Showing posts with label start times. Show all posts
Showing posts with label start times. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 20, 2021

Large scale longitudinal study on student sleep and changed start times out of Colorado

I'd missed that this had been released last week:
Since many districts stagger their school buses in order to pick up everyone, the elementary school students began school an hour earlier over the course of the study so that older students could be picked up later, said study author Lisa Meltzer, a pediatric psychologist at National Jewish Health in Colorado.
She said the research team found no significant difference in elementary school students' sleep times after the hour change.
The middle schools delayed their start times by 40 to 60 minutes, and high schools delayed theirs by 70 minutes to ensure they started at or after 8:30 a.m.
Middle school students went to bed an average of nine minutes later, but slept in an additional 37 minutes, giving them an average of 29 minutes of extra sleep. High school students went to bed an average of 14 minutes later, but slept for an additional 60 minutes, allowing them to sleep 46 minutes more on average.

That's from CNN reporting on the study itself (linked above).  Some additional links here. 


Editing to add that Massachusetts House bill H.663 would study this issue (and could use co-sponsors!).

Friday, February 19, 2021

Some things to read this weekend

 

Looking for something to read? 


By my count, I'm overdue on at least two blog posts--fingers crossed for this weekend!--but in the meantime, here are some things I recommend reading:

  • This Vox piece on how school funding can be part of the repair for segregation, which even includes some parts about federal funding perhaps being used to push. 

  • This piece from Erica Green in yesterday's New York Times on a program through the National Education Equity Lab that gets students into Harvard's Extension School courses and has shown that they have every ability to do the work. It has now expanded to other universities. The results are not only in terms of what it has shown about the students, but has shown the schools: 

    “We have not traditionally taken students from certain communities and certain high schools,” Mr. Quinlan said, “and that’s generations of work that we need to overcome.”

  • A plea from a New York City teacher that we stop calling this a "lost generation" that speaks to some of the gains she has seen in her students this remote year.

  • This piece from a rural North Carolina teacher where they're running their school on shifts that reflect the local textile mill. 

  • I have talked a lot about the 1918 pandemic in Worcester and how it has been part of what I have reflected on this year, so it was neat to see more of that in this Telegram & Gazette piece this week. 

  • Sarah Hosseini in The Atlantic asked the very reasonable question of why we have ever sent sick kids to school. 

  • And from a not really education related perspective, this piece in The New Republic on our not-exactly-progressive Massachusetts was today's must read. 

Tuesday, September 5, 2017

Joint Committee hearing on start times, recess, innovation zones

The agenda is here, 'though I don't, as yet, know in what order they'll be taking testimony.
The hearing starts at 10. Posting as we go. 
It appears they'll be taking the "zone" bills first. They are H.304 and S.279
Senator Chang-Diaz is calling the joint committee hearing to order. More on the House than the Senate side represented.
"We have a full house today; we anticipate going very long today."

Sunday, December 4, 2016

Make sure you read the memo on Worcester start times

If you read this article, make sure you also read this memo, which is what is being referenced.
And in particular: "All options presented should not be considered recommendations."
'though not all options are costed out, and some are dismissed out of hand. 
Full agenda for that meeting, which is tomorrow at 5:30, is here. And, yes, they're going for another round on wifi. 

Thursday, August 18, 2016

On later start times in Worcester...

I just saw this, as the agenda wasn't posted ahead of time. 
Here's administration's response regarding earlier start times:
The research on the benefits of a later start time for secondary schools is clear and indisputable. For the Worcester Public Schools, a change in the starting time for the secondary schools is operationally impossible, considering the many starting tiers of our schools. In addition, consideration has been given to other important factors such as afternoon athletics training and competition, students’ after school employment needs, and taking care of siblings while parents are at work. After much consideration on this issue, the Administration recommends filing this item. 
I don't know this, but that sounds a lot like "the new superintendent doesn't want to do this." This wasn't the message that was being given the last time there was discussion of this.

The latest post on later start times for secondary school is here from EdWeek  is here. 

Thursday, March 31, 2016

RISE and shine!

