191–200 of 267 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If a high schooler needs to be driven to school by their parent, there is a serious street safety/transit problem which should be solved.
Ok, well it's not going to be solved. So what's your view on it now?
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.
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.
If I drove them (or when they were old enough to drive on their own), they could sleep nearly an hour later than if they had to take the bus. Since it wasn't much of a detour on my way to work, that's what I did.
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.
The problem with that approach is the debate tends to be led by football parents who want to make sure there’s ample time for the kids to beat each other senseless on the field. Literally, that’s the argument we got in Fairfax County when similar proposals were floated.
This sounds like a vast over simplification and plain scapegoating. All the school start time surveys I've seen typically have an even split up to moderately favoring normal start times. Half the school is not on the football team.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
> The flipside to starting much later is that kids will be exiting schools later 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.
This is how people can go to college and spend comparatively little time in class yet learn more than they did in high school.
https://www.cdc.gov/sleep/features/schools-start-too-early.h... https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aau6200
The fact that "late bedtimes" is listed as a cause is telling - shifting the start time later isn't likely to help if it just allows/causes people to shift their bedtimes later in response. Teens who go to bed at a reasonable hour are getting enough sleep and performing well.