Over the
past couple of years, educational reform advocates (educators, legislators, parents,
etc.) have argued unsuccessfully for changing the start of the school day. Basing
the foundation of their arguments on anecdotal evidence and loosely based empirical
evidence, advocates could not make a compelling argument for changing the start
of the day, until now.
This week,
the Harvard Education Review will publish the research of Colby College North
Carolina .
The school district changed the start
of the school day one hour later. The
results of this change to the school day produced a standardized test score of
2.2 percent in math and a 1.5 percent in reading. Additional benefits were students spending
twelve fewer minutes per day of watching television, nine more minutes of
devoted to homework and 1.3 fewer absences per student[ii].
However,
the most promising results confirmed the largely ignored biological research
that correlated the affects sleep has on school work. Edward’s study bolstered an earlier Brown University
If Edward’s
study proves to be the springboard for changing the start time of the school
day, the change could mutually benefit schools, teachers and students. A later start time would allow teachers extra
time to prepare for the school day instead of feeling rushed in the morning,
students would come to school having more sleep and hopefully mentally prepared
for the school day. The school could use
the extra time to have parent conferences, provide academic supports such as
tutoring/enrichment, or staff development.
The downside to changing the start
of the school day, are factors out of the control of a school district. The first is getting concessions from the
teachers and other support unions to change their start and end time. Teacher and support staff unions collectively
bargain specific hours of the work day.
Second, how to accommodate parents.
There are some parents whose work schedule revolves around their child’s
school day. A later start to the school
day could force parents to be late to work due to ensuring their child gets to
school on time. While high school age
youth may not be affected by the later start time, younger children who are
more dependent on their parents to get to school on time may be adversely
affected by the change in time.
The debate
on changing the start of the school day should begin and end with: “what is in
the best interest of the children.” If
the children’s needs are given priority over the adults, everyone wins.
It's difficult to link better school performance to any single educational reform. What's much clearer is the link between the absurdly early school hours that became the norm a few decades back (largely to save $ on buses) and serious health problems, both immediate and longterm. You'd be hardpressed to find a health professional or sleep scientist who would defend starting high schools in the 7 a.m. hour, but local efforts to change start times almost always fall to vested interests & widespread myth. The answer may require collective action on a national scale. The grassroots coalition StartSchoolLater.net is trying to do just that. Our first initiative is an online petition (bit.ly/tWa4dS) for a rock bottom minimum school start time to make it easier for local schools to put health and learning first.
ReplyDelete