catching some zzzzs

Two of Colorado’s largest districts explore later high school start times

PHOTO: planetchopstick/Creative Commons

Two large Colorado districts are considering pushing back high school start times for 2017-18 in a nod to research that shows starting later helps teens get more sleep and do better inside and outside the classroom.

Officials in the Cherry Creek and Boulder Valley districts —the state’s fourth- and eighth-largest —say they’ll hold community meetings this school year to gather feedback from parents, staff and students about the potential changes.

“It would be our hope to go forward next year,” said Sandy Ripplinger, Boulder Valley’s assistant superintendent for elementary education and co-chair last year of a task force that researched later high school starts.

The proposed start time range would be 8:30-8:45 a.m. compared to the current 7:30-8 a.m. range, she said.

Tustin Amole, spokeswoman for Cherry Creek, said the district hasn’t settled on a time range for its late start proposal. High schools there now start between 7 a.m. and 7:30 a.m.

Meanwhile, in Denver Public Schools, the state’s largest district, two years of discussion and one short-lived attempt to push start times later at 10 secondary schools haven’t yielded any changes so far.

In fact, start times have gotten earlier at one DPS high school. Northfield High, the district’s newest comprehensive high school, opened last year with an 8:45 a.m. start time and this year has a 7:45 a.m. start time.

Principal Amy Bringedahl, who was named to the job last spring, said last year’s later start time came with a 4:45 p.m dismissal time that created problems for students in after-school sports or with after-school jobs, and pushed homework and family time too late in the day.

Why are later start times better for teens?

  • Sleep-wake cycles shift during puberty, making it hard for kids to fall asleep as early as they did in elementary school.
  • Experts say it’s normal for teens to stay awake till 11 p.m.
  • It’s recommended that teens get 8.5-9.5 hours of sleep a night.
  • Research shows that students with early bell times get less sleep than they should, which is tied to lower achievement and higher rates of obesity, depression and car accidents.

A school committee of parents, teachers and administrators recommended an 8 a.m.-3:30 p.m. schedule this year, said Bringedahl. But transportation department officials couldn’t accommodate the request, settling on a 7:45 a.m.-2:50 p.m. day instead. (While district-run yellow buses aren’t provided for most Denver high-schoolers, Northfield is an exception because city bus routes haven’t been established in that area yet.)

DPS officials said Monday they’re considering the possibility of adjusting high school start times, but provided few details on their plans.

“We know that this conversation needs to include school leaders and their communities as we move forward, so that any decisions are rooted in the needs of each school,” Deputy Superintendent Susana Cordova said in an emailed statement.

The push for later high school start times has gained steam nationally with increasing evidence that when school schedules jibe with teen sleep rhythms, students are healthier, more focused, attend school more regularly and do better academically. In the last two years, both the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have come out in favor of start times of 8:30 a.m. or after.

A number of school districts across the country have opted for later start times in recent years, but the 52,000-student Seattle Public Schools is probably the biggest and most high-profile example. Starting this fall, high schools and most middle schools there will start at 8:45 a.m.

In Colorado, some smaller districts, including Montezuma-Cortez and Harrison, have pushed start times to 8:30 or after for some or all secondary schools, but large districts have been slower to join the club.

A big part of it is logistics. District officials everywhere say later start times for middle and high schools can impact elementary school bell times, transportation costs, sports schedules and students’ after-school obligations, including caring for younger siblings.

“It’s not as simple as saying kids do better when they don’t have to get up as early,” Amole said. “There’s so many things that go into that.”

She said Cherry Creek officials discovered how controversial schedule changes can be when they shifted middle school start times from 8 a.m. to 9 a.m. several years ago. School board meetings were packed with protesters and eventually a compromise 8:30 a.m. start time was adopted.

“There’s a lot of things we learned from that experience that we have to consider this time,” Amole said.

Boulder Valley administrators said last year’s task force, which studied scheduling issues at various grade levels, focused on examining research on late high school starts. This fall’s process, after clarifying whether late starts are feasible for the district’s transportation department, will seek public opinion on the issue.

One open question on late high school starts—particularly around their effect on interscholastic sports— is whether districts that make the change will influence others to do the same.

“If one district has a later start which then pushes athletics later, would other districts be thrown off, or would they come together?” Ripplinger asked.

Bringedahl, of Northfield High School, said there are two strands of research to consider. Besides evidence in favor of late starts and well-rested students, “There’s also the research to show the more kids are involved after school the more successful they are in life.”

“It’s the push and pull,” she said. “I certainly don’t have any perfect bell time.”

Extra sleep

Two Colorado districts shift to later high school start times — for very different reasons

PHOTO: planetchopstick/Creative Commons

The 22,000-student Greeley-Evans school district in northern Colorado will join the 55,000-student Cherry Creek district in suburban Denver in adopting later high school start times this fall.

But unlike in wealthier Cherry Creek, the change in Greeley was not the result of a lengthy process to review research and solicit community feedback. Instead, the move came out of a very different conversation: How could the cash-strapped district tighten its belt?

After Greeley voters rejected a district tax measure last November, a chronic bus driver shortage loomed larger than ever. With no additional money to beef up driver salaries and more than a dozen driver vacancies, district officials needed to reduce the number of routes. They decided to discontinue busing for most high school students — part of a package of cuts that will save the district $667,000 a year.

