What Confederacy of Imbiciles Is Working To Prevent A Later Start Time For MCPS High Schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously, ladies, enough already. The science is in:

https://www.cdc.gov/sleep/features/schools-start-too-early.html

This staggering of start times is 100% bass-ackwards.

Board of Education Approves Later School Start Times
Level Time Length of Day
High School 7:45 a.m.–2:30 p.m. 6 hours, 45 minutes
Middle School 8:15 a.m.–3:00 p.m. 6 hours, 45 minutes
Elementary School Tier 1 9:00 a.m.–3:25 p.m. 6 hours, 25 minutes
Elementary School Tier 2 9:25 a.m.–3:50 p.m. 6 hours, 25 minutes

So, let's say we flip that around. Give High school and Middle school the last two slots.

High school then gets out at 4:10. So, they START after school sports, jobs, and HW at 4:30?

That's not sustainable for most families, unless you don't value family time at all, or don't value your kid having sports, arts, employment etc . . .

It's a matter of prioritization. No reason kids can't do sports in the morning.

So they go to practice at 7 a.m.? So instead of getting up early for school now they get up early for sports? NO it doesn't work. You obviously don't have kids that play sports.

So essentially you want all high schoolers to get up early rather than just the ones who play sports?

Many fewer kids would do sports if it was scheduled that way. You would also have fewer coaches. DH was able to coach HS basketball for years only because it was after school.

Plus games would still have to be afterschool even if practices were before school. And many schools in MCPS rent out their gyms at 6 am for adults in the community to exercise. So that’s lost revenue.

Sports/revenue >>> academics. USA! USA!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably includes working parents of young children who’d rather not have to cover another hour of childcare in the afternoon. High school athletes who get home late enough as it is already. High school students with after school jobs. Is that enough imbeciles for you?

Not to mention all of the families that rely on older siblings for childcare. That was a major factor in the 2015 report if I recall correctly. Between older siblings providing care, and kids who needed money from after-school jobs, the later start time was going to have a severe effect on the financial well-being of some of the most vulnerable families in the district.

As a parent of an ES student, I have a hard time following the childcare piece. Our bus does not come until 9am- what parent can wait until 9am to start their commute to work (in normal times)? Most families end up utilizing before AND after care. And are there really that many young kids with teenage siblings to watch them in the afternoon?

I thought it was really more about preserving time for after school jobs and sports. But the trade off is not enough sleep and lower school performance.

When DD was in elementary school, we used before care because we could afford it. The low income parents dropped their kids off an hour early, and the kids had to wait outside the school in all weather for the doors to open. Everyone doesn’t live like you do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously, ladies, enough already. The science is in:

https://www.cdc.gov/sleep/features/schools-start-too-early.html

This staggering of start times is 100% bass-ackwards.

Board of Education Approves Later School Start Times
Level Time Length of Day
High School 7:45 a.m.–2:30 p.m. 6 hours, 45 minutes
Middle School 8:15 a.m.–3:00 p.m. 6 hours, 45 minutes
Elementary School Tier 1 9:00 a.m.–3:25 p.m. 6 hours, 25 minutes
Elementary School Tier 2 9:25 a.m.–3:50 p.m. 6 hours, 25 minutes

So, let's say we flip that around. Give High school and Middle school the last two slots.

High school then gets out at 4:10. So, they START after school sports, jobs, and HW at 4:30?

That's not sustainable for most families, unless you don't value family time at all, or don't value your kid having sports, arts, employment etc . . .

It's a matter of prioritization. No reason kids can't do sports in the morning.

So they go to practice at 7 a.m.? So instead of getting up early for school now they get up early for sports? NO it doesn't work. You obviously don't have kids that play sports.

So essentially you want all high schoolers to get up early rather than just the ones who play sports?

Many fewer kids would do sports if it was scheduled that way. You would also have fewer coaches. DH was able to coach HS basketball for years only because it was after school.

Plus games would still have to be afterschool even if practices were before school. And many schools in MCPS rent out their gyms at 6 am for adults in the community to exercise. So that’s lost revenue.

Sports/revenue >>> academics. USA! USA!

Seriously. I am just done with the way sports culture is allowed to warp everything else to fit its needs. You want your kid to do sports? Fine. Have him or her get up early like the kids on crew already do. They seem to manage fine. It simply more sense to fit game timing to circadian rhythms than vice versa. Solutions can be found (games on weekends!). Sports is an optional activity and it's time to putting the needs of student athletes over the needs of ALL kids.

I remember this article being pretty good: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/10/the-case-against-high-school-sports/309447/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Again, just look a lt a single boundary of any school and imagine where the kids live and then look at bus routes.

