Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This SB is committed to healthy start times so it will be one of the 2 options. Take the survey with that in mind..."neither" is a wasted vote.

If they were committed to healthy start times, they would have provided a reasonable option.

They're not magicians and need to be constrained by what's possible with the bus fleet we have. Maybe some wealthy families from the area could donate to buy enough buses and all kids could start school at 8/8:30...otherwise be realistic, please. (And don't have kids getting on buses at 6:45 AM...seriously.)

For years and years, FCPS had high schoolers getting on the bus at 6:45. It worked. Scores were good, plenty of time for after school activities, etc.

But, they told us it was not healthy.

I would bet the kids were healthier then than they are now.

We should get rid of all the sleep scientists who study this for a living and put you in charge to make decisions based on your gut instincts and feelings.

Experience. Data. Not gut instinct. Compare FCPS scores from before and after. Sure, there are other factors. But, better that than going to school late in the afternoon.
But, no elementary school should be starting after 9 a.m. 8-3 is preferable.

Couldn't they just buy more busses instead of all these surveys? How many busses are needed to keep the start times from 7:45 to 9:15?

I'll vote for any option where no 12+ year old kids has to start before 830a, consistent with the widely available research and national trends. I don't care much if it 830, 9, or 930a, or anywhere in between, as long as it's no earlier than 830a.

I am likewise fine with my ES kids starting as early at 730a, they're up anyway and are mentally done by around 3p regardless of start time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This SB is committed to healthy start times so it will be one of the 2 options. Take the survey with that in mind..."neither" is a wasted vote.

If they were committed to healthy start times, they would have provided a reasonable option.

They're not magicians and need to be constrained by what's possible with the bus fleet we have. Maybe some wealthy families from the area could donate to buy enough buses and all kids could start school at 8/8:30...otherwise be realistic, please. (And don't have kids getting on buses at 6:45 AM...seriously.)

For years and years, FCPS had high schoolers getting on the bus at 6:45. It worked. Scores were good, plenty of time for after school activities, etc.

But, they told us it was not healthy.

I would bet the kids were healthier then than they are now.

We should get rid of all the sleep scientists who study this for a living and put you in charge to make decisions based on your gut instincts and feelings.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This SB is committed to healthy start times so it will be one of the 2 options. Take the survey with that in mind..."neither" is a wasted vote.

If they were committed to healthy start times, they would have provided a reasonable option.

They're not magicians and need to be constrained by what's possible with the bus fleet we have. Maybe some wealthy families from the area could donate to buy enough buses and all kids could start school at 8/8:30...otherwise be realistic, please. (And don't have kids getting on buses at 6:45 AM...seriously.)

The county is not doing enough to problem solve. Examples: looking at how crowded each bus is (apparently, not all are full), adding on mileage for walking, opting in to bus transportation, looking at getting rid of transportation to AAP centers when base school has LL4. These are all things that should be done. If they cannot have every kid go to school between 8-4, they should keep it the same.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This SB is committed to healthy start times so it will be one of the 2 options. Take the survey with that in mind..."neither" is a wasted vote.

If they were committed to healthy start times, they would have provided a reasonable option.

They're not magicians and need to be constrained by what's possible with the bus fleet we have. Maybe some wealthy families from the area could donate to buy enough buses and all kids could start school at 8/8:30...otherwise be realistic, please. (And don't have kids getting on buses at 6:45 AM...seriously.)

For years and years, FCPS had high schoolers getting on the bus at 6:45. It worked. Scores were good, plenty of time for after school activities, etc.

But, they told us it was not healthy.

I would bet the kids were healthier then than they are now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This SB is committed to healthy start times so it will be one of the 2 options. Take the survey with that in mind..."neither" is a wasted vote.

If they were committed to healthy start times, they would have provided a reasonable option.

They're not magicians and need to be constrained by what's possible with the bus fleet we have. Maybe some wealthy families from the area could donate to buy enough buses and all kids could start school at 8/8:30...otherwise be realistic, please. (And don't have kids getting on buses at 6:45 AM...seriously.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have they considered consulting with how other districts make this work? Or even AI? I feel like they're overly complicating matters as usual.

Others have pointed out that the start times for Loudoun are similar to Option 1. With elementary starting between 7:30 and 8:00, MS at 8:30 and HS at 9:30.

Fcps better not start high school at 9:30.

Ridiculous.

Anonymous wrote:This SB is committed to healthy start times so it will be one of the 2 options. Take the survey with that in mind..."neither" is a wasted vote.

If they were committed to healthy start times, they would have provided a reasonable option.

Anonymous wrote:Honest question: why is the survey so annoying? Why separate by start time/end time for each option (with a question in between), as if we can have one without the other? (As in, "I'm cool with ths start time but hate the end time.") Do they not have actual experts to design these?!

I think they're trying to understand where the most prevalent logistical challenges for families are. If I don't like ES starting after 9a, is it because it's a logistical challenge to supervise my child that late in the morning and would need to arrange before-care, because I am worried about my kid getting home too late in the day, neither, or both? There's plenty of problems with their surveys, but separating start time / end time concerns for a given schedule is not one of them; that's actually an improvement on most of their prior survey work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This SB is committed to healthy start times so it will be one of the 2 options. Take the survey with that in mind..."neither" is a wasted vote.

Except neither option has healthy start times.

Option 1 does

Anonymous wrote:Have they considered consulting with how other districts make this work? Or even AI? I feel like they're overly complicating matters as usual.

Others have pointed out that the start times for Loudoun are similar to Option 1. With elementary starting between 7:30 and 8:00, MS at 8:30 and HS at 9:30.

Neither of these options is the only reasonable choice.

Which is why I'm honestly surprised they even let that in the survey.

Anonymous wrote:This SB is committed to healthy start times so it will be one of the 2 options. Take the survey with that in mind..."neither" is a wasted vote.

Except neither option has healthy start times.

Have they considered consulting with how other districts make this work? Or even AI? I feel like they're overly complicating matters as usual.