Bell times predictions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When they surveyed the parents a students the vast majority wanted a change. It's only on dcum that I hear people are against it.

Disagree. Most ES are against any changes. The tier 2 don't want another 20min added making dismissal 4pm and getting off busses at 4:30 when the sun is going down. It also causes working parents to have issues starting school at 9:45am.

Tier 1 schools do not want start time at 7:30am because the kids are getting on the bus or walking to school at the darkest, coldest time of the day.

I honestly think the only decent change is middle school first. But honestly, I don't think it should change at all. I just think teens need to shut down screens and get to bed earlier.

I have one child in a Tier 1 and another in a Tier 2. Everyone I know was disappointed in June bc they wanted the times to change.

To what? There are 6 options on the table.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most parents work and kids go to after care. Why are your kids so needy that they have to come home so early? And why do their needs trump the needs of teenagers who need to sleep later?

Teens do not NEED to sleep later. They need more sleep period. They won't get it by changing the times.

And the full busses leaving at my kids elementary school compared to the 30-40 kids in after-care proves your point completely inaccurate. And the reason they need to be home earlier is because it is PITCH black by 4:45pm in the dead of winter. No child should be getting home with zero daylight to play in. They barely get enough recess - 20-25min a day. There is also no time to do sports or music practices which all normally start at 4pm or 5pm. My 5yr old child goes to bed between 7:00-7:30pm at night. It already feels like there is so little time for play/downtime all week.

[Anonymous]

The bell times have worked for decades and decades. What has changed is high school workload, the increase in sport practice times, the increase in extra curriculars, and the ever obvious increase in electronics and screens. THESE are the problems and all of those things can be changed for FREE.

The homework could be decreased or given more time than one night to complete. Sports games could be shortened, practices could be 3 or 4 days a week instead of all 5. Parents could chill the F out on all the extras their kids are in including tutors and test prep classes. And phones/computers/tv could be taken away by 9-10pm.

My daughter is a swimmer. She is in the pool at 5:30am. She is in bed no later than 10pm and on really tiring days, she is snoring by 9pm. There is no messed up rhythm for her. She is active and needs sleep and not having any phone or computer in her room allows her to de-stress and fall asleep. Any teen can do it.

I don't care what the studies say. If you change the bell times, the kids in IB will still be up later working. The sports kids will be getting home later and starting homework later, and (shocker) staying up later at night. The kids on Instagram will think they have an extra hour to text/chat. It will not change. It hasn't in Fairfax after they spent over 10 million to study and implement it. Kids still complain of no time and lack of sleep. They are overworked. THAT is the problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope bell time will be moved for HS.
My children will be on the bus for magnets, and 6:30 a.m. is way too early.

And coming home at 4:30 is way too late for my kids.

4:30 is a perfectly reasonable time to get home.

If you're 6?

no

sorry - Maybe you're OK with your kid coming home in the dark during winter, but I'm not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most parents work and kids go to after care. Why are your kids so needy that they have to come home so early? And why do their needs trump the needs of teenagers who need to sleep later?

b/c YOUR teen chose to do extracurricular activities or to enter the world of IB - perhaps to please Mom and Day, eh?

My little ones have no choice;; they're kids. They need to come home early and run outside on a nice day.

Furthermore, as a HS teacher who sees teens on a daily basis, some need to WORK! You're looking at this shift in time through your privileged lens, lady (or man). Others have to watch younger siblings.

I love how so many "educated" posters fail to see all sides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The 20 min shift seems reasonable. People who complain about that option have no credibility.

Are you kidding me? First off, 20 minutes is just meaningless.

Secondly, like other posters, my kid goes to a Tier 2 school which does not start until 9:15am. Kids are not allowed in the building until 9am. That makes life very difficult for working parents. When I tell people who live elsewhere how late school starts they are often shocked. As it stands now, I have to go in late and work late to accommodate this late start time and avoid paying for before and aftercare. We cannot afford to pay for both and neither can many families at our school.

On top of all this, my kids are routinely up at 6:30am so they have 2.5 hours every morning to fart around before school, it is way too much time.

Any bell time changes will anger some part of the population but if they are going to do it, at least make it meaningful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The 20 min shift seems reasonable. People who complain about that option have no credibility.

Are you kidding me? First off, 20 minutes is just meaningless.

Secondly, like other posters, my kid goes to a Tier 2 school which does not start until 9:15am. Kids are not allowed in the building until 9am. That makes life very difficult for working parents. When I tell people who live elsewhere how late school starts they are often shocked. As it stands now, I have to go in late and work late to accommodate this late start time and avoid paying for before and aftercare. We cannot afford to pay for both and neither can many families at our school.

On top of all this, my kids are routinely up at 6:30am so they have 2.5 hours every morning to fart around before school, it is way too much time.

Any bell time changes will anger some part of the population but if they are going to do it, at least make it meaningful.

