I like the later start times for high school. I was local here, and my high school started at 7:55. While that is much later than many of the local schools, I still think starting all in the 8-8:30 range would be better. I think most middle school times that are starting in the 8-8:30 range are fine as well, and most elementary schools were 8:45-9:15, and that was fine. If money/bus transportation wasn't a barrier, I'd recommend leaving middle/elementary alone and just adjusting high school later. I don't think moving elementary school earlier is a good solution. A 7:25 start time for elementary children is WAY too early - many of them are first waking at 7 or 7:30, as they should, and if they are taking the bus, that would still force some very young children to wake up at 5 or 5:30 to make it to school on time.

It would be great if RideOn had morning discounts for students too.

But I agree that the bus system currently in the county as a whole is just not adequate for getting high school students to school. There are some places it would work, but a lot more places it wouldn't.

I take the public bus frequently.

Two issues with that proposal are just the logistics in fitting all of the students who will need to get to the school at the same time on the bus that probably is limited to a couple of lines around the school. Meaning there is probably only one or two buses that will go by the school in a 20 minute interval and all of the students will need to jump onto it.

Not to mention the bus system sucks in Montgomery County. I tried to see if I could go to primarily bus only but it just wasn't possible/convenient to do so in travelling around the areas north of Rockville. Most of the buses are designed to go with rush hour. So in the mornings the majority of the buses go southbound towards the metro and vice versa. So a fifteen minute car drive would take about an hour on the bus.

And I've learned to try not to make eye contact with people on the bus because you have people that start some strange (and somewhat scary) conversations. So am not sure if it would be the safest environment for some students travelling on their own.

For those interested in the public bus service, Ride On has discounts for students:
http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/DOT-Transit/routesandschedules/fares/fares2.html

Which are:
-Students can ride free from Monday through Friday from 2 pm to 8 pm
-monthly youth pass $11/month
-summer youth pass for July to August for $18

Personally I'm not that big of all of this talk about changing bell times. Although I don't have any kids in school yet. I'm guessing that this is all based off of some random study that everyone decided to take ahold of and is now a fad or a big thing. In twenty years there will probably be another study that refutes this one.

I would support a user fee for buses. What annoys me as a working parent is that we as taxpayers are spending all this money for a service that many of us can't use. Plus we need to pay extra for before and aftercare. I would be curious how many families in MCPS have a parent at home for morning/afternoon buses- it seems like two working parents or a single working parent is the norm now.

Anonymous wrote:To those who are suggesting high schoolers take public transportation to school, what about Damascus, Poolesville, or other outlying suburbs? I doubt they have the transportation infrastructure that could get students to school. And how about magnet programs? Is someone supposed to commute to Blair or another magnet using only public transport when they live 20+ miles away? I really don't see this as a viable option for the entire county.

Even though a public transportation option would work just fine for my Takoma Park kid to get to Blair, I have to agree that it wouldn't work for much of up-county.

I'd be all for a plan that asks parents to pay for bus transportation, with a waiver for FARMs families, of course. Call it a user tax if you'd like. Surely most magnet parents, who tend to derive the most benefit from transportation (ie: longest distance) would be willing to pay for the service. Use that added revenue to pay for more buses and create later start times for all.

To those who are suggesting high schoolers take public transportation to school, what about Damascus, Poolesville, or other outlying suburbs? I doubt they have the transportation infrastructure that could get students to school. And how about magnet programs? Is someone supposed to commute to Blair or another magnet using only public transport when they live 20+ miles away? I really don't see this as a viable option for the entire county.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

OP here. It was.

One of the options was ES starts earlier (at 7:45am, which many parents thought was too early), then MS and HS later (not clear which of these would start first, hopefully MS).
I hope we can still keep this concept, but perhaps tweak the times.

A PP's suggestion that high schoolers be expected to use public transport, or schoolbuses at a cost, with waivers for FARMS, is intriguing.

The people pushing for bell times changes already have the public-relations problem of being perceived as rich white people in Bethesda who know best. What do you suppose a proposal to make high school kids get themselves to school, or pay for a school bus, would do for this perception?

I don't think it would worsen it. My kid would have to take the bus, the schoolbus, his bike or leave early to walk there. Paying for whichever bus would be an imposition on our finances, because we're not rich. However if that's what it takes to get a grudging consensus I'll take it. I remember paying for public transport in middle and high school (no school transport of any kind).

Making kids ride public buses isn't realistic logistically or financially.