The only way it works is “special” buses and congratulations, you have now turned a RideOn bus into an expensive school bus. Also, LOL at getting kids waking and biking. The elementary school in the densest and most urban location in the county buses all the kids from the nearby apartments from within the walk zone. The schools that have the most walking are the schools located in purely residential neighborhoods.

You don’t have kids in MCPS do you?

Kids take RideOn/Metrobus to and from school, right now. Even if you don't know any. Which means that it actually is possible for kids to take RideOn/Metrobus to and from school. My MCPS kid does not take public transportation to school because there's a school bus, but if there were no school bus, my kid would take public transportation to school.

Also, addresses that have bus service are, by definition, not in the walk zone - though they may be within the walk distance. When MCPS provides bus service to kids within the walk distance, that's called hazard busing, and safer streets are the solution.

I think you are jut making things up. A lot of schools don't even have RideOn bus stops nearby. And yes, MCPS made a special exemption for one ES to provide buses to all families that live in apartments only blocks away. Good luck with your plan!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably includes working parents of young children who’d rather not have to cover another hour of childcare in the afternoon. High school athletes who get home late enough as it is already. High school students with after school jobs. Is that enough imbeciles for you?

Not to mention all of the families that rely on older siblings for childcare. That was a major factor in the 2015 report if I recall correctly. Between older siblings providing care, and kids who needed money from after-school jobs, the later start time was going to have a severe effect on the financial well-being of some of the most vulnerable families in the district.

As a parent of an ES student, I have a hard time following the childcare piece. Our bus does not come until 9am- what parent can wait until 9am to start their commute to work (in normal times)? Most families end up utilizing before AND after care. And are there really that many young kids with teenage siblings to watch them in the afternoon?

I thought it was really more about preserving time for after school jobs and sports. But the trade off is not enough sleep and lower school performance.

When DD was in elementary school, we used before care because we could afford it. The low income parents dropped their kids off an hour early, and the kids had to wait outside the school in all weather for the doors to open. Everyone doesn’t live like you do.

I have seen this as well. If MCPS wants to use this argument to support their decision not to budget more money for buses, they need to actually poll the parents who rely on older siblings for before or after care and get some numbers about whether before school or after school is a bigger problem. My sense is they both are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Again, just look a lt a single boundary of any school and imagine where the kids live and then look at bus routes.

The only way it works is “special” buses and congratulations, you have now turned a RideOn bus into an expensive school bus. Also, LOL at getting kids waking and biking. The elementary school in the densest and most urban location in the county buses all the kids from the nearby apartments from within the walk zone. The schools that have the most walking are the schools located in purely residential neighborhoods.

You don’t have kids in MCPS do you?

Kids take RideOn/Metrobus to and from school, right now. Even if you don't know any. Which means that it actually is possible for kids to take RideOn/Metrobus to and from school. My MCPS kid does not take public transportation to school because there's a school bus, but if there were no school bus, my kid would take public transportation to school.

Also, addresses that have bus service are, by definition, not in the walk zone - though they may be within the walk distance. When MCPS provides bus service to kids within the walk distance, that's called hazard busing, and safer streets are the solution.

I think you are jut making things up. A lot of schools don't even have RideOn bus stops nearby. And yes, MCPS made a special exemption for one ES to provide buses to all families that live in apartments only blocks away. Good luck with your plan!

Why? Both things are true:

1. Many kids take RideOn/Metrobus to school.
2. There are schools that don't have bus stops nearby (though I don't think it's a lot of schools).

Obviously if there's no bus stop nearby, then kids at that school probably aren't taking RideOn or Metrobus to school.

I don't understand the idea that, because not every MCPS student can take RideOn or Metrobus to school, we shouldn't expect any MCPS student to take RideOn or Metrobus to school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Again, just look a lt a single boundary of any school and imagine where the kids live and then look at bus routes.

The only way it works is “special” buses and congratulations, you have now turned a RideOn bus into an expensive school bus. Also, LOL at getting kids waking and biking. The elementary school in the densest and most urban location in the county buses all the kids from the nearby apartments from within the walk zone. The schools that have the most walking are the schools located in purely residential neighborhoods.

You don’t have kids in MCPS do you?

Kids take RideOn/Metrobus to and from school, right now. Even if you don't know any. Which means that it actually is possible for kids to take RideOn/Metrobus to and from school. My MCPS kid does not take public transportation to school because there's a school bus, but if there were no school bus, my kid would take public transportation to school.

Also, addresses that have bus service are, by definition, not in the walk zone - though they may be within the walk distance. When MCPS provides bus service to kids within the walk distance, that's called hazard busing, and safer streets are the solution.

I think you are jut making things up. A lot of schools don't even have RideOn bus stops nearby. And yes, MCPS made a special exemption for one ES to provide buses to all families that live in apartments only blocks away. Good luck with your plan!