Agree 100 percent. I responded with this issue the first time MCPS a asked for community input. I was annoyed they asked parents to email a second time this year. Did they not read the email responses the first time or did they not like the responses they received.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The bell times have worked for decades and decades. What has changed is high school workload, the increase in sport practice times, the increase in extra curriculars, and the ever obvious increase in electronics and screens. THESE are the problems and all of those things can be changed for FREE.

Decades and decades? They go back to 1993-94 -- 20 years.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/boe/changing-belltimes.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Agree 100 percent. I responded with this issue the first time MCPS a asked for community input. I was annoyed they asked parents to email a second time this year. Did they not read the email responses the first time or did they not like the responses they received.

They -- meaning the Board of Education -- did not like Starr's decision to keep the bell times as they were.

[Anonymous]

I guess nobody on here has a prediction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The bell times have worked for decades and decades. What has changed is high school workload, the increase in sport practice times, the increase in extra curriculars, and the ever obvious increase in electronics and screens. THESE are the problems and all of those things can be changed for FREE.

The homework could be decreased or given more time than one night to complete. Sports games could be shortened, practices could be 3 or 4 days a week instead of all 5. Parents could chill the F out on all the extras their kids are in including tutors and test prep classes. And phones/computers/tv could be taken away by 9-10pm.

My daughter is a swimmer. She is in the pool at 5:30am. She is in bed no later than 10pm and on really tiring days, she is snoring by 9pm. There is no messed up rhythm for her. She is active and needs sleep and not having any phone or computer in her room allows her to de-stress and fall asleep. Any teen can do it.

I don't care what the studies say. If you change the bell times, the kids in IB will still be up later working. The sports kids will be getting home later and starting homework later, and (shocker) staying up later at night. The kids on Instagram will think they have an extra hour to text/chat. It will not change. It hasn't in Fairfax after they spent over 10 million to study and implement it. Kids still complain of no time and lack of sleep. They are overworked. THAT is the problem.

I totally agree.

[Anonymous]

No prediction here, but I do have to comment.

I am guessing that most of the people who wrote in are parents of elementary school (or younger) children. I am guessing that when your child(ren) get older, your opinions will most likely change.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has clearly stated that due to teenagers natural sleep rhythms, high school should not start before 8:30 (see http://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-aap/aap-press-room/Pages/Let-Them-Sleep-AAP-Recommends-Delaying-Start-Times-of-Middle-and-High-Schools-to-Combat-Teen-Sleep-Deprivation.aspx). This is not because of screens or lax rules at home. Teens naturally fall asleep later and wake up later. This is what there bodies need. The same is not true for younger children. They are at different stages of development and need different considerations. I agree, younger children do need time to play, but that does not trump teenagers need for sleep. It should be considered in tandem. Perhaps more recess time?

Also, take a look at what the American Academy of Pediatrics lists as the side effects of sleep deprivation - depression, obesity, car accidents. And good sleep leads to better grades and an overall improved quality of life.

I understand that we all want what is best for our kids. But, please consider that some day your kids will be teenagers soon. Trust me, you don't want them waiting for the bus at 6:30 am.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No prediction here, but I do have to comment.

I am guessing that most of the people who wrote in are parents of elementary school (or younger) children. I am guessing that when your child(ren) get older, your opinions will most likely change.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has clearly stated that due to teenagers natural sleep rhythms, high school should not start before 8:30 (see http://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-aap/aap-press-room/Pages/Let-Them-Sleep-AAP-Recommends-Delaying-Start-Times-of-Middle-and-High-Schools-to-Combat-Teen-Sleep-Deprivation.aspx). This is not because of screens or lax rules at home. Teens naturally fall asleep later and wake up later. This is what there bodies need. The same is not true for younger children. They are at different stages of development and need different considerations. I agree, younger children do need time to play, but that does not trump teenagers need for sleep. It should be considered in tandem. Perhaps more recess time?

Also, take a look at what the American Academy of Pediatrics lists as the side effects of sleep deprivation - depression, obesity, car accidents. And good sleep leads to better grades and an overall improved quality of life.

I understand that we all want what is best for our kids. But, please consider that some day your kids will be teenagers soon. Trust me, you don't want them waiting for the bus at 6:30 am.

Actually it is true for younger children. Early start times are also bad for elementary school children.

http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2014/06/school-start-times.aspx

And late start times are bad for elementary school children's working parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The 20 min shift seems reasonable. People who complain about that option have no credibility.

Are you kidding me? First off, 20 minutes is just meaningless.

Someone keeps saying that 20 minutes is meaningless. It is not meaningless. It means that school start (and end) times will be 20 minutes later. Perhaps the poster doesn't know what "meaningless" means.

Someone else complained about the cost but there is no extra cost.

Anonymous wrote:
Secondly, like other posters, my kid goes to a Tier 2 school which does not start until 9:15am. Kids are not allowed in the building until 9am.

If true that needs to change. At my son's Tier 2 school, kids are allow into the building 30 minutes before start time, at 8:45 AM.

[Anonymous]

If MCPS adopted the 20-minutes-later plan, then when my kid is in high school, she would get on the bus at 6:50 am instead of 6:30 am. That is not a meaningful difference.