161–170 of 267 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't really work like that for those of us who aren't "morning people." I will feel exhausted if I have to get up at 7:30, but will feel amazingly awake with the same number of hours if I can sleep in till 9am. It's not just the number of hours, but how they align to the daily clock.
> Let me guess, you’ve always been a morning person? Please don't cross into personal attack. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
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 th…
Or they could just give that time back. Maybe things have changed, but back when I was in school, almost every class was a waste of time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most of America is a serious street safety/transit problem which should be solved. A plurality ~35% of high school students are driven to school, though not necessarily by a parent. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0739456X1772514... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-07/how-dista... EDIT: This is nationwide, there's reason to believe this percentage is probably higher in California.
I was one of those kids. Only because taking the bus was a pain in the ass and my parents loved me enough to put up with it, at least until I could drive. Bus was awful. Kids had no respect for the driver or other kids. Plus it easily tripled the commute time.
Exactly. Similar to the problem many adults have trying to get to work by bus, it often doubles or triples a commute time.
While letting yawning teenagers get more sleep seems obvious, the lesser evil is having them get up while it's dark out instead of making 10 year olds walk to the bus stop in darkness, or walk home in twilight. Folks would drive their kids to school if they could, my dad did for me and my little brother as much as possible, but in a household where both parents have jobs, it's not a realistic solution, and that was the reality for most people in the district I lived in.
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…
Fr lol all this will do is make kids less disciplined. They need to be forced to go to bed and get up early precisely because it is harder than getting up late and staying up late. Inertia says its easier to stay up late than get up early so since we need to put discipline into kids we should do the opposite. Kids will otherwise just stay up late watching TV and smoking marijuana.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Education is more important than playing football. Working is more important than playing football (for those who need the money). Anecdotally, when I was in high school, with a 7:30 AM start, around 25% of the class was asleep through 1st period. And this was in honors/AP courses with the kids who wanted to learn, get good grades, and generally be successful.
Football (and its school attendance and passing grade requirements) might be the thing keeping a kid in school and getting an education.
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 th…
3) Who says their waking coincides with the current times? Doesn't for us. Something like 9:30 or 10:00 would.
8:30 or later. Good. I say start it at 10. Let the kids sleep in and be happier for it.
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.
What's worse is the end of day. My kid is younger and I need to be at the bus stop at 3:50 PM every day to meet her.
8:30 or later. Good. I say start it at 10. Let the kids sleep in and be happier for it.
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.
My high school started at 8:20 but we had a 0-period option at 7:15 which is when we were able to take other arts classes like concert band.
I ultimately was in 3 music related classes in high school: concert band at 0-period, jazz band at 4th period, and a small combo band after school 3-days per week.
I loved having a longer day when it meant I could do more of what I wanted to do and also get some flexibility around the school's otherwise rigid schedule but looking back I really appreciate that the longer day was at least partially from starting earlier.
Starting these longer days early meant I still had a lot of free time after school as well to spend with friends even if they were involved in the "standard" day and gave me unstructured free time before my parents came home and before I had to worry about doing things like homework.