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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m in a neighboring county where this was implemented. It’s really impacting the elementary kids and their families. There aren’t older kids out at 2:30/3 and parents are struggling to pick them up. Parents get out of work at 3:30 and only need 30 min of aftercare. Aftercare schedules still aren’t up to full capacity yet because of covid too. Maybe aftercare is nbd for most of dcum but it’s just another expense that lower income people can’t afford. Lots of kids are walking home to empty homes.

If you go back and read the study MCPS commissioned back in 2014-15, you see that moving elementary school to an earlier start time had benefits:

Eliminate the need for both before and after-school day care (e.g., start school early enough
for working parents to drop off students on the way to work); several commenters reported
that after-school child care was easier to arrange than before-school child care, and early
start times were more compatible with the needs of working parents than later start times.
However, eliminating or reducing the need for before-school child care may be offset by
an increase in after-school child care costs if the elementary school day ends in the early
afternoon.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/info/pdf/Bell%20Times%20Analysis%20Addl%20Options%20Jan2015.pdf

Yes, it did. It also had disadvantages.

While this model might be most responsive to available sleep science about adolescents, concern
was expressed about elementary school students waiting at bus stops in the early morning and the
lack of after-school supervision for those elementary-age children currently cared for by older
siblings who would get home from school later under this model. The later high school release
time complicates high school students’ after-school activities. Further, the later start for middle
school students raises the concern that students without sufficient morning supervision may have
difficulty getting ready for school, making the bus, or getting to school on their own.

[Anonymous]

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

Has anyone ever accused you of being a chad?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I suspect the institutional inertia on this has a lot more to do with parents of high-school kids (for whom the evidence of benefits is overwhelming) being outvoted by elementary and middle school parents, who find their own later start times to be a convenience they don't want to part with.

I think you are wrong. As an ES (and MS) parent, I think the 9:20 start date is WAY too late and misses a lot of productive time for the little kids to learn. By the time they get home at 4:30, they are a mess.

But....even though I know the schedule is not convenient for anyone, I also understand why it is necessary.

+1.

As an ES parent I'd strongly support earlier start times for ME (my kid is up and ready to go at 7 am, but doesn't start until almost 9:30), but I get the reasons why it make sense for families with high school students who need to work or do childcare. Virtually every school system starts high school early (I started high school even earlier than MCPS) and I think we'd do well to start from assuming that there's good reasons for that, even if we disagree.

There are institutional reasons the situation is what it is. It's just that they don't have much to do with the health and safety of (all) the kids.

- Studies that examined start times on student sleep found that both middle and
high school students slept more when their school start times were later
- As students received more sleep, feelings of sleepiness lessened while attention
and feelings of alertness increased.
- Teen car crash rates were found to greatly decrease when schools start later.
- Pre-adolescents are found to have early morning preferences, as compared to
older children.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/info/pdf/Appendix%20D%20(Hanover).pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I suspect the institutional inertia on this has a lot more to do with parents of high-school kids (for whom the evidence of benefits is overwhelming) being outvoted by elementary and middle school parents, who find their own later start times to be a convenience they don't want to part with.

I think you are wrong. As an ES (and MS) parent, I think the 9:20 start date is WAY too late and misses a lot of productive time for the little kids to learn. By the time they get home at 4:30, they are a mess.

But....even though I know the schedule is not convenient for anyone, I also understand why it is necessary.

+1.

As an ES parent I'd strongly support earlier start times for ME (my kid is up and ready to go at 7 am, but doesn't start until almost 9:30), but I get the reasons why it make sense for families with high school students who need to work or do childcare. Virtually every school system starts high school early (I started high school even earlier than MCPS) and I think we'd do well to start from assuming that there's good reasons for that, even if we disagree.

There are institutional reasons the situation is what it is. It's just that they don't have much to do with the health and safety of (all) the kids.

- Studies that examined start times on student sleep found that both middle and
high school students slept more when their school start times were later
- As students received more sleep, feelings of sleepiness lessened while attention
and feelings of alertness increased.
- Teen car crash rates were found to greatly decrease when schools start later.
- Pre-adolescents are found to have early morning preferences, as compared to
older children.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/info/pdf/Appendix%20D%20(Hanover).pdf

Yep. In this context, the health of kids is not prioritized.

