@WJ_Coach I have 2 teenagers at home and teach college (with part of the
curriculum I teach being biorhythm changes across the lifespan). I'm
familiar with the scientific arguments and evidence. Science is overwhelming in
favor of later start times for teens, with a whole host of benefits from doing
so. One of my colleagues is a sleep researcher! It's not about throwing
them to the "wolves," as you put it, but it's about preparing them
for the "wolves." This proposal (of changing start times) does not seem
to be preparing them for the realities of adulthood, but rather postponing
adaptation to that reality...to their detriment. It is them who will ultimately
suffer when they cannot hold down jobs because they've been socialized to
have society accommodate them when it is them who will need to adapt to
accommodate society. A high school or even college graduate with excellent
cognitive abilities (4.0, SAT/ACT off the charts, etc.) won't make it far
in the workforce if he/she can't get to work on time because their start
and end times are at odds with their biorhythms. I'm just saying that their
are consequences to the proposal, which some may not fully be appreciating.
Again, studies say this would help students (starting school later). And
generations ago schools actually started later with rare exceptions. Good
grief, the older generation in which I belong is out to lunch (and grumpy)...
This needs to be a local decision and not a legislated one. The lawmakers tend
to make decisions to be carried out by local school boards without any funding.
It is easy to pass laws, but not so easy to fund the changes.Where
will the money come from? Class load, teacher salary, etc. Unintended
consequences need to be examined carefully before the implementation and the
legislature is not the group that should be making this decision!
If the start time is later in the morning, kids will stay up later (with the
blessing of their parents). They still won't get enough sleep.According to the Park City HS website, they use a block schedule with periods
that are almost 90 minutes long. Many adults can't stay awake in church
for an hour, yet we expect kids to stay awake and engaged in a classroom for 90
minutes? It's torture if the teacher lectures for the entire period.
Sometimes less is more. Switch to a traditional schedule with 45-50 minute
periods and watch how much better the kids perform in the classroom.
How sad that the first comments dropped on here are inter-generational attacks,
ignoring data and science just to lob in a few attacks on today's youth.This study has nothing to do with assessing how much better your
generation was than the current crop being raised. It has nothing to do with
parenting, bedtimes or laziness. The study uses data to prove that our high
school start times are literally out of sync with the circadian rhythms of
Quite possibly it is the older generation that is the entitled generation. The
junior high that I attended starts 35 minutes earlier now than it did when I
went there several years ago. It is interesting to see the creep to earlier
times as the years go by.
And we wonder where the "entitled generation" came from. It's
topics like this that parents buy into, and/or allow, that make for
irresponsible entitled brats. Whose idea is this later start time anyway -
parents, teachers, students? Let's see who is driving for the change.From an earlier comment here: "teenagers growth spurts take a
serious toll on their minds and bodies" - what changed about "growth
spurts" between now and when I was young? These area excuses adults make
for their children. A later start time will not fix this, however, an earlier
bed time and no TV on school nights may be the ticket.
There is a scientifically proven method to solve the problem of tired teens. It
is called going to bed at a regular time.Yes we know that scientists
have found that when kids enter their teen years their bodies switch to running
later at night. However, those same scientists have found that what the teens
are experiencing is similar to jet lag, and is cured the same way. You go to
bed at a regular time, and get up at a regular time.Changing the
school start time will only encourage teens to stay up later and get up later,
they won't keep the same sleep schedule for a 9 AM start time that they do
for a 7:30 AM start time.
You can't cut a foot off the bottom of a blanket and sew it to the top,
then think the blanket is am foot longer! If you move the start time back,
these same teenagers will simply stay up an extra hour longer. Resulting in the
EXACT same scenario! More and more everyday, the world is losing its ability to
see simple common sense. Logic is becomming a hard to find commodity, anymore!
How lame. They have all this data... but is there any data that shows that
starting school later will actually lead to more sleep? I know when I was in
high school I would've just seen it as an excuse to stay up later.
"Early to bed and early to rise" made sense before electricity was
discovered. In today's society there are a lot of people that work swing
and grave-yard shifts because they aren't employed in an agrarian
occupation.As to those who sleep later feeling groggy, many also
feel "well rested."It's now 10:30 PM; read this after
you get up tomorrow morning.
