3 ms·

17.3% of schools in New York start later than 8.30, the majority starts between 8-8.30 SA starts at 7.45 yet they dominate the Top 30 out of a sample of 2400 sc

17.3% of schools in New York start later than 8.30, the majority starts between 8-8.30 SA starts at 7.45 yet they dominate the Top 30 out of a sample of 2400 schools. I can live with that as a significant sample size and control group ESPECIALLY since I never said that the earlier you are up the better but simply that it's not a problem if you get early enough to sleep. The study you refer to compares 2, TWO schools and doesn't come to any conclusion that contradicts mine in fact it support it. More sleep means better performance most of all. But sure keep on claiming I am the one who is making anecdotal claims.

boomboomsubban 7y ago
>But sure keep on claiming I am the one who is making anecdotal claims You are. This doesn't mean they are for sure wrong, but you are looking at the success of one school system and saying that means that the start time does not matter. For all you know, that school system could change to starting at 8:30 and rank even higher. It is a textbook anecdotal claim. >The study you refer to compares 2, TWO schools and doesn't come to any conclusion that contradicts mine in fact it support it. More sleep means better performance most of all. That study doesn't compare two schools, it compares two classes in both of the schools against each other. This let's them better isolate the start time as the variable responsible for the change. It also references other studies with similar results. And it does disagree with you, the later start time was associated with kids getting 30 more minutes of sleep.
- ThomPete 7y ago
  I am comparing +2400 schools in New York state with each other based on the stats I told you and with Success Academy both being the earliest and dominating the top of that list (two thirds of the top 1.8% of the school. And that's with a majority of the children being black and Hispanic and from less financially well of homes. It's not just one school system it's various school systems Charter school vs. elementary school vs. different start time vs. different income groups etc. You are just moving the goal post. For all intents and purposes what I am citing is as good if not better than the study you seem to think is more accurate. With regards to the study, it compares two classes in two schools in high school. Yet somehow that's not anecdotal? Furthermore no it actually says that the amount of sleep is what leads to better performance. NOT the time in the morning which was the entire claim of the parent I was answering so it does, in fact, agree with me even though it's, of course, actual anecdotal using two classes and it certainly isn't proving anything with regards to general performance or optimal time of day that kids can learn. I am not even sure what we are debating anymore. But claiming my example is anecdotal is simply not true. It's much less anecdotal than any of the other studies being done here when it comes to performance which was what I originally responded to claims about.
  - throwaway93132 7y ago
    I needed to create an account because it's so frustrating how correct you think you are despite literally everyone in this thread telling you that you're wrong.
  - boomboomsubban 7y ago
    Here's the definition of anecdotal >Based on casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis. You're basing it off your own casual observation of one school system. Nobody is moving goalposts. >With regards to the study, it compares two classes in two schools in high school. Yet somehow that's not anecdotal Because they actually ran an experiment where they tracked and controlled as many variables as possible. It had scientific rigor. >Furthermore no it actually says that the amount of sleep is what leads to better performance. It also says the later start time gave children thirty more minutes of sleep. So yes, it does say that a later start time is better.
    - ThomPete 7y ago
      2400 schools and exactly the same school system the “scientific studies” are based on, so yes you are moving the goal post. What i have is a pretty clear indication that meeting early in school does not affect your abilities to perform well in fact when you compare SA which have the earliest meeting time they dominate of a top 30, 20 of those are SA. I was responding to a claim that Later was better for performance. Whatever that stude had in scientific rigor it lagged in sample size, if anything that was the very definition of anecdotal no matter how deep itcwent it was still only two classes on two different schools. Also notice how it talks about the sociodemographic reality as a way to explain some of thecredults yet SA is mostly from exactly that sociodemographic group yet outperform 98.2% of all other elementary schools in new york state. And no the later time is only better because they got more sleep, but that can wasily be solved by going to bed earlier. I dont for a second believe you cant see that your positive is simply not supported by your evidence and if you really cant see the holes in your position then i guess there is nothing more i can do. You are the one supporting anecdotal evidence, however detailed it is, not me. You loterally started claiming i was talking about one school only, then you just kept moving the goal post. That’s intellectually dishonest and not something i care continuing supporting. Thanks for the talk.

boomboomsubban 7y ago

>But sure keep on claiming I am the one who is making anecdotal claims You are. This doesn't mean they are for sure wrong, but you are looking at the success of one school system and saying that means that the start time does not matter. For all you know, that school system could change to starting at 8:30 and rank even higher. It is a textbook anecdotal claim. >The study you refer to compares 2, TWO schools and doesn't come to any conclusion that contradicts mine in fact it support it. More sleep means better performance most of all. That study doesn't compare two schools, it compares two classes in both of the schools against each other. This let's them better isolate the start time as the variable responsible for the change. It also references other studies with similar results. And it does disagree with you, the later start time was associated with kids getting 30 more minutes of sleep.

ThomPete 7y ago
I am comparing +2400 schools in New York state with each other based on the stats I told you and with Success Academy both being the earliest and dominating the top of that list (two thirds of the top 1.8% of the school. And that's with a majority of the children being black and Hispanic and from less financially well of homes. It's not just one school system it's various school systems Charter school vs. elementary school vs. different start time vs. different income groups etc. You are just moving the goal post. For all intents and purposes what I am citing is as good if not better than the study you seem to think is more accurate. With regards to the study, it compares two classes in two schools in high school. Yet somehow that's not anecdotal? Furthermore no it actually says that the amount of sleep is what leads to better performance. NOT the time in the morning which was the entire claim of the parent I was answering so it does, in fact, agree with me even though it's, of course, actual anecdotal using two classes and it certainly isn't proving anything with regards to general performance or optimal time of day that kids can learn. I am not even sure what we are debating anymore. But claiming my example is anecdotal is simply not true. It's much less anecdotal than any of the other studies being done here when it comes to performance which was what I originally responded to claims about.
- throwaway93132 7y ago
  I needed to create an account because it's so frustrating how correct you think you are despite literally everyone in this thread telling you that you're wrong.
- boomboomsubban 7y ago
  Here's the definition of anecdotal >Based on casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis. You're basing it off your own casual observation of one school system. Nobody is moving goalposts. >With regards to the study, it compares two classes in two schools in high school. Yet somehow that's not anecdotal Because they actually ran an experiment where they tracked and controlled as many variables as possible. It had scientific rigor. >Furthermore no it actually says that the amount of sleep is what leads to better performance. It also says the later start time gave children thirty more minutes of sleep. So yes, it does say that a later start time is better.
  - ThomPete 7y ago
    2400 schools and exactly the same school system the “scientific studies” are based on, so yes you are moving the goal post. What i have is a pretty clear indication that meeting early in school does not affect your abilities to perform well in fact when you compare SA which have the earliest meeting time they dominate of a top 30, 20 of those are SA. I was responding to a claim that Later was better for performance. Whatever that stude had in scientific rigor it lagged in sample size, if anything that was the very definition of anecdotal no matter how deep itcwent it was still only two classes on two different schools. Also notice how it talks about the sociodemographic reality as a way to explain some of thecredults yet SA is mostly from exactly that sociodemographic group yet outperform 98.2% of all other elementary schools in new york state. And no the later time is only better because they got more sleep, but that can wasily be solved by going to bed earlier. I dont for a second believe you cant see that your positive is simply not supported by your evidence and if you really cant see the holes in your position then i guess there is nothing more i can do. You are the one supporting anecdotal evidence, however detailed it is, not me. You loterally started claiming i was talking about one school only, then you just kept moving the goal post. That’s intellectually dishonest and not something i care continuing supporting. Thanks for the talk.