Slashdot Mirror
Later School Start For Teenagers Brings Drop In Absenteeism
krou writes "Monkseaton High School in North Tyneside, UK, began an experiment in October that saw its 800 pupils ranging in age from 13-19 attend school an hour later than normal, at 10am. Early results indicate that 'general absence has dropped by 8% and persistent absenteeism by 27%.' Head teacher Paul Kelley supported the idea because he believed that 'it was now medically established that it was better for teenagers to start their school day later in terms of their mental and physical health and how they learn better in the afternoon', and he now claims that the children are becoming 'happier better educated teenagers' as a result of the experiment. The experiment is being overseen by Oxford neuroscience professor Russell Foster. 'He performed memory tests on pupils at the school which suggested the more difficult lessons should take place in the afternoon. He said young people's body clocks may shift as they reach their teenage years — meaning they want to get up later not because they are lazy but because they are biologically programmed to do.'"
At Wellington High School, they have been starting the seniors about an hour later for the last few years. It seems to work well, and the students are happier for it.
Ask me about repetitive DNA
Thomas Edison has a lot to answer for (at least for adult sleep patterns).
Electric lighting may have given massive boosts to human productivity. However, if it wasn't for electric light, we would all be going to bed much sooner (as you can't do any real work by candlelight), and then waking up in the morning with the natural daylight. Anyone who has spent time wild camping has experienced this..... and also knows how much more refreshed they feel waking up to the wavelengths inherent to natural light.
Of course, those that live above/below certain latitudes might argue differently when winter comes along and there is no daylight in which to do any work. You can only spend so much time in bed
Anyone quoted by a reporter knows how little they understand
Don't believe what you read is the truth.
The majority of the times I ever considered skipping school was because I was being woken up at 7 in the morning and would have prefered another 2 hours of sleep when I would have been far more accepting of the idea.
I went through a period of roughly 2 months in my senior year where I went to sleep at 6PM and woke at around 2AM, now the absurdity of that aside, one benefit of doing so was I didn't miss a single day, wasn't late for a class, and my grades improved significantly. I believe these effects were a direct result of me being well rested, and with the ability to get an extra hours worth of sleep if I felt like it with time to spare.
There is a difference between an 18 year old HS student deciding to have sex and a 14 year old HS student deciding to have sex. Only one of them is of the legal age of consent in most western countries. If a child is bound and determined to have sex they will. There is little to be done to prevent it when the child is actively trying to make it happen. However, there are a lot of children (and a 14-16 year old is still a child no matter how much they protest) whom are willing to accept prolonged virginity if the opportunity does not present itself. One of my sisters sought out opportunities to have sex, while my other sister, myself and 2 brothers were willing to wait. Nothing my parents did could prevent her (she ended up nocked up by 19), but their involvement in our lives, and perpetual presence in our home probably kept some of us from having sex earlier than we did.
/.ers were smarter than that. Cultural norms with regards to age of consent, and age appropriate behavior evolved over time for a reason. They many not be the best, but their is usually a good reason for the norms being what they are/were.
Furthermore, my wife lost her virginity at 14 and said she felt it was a huge mistake. In fact, most of the women I know who lost their virginity before 18 have told me they wished they hadn't. That's not my perception as a new father, but what women have been telling me for over a decade and I have no reason to believe they lied to me. Many of them did so out of a perception that "everyone is doing it", but felt totally unprepared before, during and after the event. Many of them didn't have sex again for several years after breaking up with their first partner because they didn't feel they could handle it yet (my wife incuded). I realize that the Baby Boomers here in the US believe that they are the first generation to have ever had a good idea, but I though that most
Now, with all of that being said... I don't believe that pushing back the start of classes at the HS by an hour will result in increased teenage sex. The vast majority of students will use the extra hour in the morning to get more sleep. I could see a little more recreational drug use (had a friend who used to get high before school), but it's not like it's going to make kids use drugs that wouldn't have anyway. I've been wanting schools to move start times back for years. I was a morning person in HS, but my older brother was not. I had to get up an extra half an hour early just to get my brother out the door on time. Even as a morning person, I would have appreciated the extra hour of sleep.
Bureaucracy expands to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.-Oscar Wilde
I agree that the OP is guilty of a broad generalization. Plenty of kids developed the ability to supervise themselves before they turn 18. However, unsupervised time is directly correlated with delinquent behavior. You sound like someone who developed a strong ethic early on, but many children at 14, 15 or even 16 are still highly impressionable by peer pressure, gang culture, etc. It's not that an increase in unsupervised time will always result in increased deliquent behavior in every child, but that it increases the proportion of children that will engage in such behavior, and increase the amount of deliquent behavior in others.
Four of the 5 kids in my house participated in delinquent behaviors to some extent (my youngest sister is damn near a saint) with similiar exposure to unstructured/unsupervised time. When that time increased my youngest brother increased the amount of delinquent behavior, but it stayed below the level of police invovlement. The same cannot be said of my other sister. My older brother and I managed to keep our delinquent behavior relatively unchanged, in part becase we were responsible for watching our younger siblings during that time.
With all of that being said... I don't believe that starting HS an hour later will be the problem they invision. The added hour of unsupervised time in the morning is most likely going to be taken up by sleep or time in front of the TV. Besides, starting an hour later in the AM means getting out an hour later in the PM. That means there will be 1 less hour between release from school and when the parents get home. I almost never got into trouble before noon on the weekends, and never during the school week. If anything I believe that this will lead to decreased delinquent behavior in the hours after school.
Bureaucracy expands to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.-Oscar Wilde
My brother recently finished secondary school in the UK, and for several years before he left the school had an automated system that would send a text message to my parents if he missed registration for any lesson, and request a response. If one wasn't received, then it moved onto making voice calls to secondary contacts.
It has a bit of a big brother feel to it, but it does mean that the parents can't claim that they didn't know it was happening.
As a former baystater, I can attest to the idiocy that the puritan legacy has played on that state. However, I don't see that this has anything to do with the puritans. AFAIK, the current schedule for schools was worked out based on what was cheapest for communities to pay for. Students start at approximately 9:30, 8:30 or 7:30 depending on their grade level (Elementary, Middle, or High School) so that older children will get out befor the younger, thus providing supervision until the parents get out of work, and so that the school only needs to buy enough busses for 1/3 of the total student population in the town.
I think a big part of the problems I've seen with the Massachusetts education system is the use of new "Progressive Education" techniques pioneered in the 60's, shown to be largely counter productive by the late 70's, but still en vogue in the late 90's (when I graduated HS). They care far too much about self esteem and student's feelings, and far to little for making the students perform. I believe that I did well in spite of many of my teachers instead of because of their efforts. Only a handful of my teachers actually challenged me, and that's because they didn't accept excuses or care too much about how a 'C' or a 'D' made me feel. Those rare grades made me feel bad, but they also motivated me to improve my performance (and not because I was getting paid for A's as many of my peers were).
Bureaucracy expands to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.-Oscar Wilde
Why do you worry about your daughter's virginity but not your son's? Is it somehow magically more important in daughters?
10k years of evolution, but sexism is still running rampart...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.