You're missing the point. Cancel bus routes that are redundant with existing public transportation routes and reallocate those buses to areas without public transportation, so that we can have one or two district wide start times instead of three. Add more crossing guards to enable wider walking area. (At our elementary school there are areas that are like a quarter of a mile from school but on the other side of a busy street so get bus service--it's ridiculous.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously, ladies, enough already. The science is in:

https://www.cdc.gov/sleep/features/schools-start-too-early.html

This staggering of start times is 100% bass-ackwards.

Board of Education Approves Later School Start Times
Level Time Length of Day
High School 7:45 a.m.–2:30 p.m. 6 hours, 45 minutes
Middle School 8:15 a.m.–3:00 p.m. 6 hours, 45 minutes
Elementary School Tier 1 9:00 a.m.–3:25 p.m. 6 hours, 25 minutes
Elementary School Tier 2 9:25 a.m.–3:50 p.m. 6 hours, 25 minutes

So, let's say we flip that around. Give High school and Middle school the last two slots.

High school then gets out at 4:10. So, they START after school sports, jobs, and HW at 4:30?

That's not sustainable for most families, unless you don't value family time at all, or don't value your kid having sports, arts, employment etc . . .

It's a matter of prioritization. No reason kids can't do sports in the morning.

So they go to practice at 7 a.m.? So instead of getting up early for school now they get up early for sports? NO it doesn't work. You obviously don't have kids that play sports.

So essentially you want all high schoolers to get up early rather than just the ones who play sports?

Many fewer kids would do sports if it was scheduled that way. You would also have fewer coaches. DH was able to coach HS basketball for years only because it was after school.

Plus games would still have to be afterschool even if practices were before school. And many schools in MCPS rent out their gyms at 6 am for adults in the community to exercise. So that’s lost revenue.

Just so long as we don't lose sight of what's important. Go sports!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably includes working parents of young children who’d rather not have to cover another hour of childcare in the afternoon. High school athletes who get home late enough as it is already. High school students with after school jobs. Is that enough imbeciles for you?

Not to mention all of the families that rely on older siblings for childcare. That was a major factor in the 2015 report if I recall correctly. Between older siblings providing care, and kids who needed money from after-school jobs, the later start time was going to have a severe effect on the financial well-being of some of the most vulnerable families in the district.

As a parent of an ES student, I have a hard time following the childcare piece. Our bus does not come until 9am- what parent can wait until 9am to start their commute to work (in normal times)? Most families end up utilizing before AND after care. And are there really that many young kids with teenage siblings to watch them in the afternoon?

I thought it was really more about preserving time for after school jobs and sports. But the trade off is not enough sleep and lower school performance.

When DD was in elementary school, we used before care because we could afford it. The low income parents dropped their kids off an hour early, and the kids had to wait outside the school in all weather for the doors to open. Everyone doesn’t live like you do.

Just because we have idiotic anti-child policies in one area doesn't mean we need to have them in other areas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Like I said, the science is pretty clear that sending High School students to school at 7:45 is damaging. At the bare minimum the start times should be reversed. HS students should start at 9, elementary schoolers at 7:45. As far as after school jobs and sports, I would think that education and student's mental health should be the priority here.

I was taught younger kids need more sleep. I would rather a high schooler start early than ES. My high school started at 8, but I think all the levels started around the same time.

Younger kids need more sleep and go to bed earlier. This is directly backwards to the known, proven teen healthy sleep patterns. Links to the relevant data on that have already been posted here.

The idea that high schoolers should have to be at school at 7:30AM every day because their parents feel entitled to use them as free babysitters is asinine.

What is entitled and asinine is assuming that families whose older lids are watching the younger have a true choice. For many of my students, it is helping keep the family afloat financially because aftercare is both expensive and in short supply.

Yet another example of thinking that the health of ALL kids should suffer because no one can be bothered to think of other ways to address social problems. There is no dispute that later is better for all teenagers. It's one of the few things that is universally agreed upon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously, ladies, enough already. The science is in:

https://www.cdc.gov/sleep/features/schools-start-too-early.html

This staggering of start times is 100% bass-ackwards.

Board of Education Approves Later School Start Times
Level Time Length of Day
High School 7:45 a.m.–2:30 p.m. 6 hours, 45 minutes
Middle School 8:15 a.m.–3:00 p.m. 6 hours, 45 minutes
Elementary School Tier 1 9:00 a.m.–3:25 p.m. 6 hours, 25 minutes
Elementary School Tier 2 9:25 a.m.–3:50 p.m. 6 hours, 25 minutes

I don’t know why the HS and ES times aren’t flipped. We do that in Loudoun County and it’s the best.

Having read this thread, the only explanation that makes sense is that MCPS is just way too solicitous of the needs and interests of low-income families. That's just the way it is here--that's why school boundaries are so clearly drawn in the interest of educational equity.

