6 ms·

The start time changes can of course make sense (e.g. teenagers later in the day), but a big issue for smaller kids ending significantly earlier is childcare. W

The start time changes can of course make sense (e.g. teenagers later in the day), but a big issue for smaller kids ending significantly earlier is childcare. Who's going to look after your second grader from 2pm-5pm+ when you get off of work? Keep in mind, the kids riding the bus are not the kids whose parents can drop them off and pick them up; and one of the education system's primary functions is childcare. But sure, in principle - if you are thoughtful, changes from the status quo can be better.

pavel_lishin 3y ago
Hell, who's going to look at them at 5am if they're having to get up that early? You're asking probably working parents to sacrifice at least 2, if not more, hours of sleep. For parents who work overnights, they may not even be home yet. Staggered schedules might make sense, but not the way this was done.
toast0 3y ago
> The start time changes can of course make sense (e.g. teenagers later in the day), but a big issue for smaller kids ending significantly earlier is childcare. Who's going to look after your second grader from 2pm-5pm+ when you get off of work? This is like the daylight savings debate. Just like you can't make more daylight, just move it around the clock; the school system is only going to mind your kids for a certain number of hours, you can start it earlier or later, but they're going to do the number of hours they want, and you need to figure out the rest. Yes if you've got multiple generations of kids, and they all get home around the same time, the olders can mind the youngers, and you miss out on that if the olders get home much later because of staggering. But if your school district is an extensively bussed district and doesn't have the budget to attract enough drivers, you've got to make it up somehow. In my area, we have a lot of bussing because of the rural nature, not for integration, but all of the congregate childcare options are accessible by busses (or are literally across the street from a school, and send a person to collect children at dismissal time and safely cross the street). Sending your children to congregate childcare certainly costs money though.

pavel_lishin 3y ago

Hell, who's going to look at them at 5am if they're having to get up that early? You're asking probably working parents to sacrifice at least 2, if not more, hours of sleep. For parents who work overnights, they may not even be home yet. Staggered schedules might make sense, but not the way this was done.

toast0 3y ago

> The start time changes can of course make sense (e.g. teenagers later in the day), but a big issue for smaller kids ending significantly earlier is childcare. Who's going to look after your second grader from 2pm-5pm+ when you get off of work? This is like the daylight savings debate. Just like you can't make more daylight, just move it around the clock; the school system is only going to mind your kids for a certain number of hours, you can start it earlier or later, but they're going to do the number of hours they want, and you need to figure out the rest. Yes if you've got multiple generations of kids, and they all get home around the same time, the olders can mind the youngers, and you miss out on that if the olders get home much later because of staggering. But if your school district is an extensively bussed district and doesn't have the budget to attract enough drivers, you've got to make it up somehow. In my area, we have a lot of bussing because of the rural nature, not for integration, but all of the congregate childcare options are accessible by busses (or are literally across the street from a school, and send a person to collect children at dismissal time and safely cross the street). Sending your children to congregate childcare certainly costs money though.