade schoolers doing assignments that can't reasonably be completed on a raspberry pi grade computer or lower? It's difficult for me to imagine it, or the family that has two working parents yet legitimately can't fit $40 into the budget over the entirety of their child's career in school.

That's a little disingenuous, you can't just use a raspberry pi by itself. You need an SD card, keyboard, mouse (probably), display (maybe could use a TV for this if you have one). It seems like it'd be at least $100. That's still not a ton, but for a family working a bunch of minimum wage or gig jobs it's not nothing.

edit: not to mention internet, router, wifi dongle or ethernet cord, etc.

Post reply on HN