Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25156998/
"The American Academy of Pediatrics strongly supports the efforts of school districts to optimize sleep in students and urges high schools and middle schools to aim for start times that allow students the opportunity to achieve optimal levels of sleep (8.5-9.5 hours) and to improve physical (eg, reduced obesity risk) and mental (eg, lower rates of depression) health, safety (eg, drowsy driving crashes), academic performance, and quality of life."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27040474/
"Insufficient sleep in adolescents has been shown to be associated with a wide variety of adverse outcomes, from poor mental and physical health to behavioral problems and lower academic grades. However, most high school students do not get sufficient sleep. Delaying school start times for adolescents has been proposed as a policy change to address insufficient sleep in this population and potentially to improve students' academic performance, reduce engagement in risk behaviors, and improve health. "

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34073415/
"Survey-weighted multivariate regression modeling was used to investigate associations between school start times, sleep duration, and mental health. Schools with late start times (≥8:30 a.m.) saw 32.2% (95% Confidence Interval: 29.5-35.0) of students sleeping 8 h or more relative to 23.2% (22.0-24.4) in schools with very early start times (<8:00 a.m.). For every 15 min later school start time, students' sleep duration was 4.6 (3.4-5.9) min longer. Students attending schools with very early start times had 1.10 (0.95-1.27) times the odds of attempting suicide compared to those attending schools with later start times, while students at schools with early starts (8:00-8:29 a.m.) were associated with 1.11 (0.98-1.27) times the odds." and "Schools with start times before 8:30 a.m. had 10-11% higher odds of students attempting suicide compared to schools with late start times, though these differences were not statistically significant. Student mental health should continue to be investigated when assessing the potential impacts of delayed school start times. "

But who needs science?

Lots of science denying on DCUM.

How about a study looking at bad parenting and bed times? You can easily do a study to get the results you want and not look at other factors. There is far more harm to kids getting out late. Many steady have hours of homework and activities at night so they will get even less sleep, not more. Send your kids to bed. Be the parent, not friend if they need more sleep.

You don’t punish the rest of our kids and make them give up sports and activities and work or volunteering because your kids refuse to go to bed and you refuse to enforce a bed time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25156998/
"The American Academy of Pediatrics strongly supports the efforts of school districts to optimize sleep in students and urges high schools and middle schools to aim for start times that allow students the opportunity to achieve optimal levels of sleep (8.5-9.5 hours) and to improve physical (eg, reduced obesity risk) and mental (eg, lower rates of depression) health, safety (eg, drowsy driving crashes), academic performance, and quality of life."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27040474/
"Insufficient sleep in adolescents has been shown to be associated with a wide variety of adverse outcomes, from poor mental and physical health to behavioral problems and lower academic grades. However, most high school students do not get sufficient sleep. Delaying school start times for adolescents has been proposed as a policy change to address insufficient sleep in this population and potentially to improve students' academic performance, reduce engagement in risk behaviors, and improve health. "

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34073415/
"Survey-weighted multivariate regression modeling was used to investigate associations between school start times, sleep duration, and mental health. Schools with late start times (≥8:30 a.m.) saw 32.2% (95% Confidence Interval: 29.5-35.0) of students sleeping 8 h or more relative to 23.2% (22.0-24.4) in schools with very early start times (<8:00 a.m.). For every 15 min later school start time, students' sleep duration was 4.6 (3.4-5.9) min longer. Students attending schools with very early start times had 1.10 (0.95-1.27) times the odds of attempting suicide compared to those attending schools with later start times, while students at schools with early starts (8:00-8:29 a.m.) were associated with 1.11 (0.98-1.27) times the odds." and "Schools with start times before 8:30 a.m. had 10-11% higher odds of students attempting suicide compared to schools with late start times, though these differences were not statistically significant. Student mental health should continue to be investigated when assessing the potential impacts of delayed school start times. "

But who needs science?

Lots of science denying on DCUM.