That decision divorced the start time debate from the common concern that pushing high school bell times later requires more bus routes and more money.

“We were only able to move the high school start time by seriously limiting — in fact, almost eliminating — bus transportation for our high school students,” district spokeswoman Theresa Myers said.

She noted that all district students are eligible for free transportation on city buses. About two-thirds of district students qualify for free or reduced-price meals, a proxy for poverty.

Later middle and high school start times have gained traction in Colorado and nationally in recent years with mounting evidence that teens are hardwired to go to bed later and wake up later. When school schedules align with sleep patterns, research shows students are healthier, attend school more regularly and do better academically.

Nationally, Seattle Public Schools is one of the largest districts to embrace later start times — pushing high school and most middle school start times to 8:45 a.m. last year, with plans to shift to 9 a.m. this year. Also, in what could be the first statewide start-time mandate in the country, California lawmakers are currently considering legislation that would prohibit the state’s middle and high schools from starting before 8:30 a.m.

In Colorado, the move to later start times has been relatively slow. Until March, when both the Cherry Creek and Greeley-Evans school boards voted on the schedule changes, only a few smaller districts had made the switch. They include Montezuma-Cortez in southwest Colorado and Harrison in Colorado Springs.

Both Denver Public Schools and Boulder Valley considered later high school start times in the last couple years, but ultimately shelved the idea. Boulder Valley officials said the prospect of increased transportation costs was one of the reasons they didn’t move forward.

In Denver, which currently doesn’t provide district busing to most high school students, administrators expressed concern about complicated transportation logistics, after-school sports schedules and conflicts for students with after-school jobs.

Cherry Creek officials say the change in start times this coming year won’t cost the district more money.

In both Cherry Creek, the state’s fourth-largest district, and Greeley-Evans, the 13th largest, high school start times will shift 45 minutes to an hour later this year. In Cherry Creek, high schools will start at 8:20 a.m. and middle schools will start at 8:50 a.m., and in Greeley-Evans, high schools will start at 8 a.m. and middle schools will start at 8:30 a.m.

Other changes in Greeley-Evans include greater walk distances for students at all levels. That means high-schoolers won’t qualify for busing unless they live more than three miles from school, middle-schoolers won’t qualify unless they live more than two miles from school, and elementary kids won’t qualify unless they live more than 1.5 miles from school.

Myers said the new start times haven’t caused much consternation among parents.

“It’s more the transportation issue (that’s) causing some angst for some of our families,” she said. “We’re really going to watch and see how this impacts attendance and tardiness at our schools.”

shot down

Boys & Girls Clubs unlikely to open soon in Memphis schools as SCS funding plan collapses

PHOTO: Boys & Girls Club
The Boys & Girls Club provides after-school programs for children and teens.

If there’s a downside to the improved financial condition of Shelby County Schools, it’s the challenge of getting additional funding for a new initiative, even if everyone agrees it’s a good idea.

That scenario played out this week as some county commissioners balked at a request for an extra $1.6 million to open Boys & Girls Clubs inside of three Memphis schools.

The decision was close, just one vote shy of approval, demonstrating the tension among commissioners wrestling over how to invest in a community with big needs, limited resources and a desire to keep property taxes in check.

In many ways, the proposal to open school-based clubs felt like a slam-dunk. Boys & Girls Clubs have programming. The district has empty space. Neighborhoods near schools have young people in need of enriching afterschool activities.

“We talk everyday about crime, and this is a safe haven,” Chairman Melvin Burgess told his fellow commissioners on Monday in arguing for the investment. “What people don’t know is that an afterschool program is a place for kids to go instead of an empty home.”

But even as the district’s $985 million spending plan sailed through the board, several commissioners questioned the need for anything extra.

“I really support Shelby County Schools spending their own money to do it,” said Commissioner David Reaves. “They have $80 million sitting in a savings account, and we gave them a huge bump last year. Here’s the reality: I was on the school board and I know how it works. They need to spend their own money.”

The decision kicks the proposal back to district leaders, who have been in talks for months with Boys & Girls Club of Greater Memphis.

A district spokeswoman said Wednesday that Shelby County Schools has no plans to fund the initiative at this time.

Keith Blanchard, the president and CEO of the Boys & Girls Clubs, agreed that it’s now unlikely for new clubs to open inside of Dunbar Elementary, Riverview School and Craigmont High by 2018.

“This process has drug out so long, we don’t know what next steps will be yet,” he said. “If we can secure funding at this point, maybe we start in just one school in the fall. Maybe we try again next year. We’re not giving up.”

Shelby County Schools began its 2017-18 budget season without a shortfall for the first time in years, allowing the district next year to provide teacher raises, hire new guidance counselors and behavior specialists, and make new investments in struggling schools.

But Superintendent Dorsey Hopson says the school system still doesn’t have enough money to propel students to academic success in a community challenged by high poverty and mobility.

Such concerns are among the reasons that school-based investments in Boys & Girls Clubs made all the more sense, according to the idea’s backers.

“(The commission vote) was really disappointing,” said Blanchard. “We thought we had the votes going in. I think it was most disappointing for the students who were there, and for them to have to listen to the reasons why this didn’t pass.”