I would also add onto what a PP said about how very late start times for elementary students aren't their best interest either.

[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

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.

How about kids who need to work? Or get home before a younger sibling or neighbor to provide childcare?

[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

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.

How about kids who need to work? Or get home before a younger sibling or neighbor to provide childcare?

It's funny how family convenience and childcare needs only matter in certain contexts. All high school students must go to school earlier than is healthy because some families who have children with large age gaps might need older siblings to provide child care to younger siblings. Yet if anyone expresses childcare concerns about all of the inclement weather days, professional days, and other school holidays, the response is "figure it out."

This is about money, that's all. Childcare is a convenient excuse.

[Anonymous]

Did they ever look into the possibility of having two tiers for high schools--one starting early and the other late? They could allow families to choose which of the two nearest schools from each tier worked best for them.

[Anonymous]

I thought it worked pretty well to have everyone on the same 9 am start schedule last Spring during hybrid learning. I don't think the cost of buses should be the determinative factor. The HS commute could be a longer for some of the older siblings responsible for childcare, but, except for the youngest ES kids, 15-20 minutes alone should not be a huge problem. Put in free aftercare for K-2.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did they ever look into the possibility of having two tiers for high schools--one starting early and the other late? They could allow families to choose which of the two nearest schools from each tier worked best for them.

Then families have to work out transportation OR we’d have even fewer buses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought it worked pretty well to have everyone on the same 9 am start schedule last Spring during hybrid learning. I don't think the cost of buses should be the determinative factor. The HS commute could be a longer for some of the older siblings responsible for childcare, but, except for the youngest ES kids, 15-20 minutes alone should not be a huge problem. Put in free aftercare for K-2.

It's a cost issue. That's why it can't be done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought it worked pretty well to have everyone on the same 9 am start schedule last Spring during hybrid learning. I don't think the cost of buses should be the determinative factor. The HS commute could be a longer for some of the older siblings responsible for childcare, but, except for the youngest ES kids, 15-20 minutes alone should not be a huge problem. Put in free aftercare for K-2.

Where does the money come from for that?

[Anonymous]

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.

How about kids who need to work? Or get home before a younger sibling or neighbor to provide childcare?

It's funny how family convenience and childcare needs only matter in certain contexts. All high school students must go to school earlier than is healthy because some families who have children with large age gaps might need older siblings to provide child care to younger siblings. Yet if anyone expresses childcare concerns about all of the inclement weather days, professional days, and other school holidays, the response is "figure it out."

This is about money, that's all. Childcare is a convenient excuse.

It's funny, you can look at the (anonymous) comments that were submitted during the public comment period and it's pure, distilled DCUM. Every third one is "Do not spend one PENNY more!" and every fourth comment is "I send my teen to bed at 9pm. Parent your child!1!!"

It's gross.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought it worked pretty well to have everyone on the same 9 am start schedule last Spring during hybrid learning. I don't think the cost of buses should be the determinative factor. The HS commute could be a longer for some of the older siblings responsible for childcare, but, except for the youngest ES kids, 15-20 minutes alone should not be a huge problem. Put in free aftercare for K-2.

It's not being home alone, necessarily. It's leaving on time, with all of the right things, locking the doors, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought it worked pretty well to have everyone on the same 9 am start schedule last Spring during hybrid learning. I don't think the cost of buses should be the determinative factor. The HS commute could be a longer for some of the older siblings responsible for childcare, but, except for the youngest ES kids, 15-20 minutes alone should not be a huge problem. Put in free aftercare for K-2.

It's a cost issue. That's why it can't be done.

In our DCPS ES it was effectively means-tested. Wealthy parents paid a (completely reasonable) amount and low-income families were highly subsidized. Spread that across the county and bob's your uncle. Shouldn't be a political problem since, as evidenced by this thread, wealthy residents care only about the well-being of their poorer neighbors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s “Confederacy of Dunces.”

I'm guessing that OP couldn't figure out how to spell dunce either, so went for imbecile.