How about a study looking at bad parenting and bed times? You can easily do a study to get the results you want and not look at other factors. There is far more harm to kids getting out late. Many steady have hours of homework and activities at night so they will get even less sleep, not more. Send your kids to bed. Be the parent, not friend if they need more sleep.

You don’t punish the rest of our kids and make them give up sports and activities and work or volunteering because your kids refuse to go to bed and you refuse to enforce a bed time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25156998/
"The American Academy of Pediatrics strongly supports the efforts of school districts to optimize sleep in students and urges high schools and middle schools to aim for start times that allow students the opportunity to achieve optimal levels of sleep (8.5-9.5 hours) and to improve physical (eg, reduced obesity risk) and mental (eg, lower rates of depression) health, safety (eg, drowsy driving crashes), academic performance, and quality of life."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27040474/
"Insufficient sleep in adolescents has been shown to be associated with a wide variety of adverse outcomes, from poor mental and physical health to behavioral problems and lower academic grades. However, most high school students do not get sufficient sleep. Delaying school start times for adolescents has been proposed as a policy change to address insufficient sleep in this population and potentially to improve students' academic performance, reduce engagement in risk behaviors, and improve health. "

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34073415/
"Survey-weighted multivariate regression modeling was used to investigate associations between school start times, sleep duration, and mental health. Schools with late start times (≥8:30 a.m.) saw 32.2% (95% Confidence Interval: 29.5-35.0) of students sleeping 8 h or more relative to 23.2% (22.0-24.4) in schools with very early start times (<8:00 a.m.). For every 15 min later school start time, students' sleep duration was 4.6 (3.4-5.9) min longer. Students attending schools with very early start times had 1.10 (0.95-1.27) times the odds of attempting suicide compared to those attending schools with later start times, while students at schools with early starts (8:00-8:29 a.m.) were associated with 1.11 (0.98-1.27) times the odds." and "Schools with start times before 8:30 a.m. had 10-11% higher odds of students attempting suicide compared to schools with late start times, though these differences were not statistically significant. Student mental health should continue to be investigated when assessing the potential impacts of delayed school start times. "

But who needs science?

Lots of science denying on DCUM.

Anonymous wrote:https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25156998/
"The American Academy of Pediatrics strongly supports the efforts of school districts to optimize sleep in students and urges high schools and middle schools to aim for start times that allow students the opportunity to achieve optimal levels of sleep (8.5-9.5 hours) and to improve physical (eg, reduced obesity risk) and mental (eg, lower rates of depression) health, safety (eg, drowsy driving crashes), academic performance, and quality of life."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27040474/
"Insufficient sleep in adolescents has been shown to be associated with a wide variety of adverse outcomes, from poor mental and physical health to behavioral problems and lower academic grades. However, most high school students do not get sufficient sleep. Delaying school start times for adolescents has been proposed as a policy change to address insufficient sleep in this population and potentially to improve students' academic performance, reduce engagement in risk behaviors, and improve health. "

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34073415/
"Survey-weighted multivariate regression modeling was used to investigate associations between school start times, sleep duration, and mental health. Schools with late start times (≥8:30 a.m.) saw 32.2% (95% Confidence Interval: 29.5-35.0) of students sleeping 8 h or more relative to 23.2% (22.0-24.4) in schools with very early start times (<8:00 a.m.). For every 15 min later school start time, students' sleep duration was 4.6 (3.4-5.9) min longer. Students attending schools with very early start times had 1.10 (0.95-1.27) times the odds of attempting suicide compared to those attending schools with later start times, while students at schools with early starts (8:00-8:29 a.m.) were associated with 1.11 (0.98-1.27) times the odds." and "Schools with start times before 8:30 a.m. had 10-11% higher odds of students attempting suicide compared to schools with late start times, though these differences were not statistically significant. Student mental health should continue to be investigated when assessing the potential impacts of delayed school start times. "

But who needs science?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Some of you are insane- maybe just 1-2 posters? Other districts (and not just CA) have found a way to make this work and gasp! still have extracurriculars and sports programs. So dramatic. If you’re seriously advocating to arrange school times to enable high school kids have extended hour after school jobs, you’re entitled to that POV but schools should be prioritizing actual education.

