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

New California law requires high schools to start later

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 267 posts

Re: New California law requires high schools to start later

#141

Post by logicalmonster »

givemeethekeys wrote: post #4

8:30 or later. Good. I say start it at 10. Let the kids sleep in and be happier for it.

As a former child, I truly understand that a lack of sleep is a problem in teens, but I think this solution is probably worse for everybody.

1) The flipside to starting much later is that kids will be exiting schools later. Want to participate in some after school activities or clubs that aren't physically in school? A HS kid wants to hold down a little part time job so she can save to buy that first car or afford that summer trip she wants? Any activities out of school become much more difficult to manage if the exiting time moves any later. And these extracurriculars are also a big part of many peoples' lives.

2) I think it's naive to think that kids will get much extra sleep regardless of the school starting time. Their need for socialization and leisure activities out of school doesn't suddenly vanish if school starts later: they just get shifted. If you tell kids that they can manage to wake up at 9 instead of 7 and still make it to school on time, they'll just tend to stay up about 2 hours later playing games, watching movies, or chatting with friends. The end result might be about the same amount of sleep.

3) Logistically, it's hard enough for most parents to see their kids for a few minutes and deal with getting their kids out of the door in the morning (or driving them to school) when their wakeup times roughly coincide and they can get a little breakfast together or have a few minutes to chat. Trying to arrange a much different school schedule for kids is going to present a lot more difficulties to working parents, particularly if the kid has some special needs, is a tad rebellious about going to school, or you have to drive them for some other reason.

Just thinking out loud here, but I'd say that getting rid of the nightly busy work (homework) is a better way to fix teens schedules. They already spend enough time at school learning. Stop forcing them to waste an hour or two every night regurgitating mostly busy work and then feeling like crap and needing to stay up another few hours decompressing. Let them get their fill of fun and socialization after a long day. Without the burden of homework, most teens have enough extra time in the day to get a little extra rest and still have enough to unwind and feel like a human.

Re: New California law requires high schools to start later

#142

Post by ghaff »

thehappypm wrote: post #113
gonehome wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. It's way better for younger kids to start earlier than older kids, gives time for parents to get them out the door before work (older kids can manage themselves). There's also some evidence that older kids have more trouble getting up super early. 2. Highly regionally variable (California summer is the best season by far, east coast summer is much worse than fall) - summer also has the longest daytime light which…

East coast summer is much worse than fall? What do you mean?

Depends on a lot of things of course--including where on the East Coast and the activity. (I wouldn't make such a categorical statement about Maine for example.) But not so hot and humid. Not so buggy. (Also fewer people.) In general, I'd say that September/October are the ideal months for much of New England (and a lot of the West Coast as well.)

Re: New California law requires high schools to start later

#143

Post by veilrap »

khazhoux wrote: post #89
ar_lan wrote: post #80

This seems crazy late. IIRC I had a 0-period class starting at 6:00am. Starting 2.5 hours later is surprising. If I were back in high school, all this would have told me is that I'm staying up until at least midnight, if not later. I was usually good about sleeping around 9:30pm which gave me roughly 9 hours sleep. Since I assume this means school will end later in the day, this just means homework gets pushed much l…

> I had a 0-period class starting at 6:00am Your school admins were assholes. What unholy sadists would start school that early?? What country was this?

In the US, I had similar (not quite as early) optional 0-period classes in high school that started around 6:45AM. It was awesome, small class sizes (because it was optional), interesting useful topics (Math and Philosophy).

I'm happy my school admins made this available to us. I don't understand your rage.

Re: New California law requires high schools to start later

#144

Post by ravitation »

adamw2k wrote: post #134

Many folks are talking about bus schedules, but California hardly offers transporation in most districts. Only 9% of children take a bus to school [1] and that's been trending down for decades. Pay more, get less; sad state of affairs. [1] https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-02-03/californ...

Finally. There are these long comment threads talking about high school students taking public transit/school buses, but that just isn't how most high school students get to school. It is unfortunate that mid/late teenagers are so dependent on cars, which often means dependent on a parent or other adult, but that's the type of cities we've built in this country.

Re: New California law requires high schools to start later

#145

Post by dang »

iso1631 wrote: post #51
giantg2 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you think this has nothing to do with parents? You do realize that 14-17 is still a minor?

If your 14 year old is not capable of sorting themselves out for a couple of hours you've failed as a parent, and your idea that a 17 year old needs a parent to wipe their bottom is hilarious?! Do you think something magically happens on their 18th birthday?

Please don't post in the flamewar style to HN. It's not what this site is for, and it destroys what it is for.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: New California law requires high schools to start later

#146

Post by lcvw »

imadethis wrote: post #92
bluGill wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They already have daycare picking the kids up. Now they have to drop the kids off, and the kids can't really do anything at daycare because they are quickly getting into the bus to get to school, then when off school there is less time to do anything before their parents pick them up again.

No high school student is going to daycare though, and this law is specifically for high school students.

High school has sports and activities though. I know many families that use the sports team as if it were a day care. If they do sports the kids usually get out somewhere between 4:30 and 5:30. Where I live now, a lot of the high schoolers are in school 7:30-5:30. It’s pretty ridiculous, since they also have homework. Many high schools seem to be in the process of transforming themselves into juvenile prisons designed to keep teenagers away from the rest of society.

Re: New California law requires high schools to start later

#147

Post by sharadov »

JJMcJ wrote: post #127
sharadov wrote: post #120

Elementary school kids have an easier schedule and tend to go to bed early. Teens in high school tend have a more intense schedule ( academics, sports, other activities). The teen body is growing more quickly and they need about 8 to 10 hrs of sleep. I know high schools that start at 7:50 am, that is criminal. Let the teens sleep in..

Used to be bedtime for even high schoolers would be 10 PM or earlier. No computers, one TV for the whole house. So getting up at 7 to make an 8:30 start wasn't so bad. My high school was a fifteen minute walk, or a similar bus ride in the winter. So it wasn't so bad.

Were you a 90s kid? I remember going to bed between 9 and 9:30 PM in high school, and being up at 6 am - since I went for a morning run, school did not start till 8:30 am..

Re: New California law requires high schools to start later

#148

Post by chrononaut »

iso1631 wrote: post #32
giantg2 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ten sounds like a nightmare for working parents. Eight seems like a completely reasonable start time to me, yet this law prevents that. Schools should be able to decide for themselves based off of the parents and what works for those in the district.

Why? We're talking high schools - which I believe in the US is about age 15 onwards, nothing to do with parents

It can be age 13 onward, although your point is still quite valid, even at 13.

Re: New California law requires high schools to start later

#150

Post by crooked-v »

koolba wrote: post #25
feet wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because the law is based around what's been observed behaviorally/biologically. Not what's good for working parents Schools shouldn't be forcing developing humans into a schedule that impairs their ability to learn and function, no matter what they want to decide

If they do enough physical and mental labor during the day and turn off their smart phones at night, they’ll have no issue going to sleep early enough. On the other hand if you do nothing mentally stimulating or physically tiring all day long, then of course you won’t be able to sleep till late.

Teenagers literally have different sleep rhythms than either children or adults, so in the average case staying up late is a symptom, not a cause.
Post reply on HN