Nothing to do with wealthy sports-moms and their schedules.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Again, just look a lt a single boundary of any school and imagine where the kids live and then look at bus routes.

The only way it works is “special” buses and congratulations, you have now turned a RideOn bus into an expensive school bus. Also, LOL at getting kids waking and biking. The elementary school in the densest and most urban location in the county buses all the kids from the nearby apartments from within the walk zone. The schools that have the most walking are the schools located in purely residential neighborhoods.

You don’t have kids in MCPS do you?

Kids take RideOn/Metrobus to and from school, right now. Even if you don't know any. Which means that it actually is possible for kids to take RideOn/Metrobus to and from school. My MCPS kid does not take public transportation to school because there's a school bus, but if there were no school bus, my kid would take public transportation to school.

Also, addresses that have bus service are, by definition, not in the walk zone - though they may be within the walk distance. When MCPS provides bus service to kids within the walk distance, that's called hazard busing, and safer streets are the solution.

I think you are jut making things up. A lot of schools don't even have RideOn bus stops nearby. And yes, MCPS made a special exemption for one ES to provide buses to all families that live in apartments only blocks away. Good luck with your plan!

Why? Both things are true:

1. Many kids take RideOn/Metrobus to school.
2. There are schools that don't have bus stops nearby (though I don't think it's a lot of schools).

Obviously if there's no bus stop nearby, then kids at that school probably aren't taking RideOn or Metrobus to school.

I don't understand the idea that, because not every MCPS student can take RideOn or Metrobus to school, we shouldn't expect any MCPS student to take RideOn or Metrobus to school.

It was a safety issue because of the streets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously, ladies, enough already. The science is in:

https://www.cdc.gov/sleep/features/schools-start-too-early.html

This staggering of start times is 100% bass-ackwards.

Board of Education Approves Later School Start Times
Level Time Length of Day
High School 7:45 a.m.–2:30 p.m. 6 hours, 45 minutes
Middle School 8:15 a.m.–3:00 p.m. 6 hours, 45 minutes
Elementary School Tier 1 9:00 a.m.–3:25 p.m. 6 hours, 25 minutes
Elementary School Tier 2 9:25 a.m.–3:50 p.m. 6 hours, 25 minutes

I don’t know why the HS and ES times aren’t flipped. We do that in Loudoun County and it’s the best.

Having read this thread, the only explanation that makes sense is that MCPS is just way too solicitous of the needs and interests of low-income families. That's just the way it is here--that's why school boundaries are so clearly drawn in the interest of educational equity.

Nothing to do with wealthy sports-moms and their schedules.

You can judge a society by its attitude towards the most vulnerable members.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously, ladies, enough already. The science is in:

https://www.cdc.gov/sleep/features/schools-start-too-early.html

This staggering of start times is 100% bass-ackwards.

Board of Education Approves Later School Start Times
Level Time Length of Day
High School 7:45 a.m.–2:30 p.m. 6 hours, 45 minutes
Middle School 8:15 a.m.–3:00 p.m. 6 hours, 45 minutes
Elementary School Tier 1 9:00 a.m.–3:25 p.m. 6 hours, 25 minutes
Elementary School Tier 2 9:25 a.m.–3:50 p.m. 6 hours, 25 minutes

I don’t know why the HS and ES times aren’t flipped. We do that in Loudoun County and it’s the best.

Having read this thread, the only explanation that makes sense is that MCPS is just way too solicitous of the needs and interests of low-income families. That's just the way it is here--that's why school boundaries are so clearly drawn in the interest of educational equity.

Nothing to do with wealthy sports-moms and their schedules.

You can judge a society by its attitude towards the most vulnerable members.

When you do, you should also ask yourself whether policies are paying lip service to helping the most vulnerable members or whether those most in need of support are really being served. How do teens and their families compensate for lack of sleep? Who is most likely to be most harmed by unhealthy start times?

On the subject of health, also think about what populations are likely to suffer the most when younger kids come home from school at an hour that allows very little daylight time for part of the year? If you are worried about childhood obesity, think about whether getting home at at 4:20 is really good for kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

When you do, you should also ask yourself whether policies are paying lip service to helping the most vulnerable members or whether those most in need of support are really being served. How do teens and their families compensate for lack of sleep? Who is most likely to be most harmed by unhealthy start times?

On the subject of health, also think about what populations are likely to suffer the most when younger kids come home from school at an hour that allows very little daylight time for part of the year? If you are worried about childhood obesity, think about whether getting home at at 4:20 is really good for kids.

Speaking of the big picture - if we had safe streets and a good public transportation system, then most kids wouldn't need a school bus to get to or from school, and then MCPS wouldn't have to arrange school start times around school buses. To say nothing of the additional benefits for children's health and family stability.