DP. Yes, schools should be prioritizing actual education. However, MCPS's ability to do that is constrained by the fact that over 100,000 students require school bus transportation twice a day. There are ways to solve this problem, for example

1. dump the responsibility for school transportation on the parents (a bad idea for many reasons)
2. increase safe walk/bike/scoot to school routes (not under MCPS's control)
3. have students on public transportation routes use public transportation instead of school buses (MCPS could do that, but the screams of outrage from some parents would probably be audible in Tasmania)
4. have elementary school students start school ridiculously early, and high school students start late (MCPS examined this possibility but decided the disadvantages outweighed the advantages)
5. have middle school students start school ridiculously early, and high school students start later (MCPS also examined this possibility but etc., plus 7:45 is also too early for middle-school students)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:14 again- the only way I could ever see MCPS changing on this is if the tide turns against them, i.e. other area districts make the switch en masse. IIRC only Loudon has tried so far.

Many other districts start later than MCPS.
DCPS, Loudon, Arlington, Howard, etc all start later.
Most states start high school later than MCPS.
But somehow people here think logistical issues are unsolvable in MCPS.
Makes me feel like our county is backward thinking and not solution oriented

Nobody has said that they are unsolvable. MCPS can solve them, by either (1) redirecting a lot of school funding to buses and bus drivers, or (2) shifting the current schedule. MCPS has twice decided that the potential disadvantages of either option outweigh the potential advantages. It's valid to say that you disagree with this decision. It's not valid to say that MCPS didn't consider the options.

are you willing to be a driver?

There is an obvious solution to the bus driver shortage. MCPS needs to pay them more. You cannot pay pennies and expect people to work.
Same with teachers. If there is a shortage, increase pay. That is how things work

In this obvious solution, what should MCPS stop paying for, in order to pay for more bus drivers, so that high school students can start school at a non-ridiculously-early time? Keeping in mind that even underpaid labor is expensive.

There's also the issue that everyone is having a bus driver shortage, including public transportation agencies that pay quite well.

I'll offer one - get rid of that awful Leader in Me program. I don't want to know how much they pay for it.

Too much for what it is, $0 would be too much, but not enough to pay for more buses and higher pay for bus drivers.

Oh and don't forget bocce and the kids museum because they're on my grudge list!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:14 again- the only way I could ever see MCPS changing on this is if the tide turns against them, i.e. other area districts make the switch en masse. IIRC only Loudon has tried so far.

Many other districts start later than MCPS.
DCPS, Loudon, Arlington, Howard, etc all start later.
Most states start high school later than MCPS.
But somehow people here think logistical issues are unsolvable in MCPS.
Makes me feel like our county is backward thinking and not solution oriented

Nobody has said that they are unsolvable. MCPS can solve them, by either (1) redirecting a lot of school funding to buses and bus drivers, or (2) shifting the current schedule. MCPS has twice decided that the potential disadvantages of either option outweigh the potential advantages. It's valid to say that you disagree with this decision. It's not valid to say that MCPS didn't consider the options.

are you willing to be a driver?

There is an obvious solution to the bus driver shortage. MCPS needs to pay them more. You cannot pay pennies and expect people to work.
Same with teachers. If there is a shortage, increase pay. That is how things work

In this obvious solution, what should MCPS stop paying for, in order to pay for more bus drivers, so that high school students can start school at a non-ridiculously-early time? Keeping in mind that even underpaid labor is expensive.

There's also the issue that everyone is having a bus driver shortage, including public transportation agencies that pay quite well.

I'll offer one - get rid of that awful Leader in Me program. I don't want to know how much they pay for it.

Too much for what it is, $0 would be too much, but not enough to pay for more buses and higher pay for bus drivers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:14 again- the only way I could ever see MCPS changing on this is if the tide turns against them, i.e. other area districts make the switch en masse. IIRC only Loudon has tried so far.

