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

[Anonymous]

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.

I've never understood this argument. I am sure there are *some* families who use their older children for daycare in the afternoons. Likewise, I am sure there are *some* families who have to have morning care because of the late elementary start time, who otherwise wouldn't have to pay for morning care. I don't know who all these working families are that are able to hang around the house until 9:00 to get their first grader to school.

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

Not sure I understand. If ES kids are going to school earlier, wouldn't it be more likely parents would be home. Or are you talking about in the afternoon?

[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.

This is my belief as well. Families figure out childcare when they have to. MCPS doesn't want to have to spend more on buses and bus drivers. This is yet another reason I would never willingly move to an area with county-based school system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

A borgeioise obsession with spelling is an unerring sign of a mediocre thinker.

[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.

I've never understood this argument. I am sure there are *some* families who use their older children for daycare in the afternoons. Likewise, I am sure there are *some* families who have to have morning care because of the late elementary start time, who otherwise wouldn't have to pay for morning care. I don't know who all these working families are that are able to hang around the house until 9:00 to get their first grader to school.

Well put. One of the things the MCPS report found was that low-income families said they'd have an easier time getting beforecare than aftercare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

This is my belief as well. Families figure out childcare when they have to. MCPS doesn't want to have to spend more on buses and bus drivers. This is yet another reason I would never willingly move to an area with county-based school system.

Because only county-based systems have school buses?

Families may figure out childcare when they have to, but also (a) sometimes the childcare arrangements are not good, and (b) childcare costs a lot of money that families may not have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

A borgeioise obsession with spelling is an unerring sign of a mediocre thinker.

bourgeois

[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.

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.

This is my belief as well. Families figure out childcare when they have to. MCPS doesn't want to have to spend more on buses and bus drivers. This is yet another reason I would never willingly move to an area with county-based school system.

What kills me is the various "costly" scenarios were all in the ballpark of $2-5M. The 2022 operating budget for MCPS is, what, $2710M? That's a .07-.1% increase in the short-term against significant long-term benefits.

http://bsnonline.mtwp.net/2020/03/01/benefits-of-later-school-start-times-outweigh-possible-consequences/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

A borgeioise obsession with spelling is an unerring sign of a mediocre thinker.

bourgeois

Well done Karen, here's a sticker.

[Anonymous]

Delaying school start times nationwide to 8:30 a.m. could contribute $83 billion to the U.S. economy within a decade, and almost $9 billion in two years, a new study by the RAND Corporation and RAND EUROPE suggests.

The increases would come from long term effects, like better high-school graduation rates by 13.3%, and a 9.6% college attendance rate, which would outweigh the short-term costs to start school later per student by rescheduling bus routes for transportation.

It’s recommended that teens get an average of 8 to 10 hours of sleep each night, but up to 60% of middle school and high school students report getting less than seven hours on weeknights. That’s because when kids start going through puberty, their brains begin producing the sleep-inducing hormone melatonin on a delayed schedule, making it harder for them to get tired before 11 p.m. So a teen who goes to bed at 11 p.m. would need to sleep until at least 7:30 a.m. or later to get proper rest.

Not enough sleep is linked to childhood obesity, an annual cost of $45 billion. And teens who don’t get enough shut-eye are more likely to commit violent crimes which cost billions annually, according to the report.

Previous studies have suggested that going to school later could benefit kids and teens who scientists say are wired to stay up late. Not getting enough sleep can affect their health and academic performance, according to the American Academy of Sleep Medicine. Starting school no earlier than 8:30 a.m. will allow students to be more focused during the day, more alert while driving, and less likely to be late or absent from school.

In 2014, around 93% of high schools and 83% of middle schools in the US started before 8:30 a.m., according to the CDC, and more recently, some school districts have pushed back. Last year, Dobbs Ferry School District in Westchester County, New York started pushing back their middle and high school start times a half hour later from its original 8:15 a.m. for middle school and 7:30 a.m. for high schoolers in an effort to combat sleep deprivation and increase focus. The schools reported major benefits after the time change, like kids being able to actually have time to eat breakfast.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/starting-school-later-could-save-the-us-economy-billions-2017-09-07-10882128

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

A borgeioise obsession with spelling is an unerring sign of a mediocre thinker.

bourgeois

Well done Karen, here's a sticker.

Do. That's not what Karen means. You can't fail in both spelling and definitions.

Anyway
My daughter gets home from sports practice at 7pm and we luve 5 minutes from school. I don't see how a later start time is feasible

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow... Look at that. OP is raising a topic we have never discussed before!!! Genius OP!

Wow, a DCUM thread that rehashes an old topic. Your endless capacity for wonder is an inspiration to us all.

There's been more than usual right-wing grievance posts lately trying to stir up anger directed at MCPS. Guessing the astroturfers are out in force before the November elections.

[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.

I've never understood this argument. I am sure there are *some* families who use their older children for daycare in the afternoons. Likewise, I am sure there are *some* families who have to have morning care because of the late elementary start time, who otherwise wouldn't have to pay for morning care. I don't know who all these working families are that are able to hang around the house until 9:00 to get their first grader to school.

2 working parents here. We could easily manage a 9am start time. I could drop my kid off at 8:50 and be at wok at 9. The other parent could pick up at 3:30 or 4 and we wouldn’t pay for any childcare. Currently my school ends at 2:30 and neither of us are allowed to leave professional jobs that early. My neighbor planned on going back to work when her youngest hit k but can’t find any to match the hours. She also can’t afford aftercare for 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

A borgeioise obsession with spelling is an unerring sign of a mediocre thinker.

That’s rich.

[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.

I've never understood this argument. I am sure there are *some* families who use their older children for daycare in the afternoons. Likewise, I am sure there are *some* families who have to have morning care because of the late elementary start time, who otherwise wouldn't have to pay for morning care. I don't know who all these working families are that are able to hang around the house until 9:00 to get their first grader to school.

2 working parents here. We could easily manage a 9am start time. I could drop my kid off at 8:50 and be at wok at 9. The other parent could pick up at 3:30 or 4 and we wouldn’t pay for any childcare. Currently my school ends at 2:30 and neither of us are allowed to leave professional jobs that early. My neighbor planned on going back to work when her youngest hit k but can’t find any to match the hours. She also can’t afford aftercare for 3

That's a 9 a.m. start time. What about a 9:25 start time? It's a struggle for working parents to manage that.