|
|
Statement by Michele Brett to WW-P Board of Education, April 11, 2000Back to Later School is Better!Someone, somewhere, sometime ago, decided that our children should have to wake up at 6:00 in the morning. We are here to question that decision.
For those of you who do not know us, my name is Michele Brett and this is Deb Hornstra. We are the originators of the advocacy group and website Later School is Better. We are here to follow up on our letter to the Board of last November, in which we included national sleep research showing that the children of WW-P are at risk for sleep deprivation. Studies have shown that sleep deprivation is associated with increased irritability, anxiety, behavior and mood problems including depression, increased potential for drug and alcohol use, vulnerability to accidents including auto, tardiness and increased illness, as well as poorer grades.
During adolescence, nine hours of sleep is necessary to avoid behaviors associated with sleep deprivation. With some buses arriving at stops as early as 6:45, and students up at 6 a.m., they would have to be asleep by 9 p.m. in order to obtain the appropriate amount of sleep. Studies have shown that this is not possible due to the natural circadian rhythms in adolescence. Putting all the research aside, look at the children! They are tired. As caring parents, we felt we could not stand by and accept what we know to be detrimental to our children.
Since our original letter of November 12th, our website Later School is Better was born and has had almost 1300 unique visits to date. This shows that there is strong public interest in this movement. In addition, we have received support from student council members at the high school who are willing to conduct and present a formal survey because they feel so strongly about later hours. All they need is the OK from the administration. With education on the facts about sleep deprivation, it is hard to believe that any informed individual would oppose a change to later start times for the benefit of our students. Dr. Fitzsimons, Matti Prima, Stan Katz and Linda Geevers have all shown support for starting school later.
So, imagine our surprise when someone decided to start school earlier next year! We are here to express our concern and formally request that the time gained by eliminating homeroom be used to start school later in September 2000. Students can always stay after school by individual choice, but adding 18 minutes to the lunch period, as I understand is the plan, forces ALL students to lose out on the precious sleep time that could be gained by the elimination of homeroom.
In closing, I would like to share the response of Mary Carskadon, leading sleep researcher and Professor at Brown University School of Medicine. Upon learning of WW-P's decision not to start school 15 or 20 minutes later, even though this could be done without affecting either of the two main obstacles, busing costs or sports, Dr. Carskadon said, and I quote: "Start perhaps by thinking small. Even a change of fifteen minutes--in the right direction, of course--can have a positive effect."
I invite the board to act on our request and other parents to step forward with their comments following Deb's statement.
Statement by Deborah Hornstra to the WW-P Board of Education, April 11, 2000
At the last board meeting it was announced that there will be a change in middle school schedules effective next school year. I am opposed to this change because our schools already start too early, and this makes them effectively start even earlier.
For almost six months Michele and I and a large group of concerned parents have been trying to get the administration to consider starting our middle and high schools later for the benefit of our teenagers. You may not realize this but fewer than 20% of schools in America start classes as early as we do, that is before 8:00 in the morning. Of course, even fewer of those start before 7:45, as we do.
We thought the administration was sympathetic to our concerns. Dr. Fitzsimons told us he planned to try to implement later school hours at the earliest opportunity, perhaps in conjunction with block scheduling. It is therefore distressing to hear that the administration now proposes block scheduling, but they also propose beginning our middle schools five minutes earlier next year, and at the same time eliminating homeroom. This means our middle schoolers, the students who require the MOST sleep of any school-age children, will be starting first period a full 18 minutes earlier than they do now!
Right now first period begins at 7:53. Under the new schedule it would begin at 7:35. It is inconceivable to me that we should be moving in the opposite direction on this crucial issue when ALL the research shows that America's teenagers need to start school LATER, not earlier.
Let me be clear that I do not oppose the abolition of homeroom. In fact months ago our group suggested eliminating homeroom as a way of getting our kids those extra 18 minutes of sleep in the morning. We were told administrators felt it was not worth the logistical effort required. Now the administration has decided to eliminate homeroom and instead of giving our kids more sleep, they want to take those 18 minutes and tack them onto the lunch hour. I don't know a single middle schooler who thinks this is a good idea.
There is a big difference between the amount of attention required in homeroom, where no learning is taking place, and that required in an academic classroom. Our children are already going to school earlier than 80% of American children. They need to go to school LATER, not even earlier. Homeroom is probably a waste of time. But the time gained by eliminating it should be used to let our children sleep later, not to pad the lunch period.
Because our schools start so early and our buses and cars travel great distances over busy roads, there is a huge problem with tardiness in the district. Right now a middle schooler can get to school by 7:53, though, and not have missed any academic work. I simply cannot imagine why the board would allow the administration in the current climate to say to middle school parents that their children will now be missing academic work if they are not at their desks by 7:35.
Who among you are at your desks at 7:35? Very few professionals start work that early, and for a good reason. It is TOO EARLY for adults to begin thinking, and it is DEFINITELY too early for teenagers to begin thinking.
| ||||