We had early morning seminary in Portland. Somehow we all made it okay.
Politically correct nonsense is still nonsense.If a kid
"needs" an extra hour of sleep the answer is amazingly easy. Go to bed
an hour earlier. That may mean staying off their phone-toys, turning off the
TV, shutting down their internet connection and turning off the lights
earlier.Somehow, thousands of "children" aged 17-19 who
enlist in the military manage to get up pretty early and show up for duty at an
early hour and do their jobs- a lot more serious task than anything being taught
in our schools today.Forget this silly "problem" which
adults in a family can easily solve without any government programs or changes
in school schedules.
It is interesting that fir decades students manages to survive early school
start times and parents the world didn't have to revolve around making life
easy for the little darlings. At what point do today's youths need to grow
up and make wise decisions...like going to bed at a decent time without a phone
or technology in hand... Just out of curiosity are all employers now
going to need to change office hours so kids are not left at home alone in the
morning and parents hope the kids get to school on time....
What a blessing it would be if the Church could find an alternative for early
Along these same lines, what a blessing it would be if the Church could find an
alternative for early morning seminary.
@DrMANI work in a high school and have 3 teenagers at home...
teenagers growth spurts take a serious toll on their minds and bodies... they
are more exhausted and simple tasks take more effort when they are tired... this
is the real world for a teenager not getting up at 6am to go to their 9-5 job...
let them grow mentally and physically before we throw them to the wolves in the
Great idea, but in California the LDS students have early morning seminary that
starts at 6am and High school gets over at 3pm if they play sports 5 to 6 and
that's not counting YM or YW once a week, when do you do homework or
projects? Let's get back to the subject if starting school later works to
make better students is it time to rethink early morning seminary?
There are actually simple things that would help students that we don't do.
At the high school level reducing the length of classes. Learning is reduced
on the block schedule, nobody, not even grown adults, want to sit in 90-minute
classes. Make classes 50 minutes (every day) and if some classes like
vocational arts or P.E. need more time, students could block two periods.Start the school later. It is nice to say kids can't just get up
and that's the real world etc. etc. and then as adults we want our children
to be involved in extracurricular activities or have jobs that keep them way
past sunset as said above or 10:00 p.m. As for the real world, the real world
has changed and many people, especially in the higher paying jobs vs. low-paying
service jobs, set their own hours, work at home or have much more flexible
hours. I think if we want to train our students to be low-paying
service workers, then the way school is set up now is perfect. Or we can change
to actually proven research-based methods of changing instruction and starting
times of school. It is our choice.
Our district just had the elementary schools start earlier and the high schools
The natural cycle is to get to bed at sundown (or at least early) and arise at
(or before) sunrise. Just because people have allowed their kids to learn a
pattern of staying up later and getting up later, just not make it a new sleep
pattern - justified by "medical science." Those that stay up late and
get up late always feel more sluggish and tired - compared to the "new
cycle." Getting up early allows a person to feel better and get more done in
the day. My assertion is not medical science (as is not the science referred to
in this article), but empirical observation of a significant number of people
over many years. Ben Franklin was astute in this, and accurate, in my opinion.
How might this plan backfire when these students get to college and, more
importantly, to the workplace? It's not my experience that employers are
responsive to employees' needs for work hours that are responsive to their
biorhythms. How might this disconnect affect their abilities to transition into
adulthood and the "real world" when "real world" practices are
not very interested in adhering to the recommendations of medical science?
Why would it cost so much to re-program the bells? I think the costs are not
anywhere near stated and are just another excuse to delay needed reform. I
wonder how many other things could be done to help students that school boards
refuse to do that would also cut the cost of education and improve efficiency.
Surely retrofitting some buildings with air conditioning, while expensive, is
much cheaper than building brand new buildings so year round schooling/teaching
Carol Spackman-Moss is dead right on this. Why didn't the senate get to
this bill? Too busy considering lousy legislation and phony resolutions. Give the kids and the parents a break. Let them start school at a
reasonable time, like 9:00 a.m.
And don't forget about the middle and elementary schools. Our times are
7:30 for the middle and 8:20 for the elementary. My times as a kid 30 years ago
were 8:20 and 9:00.