New California law requires high schools to start later • Hacker News Board

Re: New California law requires high schools to start later

#241

Post by lttlrck » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 2:02 AM UTC

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?

Madness. I had a 9am start from elementary through to university. In the UK.

I'm in Southern California now. My kids middle school starts at 9... I'm glad High School will now be similar.

Re: New California law requires high schools to start later

#242

Post by logicalmonster » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 2:05 AM UTC

eikenberry wrote: post #167

logicalmonster wrote: post #141

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…

1) They wouldn't need to get out any later. Most of the school day is basically baby sitting and they could easily fit the actual teaching in 2) There have been bunches of studies that show teenagers don't get proper sleep specifically when they get up early. There is something about that age that requires sleeping later to get good rest. No matter when they go to bed. 3) Who says their waking coincides with the curr…

I think we're in agreement that sleep is an issue for a lot of kids, but the devil is in a ton of details about how society is organized.

To comment on your points...

> 1) They wouldn't need to get out any later. Most of the school day is basically baby sitting and they could easily fit the actual teaching in I agree that they wouldn't need to get out any later and that most of the school day is a waste and can be radically compressed, but I sincerely doubt that this is what would happen. If we're talking about showing up to school later and leaving at the same time, I'd say that's a big win over the current situation. Please tell me I've misread things and this is what we're talking about. I'd be happy to have that be the outcome, but I doubt it.

> 2) There have been bunches of studies that show teenagers don't get proper sleep specifically when they get up early. There is something about that age that requires sleeping later to get good rest. No matter when they go to bed.

I've seen similar tendencies in the studies I've come across as well, but I'm not convinced that the stats are interpreted correctly based on human nature. My thinking is that the people who need sleep the most probably aren't going to go to bed at a sane time and end up with a large net sleep gain. That said, I'm a little open-minded about this point applying to many (but not all people)

> 3) Who says their waking coincides with the current times? Doesn't for us. Something like 9:30 or 10:00 would.

Everybody's job and life situation is different, but I'd bet that a lot of lower income people have to deal with getting to work earlier, and have more transportation issues (trying to connect to multiple busses and trains, etc) and more complex childcare requirements necessitating less overall time flexibility in the morning.

I'd wager it's largely the technical, white-collar class that can show up later and generally has a quicker path to work (work in pajamas in living room, or hop into the car in the driveway and drive to work with no connecting delays)

Re: New California law requires high schools to start later

#243

Post by jbluepolarbear » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 2:35 AM UTC

xkbarkar wrote: post #201

Amazing how this irritates many. We never had classes before 8.30 ( not US ) when I was a kid. School starting at 7 would have caused an outrage. Parents were generally starting work between 8-9 so dropping of the kid on the way to work makes sense. At 7 most parents would have been an hour early for work which is not awesome for everyone. How bizarre to read that an entire culture apparently has promoted extraordina…

I went to high school 20 years ago and it started at 7:15 am and got out at 2:15 pm. I walked to school so it was never a problem for my parents.

Re: New California law requires high schools to start later

#244

Post by sjs382 » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 2:49 AM UTC

xkbarkar wrote: post #201

Amazing how this irritates many. We never had classes before 8.30 ( not US ) when I was a kid. School starting at 7 would have caused an outrage. Parents were generally starting work between 8-9 so dropping of the kid on the way to work makes sense. At 7 most parents would have been an hour early for work which is not awesome for everyone. How bizarre to read that an entire culture apparently has promoted extraordina…

I gree up in a suburban (but bordering city limits) district outside of Pittsburgh. In high school, our first bell was at 8:40. In middle school, 8:20.

Re: New California law requires high schools to start later

#245

Post by radley » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 3:51 AM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #224

radley wrote: post #217

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.

The generation who grew up during the Great Depression and WWII were very entitled???

Re: New California law requires high schools to start later

#246

Post by SlightlyLeftPad » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 5:39 AM UTC

radley wrote: post #217

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #210

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.

I actually agree with you and millennials are, rightfully, somewhat bitter about it. It’s not just post-war benefits. It was the era of 9-5 jobs, pensions, union jobs that paid nearly 6 figures in rural America…in the 90s…with no education, fully paid medical benefits for the family, and cheap homes.

What do we have now? Self managed 401k which you have pour a life savings and second mortgage into in order to beat inflation, overpopulated suburbs, record levels of pollution, rising temperatures, impossibly expensive homes, their kids getting shot in schools, their rights being stripped away, skyrocketing college tuition costs…

I actually believe a lot of millennials don’t know how bad they have it comparatively and somewhat ironically, boomers also don’t know how good they had it.

Re: New California law requires high schools to start later

#247

Post by perydell » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 5:47 AM UTC

quartz wrote: post #170

I hope this law doesn't prevent early morning extra-curricular classes. 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…

The zero period classes are still allowed to happen.

Re: New California law requires high schools to start later

#248

Post by spc476 » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 7:40 AM UTC

polski-g wrote: post #239

spc476 wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I attended elementary school (age 5-10, grades 1-5) in a small town. Each bus did four trips---two in the morning, and two in the afternoon. The morning trip wasn't bad as the kids needed to be at the stop in time for the bus to pick them up. It was after school that was bad for "second load" kids---they had to wait maybe half an hour (or more) for the bus to finish the route for the kids in "first load".

Seems like they could just pick up all aged kids at the same time and make multiple drop-off points at the various schools.

Not enough buses for that.

Re: New California law requires high schools to start later

#249

Post by pleb_nz » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 7:45 AM UTC

bragr wrote: post #77

My highschool started at 7:15AM. I have no memory now (~15 years later) of any first period classes. I can remember things for 2nd period and later, but first period? Not even vague memories.

I'm surprised you remember any classes. I certainly don't.

Re: New California law requires high schools to start later

#250

Post by yesco » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 7:52 AM UTC

collegeburner wrote: post #237

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There seem to be 3 attitudes to kids: 1 - Adults that get some kind of power trip out of tyrany and justify it by 'toughening them up'. They demand respect and dicipline they never had themselves. They will have endless stories about how their childhood was tough, and they had to talk to school and home 10 miles, alone, thorugh the snow, and it was uphill both ways 2 - Adults that 'care', by helicoptering over kids a…

Quoted post unavailable.

I'm not sure how making children get up earlier in the morning builds character? It seems like a very silly assertion to me, and not one motivated by self-improvement.