Many other districts start later than MCPS.
DCPS, Loudon, Arlington, Howard, etc all start later.
Most states start high school later than MCPS.
But somehow people here think logistical issues are unsolvable in MCPS.
Makes me feel like our county is backward thinking and not solution oriented

Nobody has said that they are unsolvable. MCPS can solve them, by either (1) redirecting a lot of school funding to buses and bus drivers, or (2) shifting the current schedule. MCPS has twice decided that the potential disadvantages of either option outweigh the potential advantages. It's valid to say that you disagree with this decision. It's not valid to say that MCPS didn't consider the options.

are you willing to be a driver?

There is an obvious solution to the bus driver shortage. MCPS needs to pay them more. You cannot pay pennies and expect people to work.
Same with teachers. If there is a shortage, increase pay. That is how things work

In this obvious solution, what should MCPS stop paying for, in order to pay for more bus drivers, so that high school students can start school at a non-ridiculously-early time? Keeping in mind that even underpaid labor is expensive.

There's also the issue that everyone is having a bus driver shortage, including public transportation agencies that pay quite well.

I'll offer one - get rid of that awful Leader in Me program. I don't want to know how much they pay for it.

Anonymous wrote:

Some of you are insane- maybe just 1-2 posters? Other districts (and not just CA) have found a way to make this work and gasp! still have extracurriculars and sports programs. So dramatic. If you’re seriously advocating to arrange school times to enable high school kids have extended hour after school jobs, you’re entitled to that POV but schools should be prioritizing actual education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just moved to MoCo and am shocked by the late elementary start time! That's going to be a major adjustment. My kids will enjoy the long morning at home, though- I think.

Also, I went to a HS that started at 7:30 and that was just awful. I remember being tired all the time and constantly late. Makes zero sense.

Before the pandemic we put our elementary school kids in before care. Now that my spouse has a flexible work schedule and can work from home most days, he can drop them off by 9am.
I think that switching the elementary school and high school start times, although not ideal, would be better than what we have now.

This option was thoroughly discussed both of the previous times MCPS studied the options. MCPS decided, on grounds that you personally may disagree with, that it would not be better than what we have now.

Sounds like MCPS decided it would be easier on them not to change anything.

MCPS did make a change, though. So: no.

Yes, just not the right change.

"The right change" means the one you wanted.

The one that prioritizes the physical and mental well-being of teenagers, yes.

No. The one you wanted.

So, a few posters of kids refuse to get up to go to school so the rest of our kids should lose their activities, after-school jobs/volunteering, and homework/tutoring time. That doesn't seem to prioritize physical or mental health. If kids cannot do sports or exercise, then that impacts their physical health. For some kids, outside-school programs are good for their mental health, so they shouldn't get to have them because that poster cannot wake up their spoiled kids.

So, if school is later, kids get home later how to we get our kids physical and mental well-bing better after you take away things important to them?

Maybe take your kid to the doctor for sleeping pills.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just moved to MoCo and am shocked by the late elementary start time! That's going to be a major adjustment. My kids will enjoy the long morning at home, though- I think.

Also, I went to a HS that started at 7:30 and that was just awful. I remember being tired all the time and constantly late. Makes zero sense.

Before the pandemic we put our elementary school kids in before care. Now that my spouse has a flexible work schedule and can work from home most days, he can drop them off by 9am.
I think that switching the elementary school and high school start times, although not ideal, would be better than what we have now.

This option was thoroughly discussed both of the previous times MCPS studied the options. MCPS decided, on grounds that you personally may disagree with, that it would not be better than what we have now.

Sounds like MCPS decided it would be easier on them not to change anything.

MCPS did make a change, though. So: no.

Yes, just not the right change.

"The right change" means the one you wanted.

The one that prioritizes the physical and mental well-being of teenagers, yes.

No. The one you wanted.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:14 again- the only way I could ever see MCPS changing on this is if the tide turns against them, i.e. other area districts make the switch en masse. IIRC only Loudon has tried so far.

