221–230 of 267 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But if all schools have to start later, employers will need to work around that
Some might. I bet many won't. Good luck doing business with the east coast if your office doesn't open until 11 am pacific.
8:30 or later. Good. I say start it at 10. Let the kids sleep in and be happier for it.
Another quicker read is here: Chronotype and Adolescence: Why being an "evening person" as a teenager is disadvantageous [https://www.psychologyinaction.org/psychology-in-action-1/20...]
Basically, even for those who don’t have a night owl chronotype, our sleep shifts back during adolescence. We now know how important sleep is for learning and memory consolidation.
Having schools stagger start time for different cohorts based on preference sounds like the most obvious answer to me to alleviate the problems caused by imposing early start times on all students. One size fits all is hardly ever the best solution.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a catasrophic level of disrespect for the younger generation. It is clear by looking at the tone in the media, the derision with which issues that affect them are treated and the level of devastation we are leaving for them to handle, both in financial debt and climate change. I don't know if it's envy, if they oldies are uncomfortable with change, or they just feel incomplete if there isn't someone lower do…
FWIW, Boomers were a very entitled generation. They have the post-war benefits of their previous generation and ran up a huge deficit for the following generations to pay back.
That's a better description of the Silent Generation than the Boomers.
8:30 or later. Good. I say start it at 10. Let the kids sleep in and be happier for it.
10am would mean less time for instruction or after-school programs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FWIW, Boomers were a very entitled generation. They have the post-war benefits of their previous generation and ran up a huge deficit for the following generations to pay back.
> Boomers were a very entitled generation. They have the post-war benefits of their previous generation and ran up a huge deficit for the following generations to pay back That's a better description of the Silent Generation than the Boomers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While as a parent myself I agree but this is high school. Generally speaking someone who's 13 or older should be able to make their way onto a bus without an adult. When I was that age (granted this was the 90s) I had a key to the house and was trusted to let myself in when I got back. 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.
> 13 or older Jeez, we've really infantilized our kids.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Boomers were a very entitled generation. They have the post-war benefits of their previous generation and ran up a huge deficit for the following generations to pay back That's a better description of the Silent Generation than the Boomers.
I've literally never heard the silent generation described in that way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"which is supposed to serve its demographic broadly." Which the current times do. "The rule being set by the state or by the local school district is hardly of consequence." This is totally untrue. At the district level, parents have more say in creating the rules that work for them (their local demographic!). "You're okay with painting broad strokes about parents' lives but then make an argument about individual stu…
> Which the current times do. According to... what? The whole reason that California passed a law like this and why it's been suggested to push up the start time for high school is largely because the time that many school districts started their high schoolers at was of negative consequence to the children. > This is totally untrue. At the district level, parents have more say in creating the rules that work for the…
That hasn't been proven yet. I guess we'll see with the next year's test scores compared to this year. I don't expect much to change test-wise. I do expect extracurricular partipation will drop.
"Are you saying that you'd have no objections if the local school district chose to start high school at a later time? "
Yes, I would be fine with districts starting later if the district was the one deciding it based on parental representation. At least then we could have a local discussion and do what works best for us.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their parents will still likely wake them up when they go off to work.
I am VERY close to this situation, I'm married to a California teacher. Most of the kids hate this idea. 1. They know they and everyone else will just stay up later. 2. School will go on too late in the day, sports participation is dropping appreciably. 3. Those who work after school or school/sports are quitting sports to work, and planning ways to leave when they did previously to go to work. This is incredibly sho…