Hmmmm...the bus thing is interesting. My kids could actually take a public bus from a street quite near our house, that already goes right to the HS in about 10 minutes time. I guess that would be a major paradigm shift for an American suburb, but it might work around here. I wonder how many HS kids drive to school, or are driven by parents, anyway? When I was in HS it was considered majorly nerdy to take the school bus (I know, because I did it....).

Anonymous wrote:

OP here. It was.

One of the options was ES starts earlier (at 7:45am, which many parents thought was too early), then MS and HS later (not clear which of these would start first, hopefully MS).
I hope we can still keep this concept, but perhaps tweak the times.

A PP's suggestion that high schoolers be expected to use public transport, or schoolbuses at a cost, with waivers for FARMS, is intriguing.

The people pushing for bell times changes already have the public-relations problem of being perceived as rich white people in Bethesda who know best. What do you suppose a proposal to make high school kids get themselves to school, or pay for a school bus, would do for this perception?

Anonymous wrote:I posted this suggestion in the previous thread but it seems to be a better fit in this thread:

I'm sure I'm missing something (perhaps something to do with the bus logistics) but I don't understand why they did not vote to have elem. schools start 20 minutes later, middle schools ten minutes earlier (7.45) and high schools 40 minutes later at 8.15. I suggest this even though my child is in middle school and would not be happy about getting to school ten minutes earlier. However, I think it is worth it to get that extra sleep when he is older. I am already starting to notice that his sleep patterns are changing. He is a good kid who goes to bed at 8.30 without any fuss but it is taking him longer to fall asleep and it is getting harder to get him out of bed in the morning and yes we do limit screen time on school night - no screens for a couple of hours before bedtime.

Your middle schooler goes to bed at 8:30?! Amazing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elementary first, then middle and high at the same time at 8:30. take advantage of public transportation for high schoolers. Why maintain so many buses?

Or, have parents pay a bus fee and waive it for FARMS families.

Does anyone know why switching HS and ES wasn't put forth as an option? Keeping MS as is, or slightly later than its current time (say 8:00 or 8:05). Can we not "switch" HS and ES just due to the sheer numbers of ES (130+ vs. only 25 HS).

Option 2 had MS starting really late... which was my biggest concern with Option 2. Although, I was willing to accept it as we really need to address the sleep issue in HS.

OP here. It was.

One of the options was ES starts earlier (at 7:45am, which many parents thought was too early), then MS and HS later (not clear which of these would start first, hopefully MS).
I hope we can still keep this concept, but perhaps tweak the times.

A PP's suggestion that high schoolers be expected to use public transport, or schoolbuses at a cost, with waivers for FARMS, is intriguing.

I posted this suggestion in the previous thread but it seems to be a better fit in this thread:

I'm sure I'm missing something (perhaps something to do with the bus logistics) but I don't understand why they did not vote to have elem. schools start 20 minutes later, middle schools ten minutes earlier (7.45) and high schools 40 minutes later at 8.15. I suggest this even though my child is in middle school and would not be happy about getting to school ten minutes earlier. However, I think it is worth it to get that extra sleep when he is older. I am already starting to notice that his sleep patterns are changing. He is a good kid who goes to bed at 8.30 without any fuss but it is taking him longer to fall asleep and it is getting harder to get him out of bed in the morning and yes we do limit screen time on school night - no screens for a couple of hours before bedtime.

Anonymous wrote:The Post article says that slightly less than half of teachers responded to the bell times survey, and of those responding 63% wanted no changes to bell times. 63% of less than 50% of teachers is not a majority, at best it's 1/3 or maybe even closer to 1/4 of teachers.

For some reason the school system choose to describe this as a majority of teachers and the Post followed suit.

The take away from this is that slightly over half of teachers (an actual majority) didn't care enough to even respond.

Because only 23% wanted a change. Less than a quarter. The other 14% didn't answer or weren't adamant either way.

Anonymous wrote:Elementary first, then middle and high at the same time at 8:30. take advantage of public transportation for high schoolers. Why maintain so many buses?

Or, have parents pay a bus fee and waive it for FARMS families.

Does anyone know why switching HS and ES wasn't put forth as an option? Keeping MS as is, or slightly later than its current time (say 8:00 or 8:05). Can we not "switch" HS and ES just due to the sheer numbers of ES (130+ vs. only 25 HS).

Option 2 had MS starting really late... which was my biggest concern with Option 2. Although, I was willing to accept it as we really need to address the sleep issue in HS.