Many other districts start later than MCPS.
DCPS, Loudon, Arlington, Howard, etc all start later.
Most states start high school later than MCPS.
But somehow people here think logistical issues are unsolvable in MCPS.
Makes me feel like our county is backward thinking and not solution oriented

Nobody has said that they are unsolvable. MCPS can solve them, by either (1) redirecting a lot of school funding to buses and bus drivers, or (2) shifting the current schedule. MCPS has twice decided that the potential disadvantages of either option outweigh the potential advantages. It's valid to say that you disagree with this decision. It's not valid to say that MCPS didn't consider the options.

are you willing to be a driver?

There is an obvious solution to the bus driver shortage. MCPS needs to pay them more. You cannot pay pennies and expect people to work.
Same with teachers. If there is a shortage, increase pay. That is how things work

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:14 again- the only way I could ever see MCPS changing on this is if the tide turns against them, i.e. other area districts make the switch en masse. IIRC only Loudon has tried so far.

Many other districts start later than MCPS.
DCPS, Loudon, Arlington, Howard, etc all start later.
Most states start high school later than MCPS.
But somehow people here think logistical issues are unsolvable in MCPS.
Makes me feel like our county is backward thinking and not solution oriented

Nobody has said that they are unsolvable. MCPS can solve them, by either (1) redirecting a lot of school funding to buses and bus drivers, or (2) shifting the current schedule. MCPS has twice decided that the potential disadvantages of either option outweigh the potential advantages. It's valid to say that you disagree with this decision. It's not valid to say that MCPS didn't consider the options.

are you willing to be a driver?

There is an obvious solution to the bus driver shortage. MCPS needs to pay them more. You cannot pay pennies and expect people to work.
Same with teachers. If there is a shortage, increase pay. That is how things work

In this obvious solution, what should MCPS stop paying for, in order to pay for more bus drivers, so that high school students can start school at a non-ridiculously-early time? Keeping in mind that even underpaid labor is expensive.

There's also the issue that everyone is having a bus driver shortage, including public transportation agencies that pay quite well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just moved to MoCo and am shocked by the late elementary start time! That's going to be a major adjustment. My kids will enjoy the long morning at home, though- I think.

Also, I went to a HS that started at 7:30 and that was just awful. I remember being tired all the time and constantly late. Makes zero sense.

Before the pandemic we put our elementary school kids in before care. Now that my spouse has a flexible work schedule and can work from home most days, he can drop them off by 9am.
I think that switching the elementary school and high school start times, although not ideal, would be better than what we have now.

This option was thoroughly discussed both of the previous times MCPS studied the options. MCPS decided, on grounds that you personally may disagree with, that it would not be better than what we have now.

Sounds like MCPS decided it would be easier on them not to change anything.

MCPS did make a change, though. So: no.

Yes, just not the right change.

"The right change" means the one you wanted.

The one that prioritizes the physical and mental well-being of teenagers, yes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS is constantly wasting money on new useless initiatives such as Leader in Me.
For a few years, they could just stop wasting money on useless programs and use the money saved to buy school buses.

Who will drive them?

Even if we buy more school buses, we don't have drivers. Are the parents who want earlier school times willing to be drivers?

Are you missing the point on purpose or.....

The suggestion is to switch ES and HS times....that would require no more hiring. Bus A going to HS A at 7:10 now goes to ES A at 7:10 and goes to HS A at 8:10, the elementary school's previous time. It's not difficult. There is absolutely no reason elementary school students should be in a classroom at 4:10 pm, but this is the norm around here. I tell my friends around the country and they are all baffled.

I'd rather my ES kid get out later than my HS kid. It would be an issue for families whose siblings do child care and for HS kids with activities, work, and responsibilities at home. You simply don't get it and want it for your convince. You don't get that HS kids volunteer, in activities and not just MCPS activities, homework, jobs... so if they aren't getting home till 4:30 they'd be going to bed at 12-1 PM every night to get their homework done. My kid is still up doing homework as they had activities after school.

That's great but it's not just about you.