This morning the Senate committee released the RISE Act (S.2203). The acronym (and nice job on this) is for An Act Enhancing Reform, Innovation, and Success in Education" per the Senate press release (which is a good bulleted summary). You can find MASC's response here.
So what's in it?
A lot, to be perfectly honest.

First (to focus on essentials) there is a charter cap lift in the bill. The lowest 10% performing communities (same as now) have a lift in the amount of spending on charters of up to 0.5% of net school spending per fiscal year, starting in 2019, up to a maximum of 23%.
HOWEVER (and this is a BIG however), that only happens if the state, in 2019-2025 fully funds the recommendations of the Foundation Budget Review Commission, and, in 2026 and thereafter, fully funds what they're now calling "district mitigation" (charter reimbursement). If that doesn't happen, the cap can only go up by the percentage funded.
The bill also puts no cap on Horace Mann and innovation schools (both of which are district-run) BUT those may be counted towards the percentage of spending of the cap lift (so a district could exceed 23% or lesser percentages in previous years IF the spending was on Horace Mann and/or innovation schools).
The bill also puts no cap on schools that primarily serves at risk populations (75% of enrollment).

District mitigation payments are reformulated at 100%, 50%, 25% (right now it's 100%, 25%, 25%, 25%, 25%, though the last few tend to be irrelevant as they generally aren't actually funded).

What else?

The Board of Ed is reformulated to have one of the Governor's appointees be required to be a retired teacher, jointly recommended by AFT and MTA; currently, teachers are barred from serving on the Board of Ed. It also drops the phrase barring a Board member from serving "as a member of any school committee," thus reversing that ban ('though they can't be paid by a district and serve on the Board of Ed). Those currently in office are to complete their terms.

It requires the Secretary of Administration and Finance to jointly with the Joint Ways and Means Committee create an implementation schedule for the Foundation Budget Review Commission recommendations. It specifically calls out:
...tuitioned-out special education rate, assumed in-school special education enrollment, low-income increment, low-income enrollment, foundation benefits, retired employee health insurance and English language learner increment...
...as the categories to be covered (note: those were the recommendations, but not everything mentioned; early childhood ed, inflation, as well as the question over if "assumed" was right for special ed aren't in here). It sets in place a seven year implementation schedule, to be equally implemented each year; in determining the schedule:
the secretary of administration and finance and house and senate committees on ways and means shall hold a public hearing and receive testimony from the commissioner of elementary and secondary education and other interested parties. The schedule may be amended by agreement of the senate and house ways and means committees in any of the 7 fiscal years to reflect changes in enrollment, inflation, student populations, or other factors that would affect the remaining costs in the schedule; provided, however, that the final year of the schedule shall not surpass fiscal year 2025, but the schedule may be fully implemented prior to fiscal year 2025.
In other words, yes, you get some wiggle room, but you don't get to kick the can down the road forever, and we're not taking excuses.

It is, however, as all such things are, "subject to appropriation."

The definition of "foundation benefits" is updated to include retiree benefits (which it hasn't).

In terms of implementation of the Foundation Budget Review Commission:
  • The benefits rate is set by "average group insurance commission premium for all plans for the 3 previous fiscal years" (so the three year GIC rate);
  • Health insurance now includes retirees in the calculation.
  • The ELL rate is set at $2,361 for 2019 and is expanded to include vocational students.
  • The low income rate is for students whose families are at or below 185% of the federal poverty level. Districts are divided into septiles (there's a new word to me!); the starting rate is set at $3,474 "and each subsequent septile shall increase by equal amounts up to the highest percentage septile rate of $8,179" which is to be annually adjusted for inflation.
  • The in-district special ed rate is raised to 4% overall and 5% of vocational students.
  • The out-of-district special ed rate is set at "4 times the statewide foundation budget per-pupil 434 amount less the sum of the statewide foundation budget per-pupil amount and out-of-district special education cost rate" (which is what the FBRC recommended).
DESE is required to "develop target percentages and standards for administrative costs."

If a student transfers into a different school during the school year, or has had substantial interruption in their schooling in the previous three years, their test scores don't count towards the school.

The bill expands those things required of Level 4 schools to Commissioner-designated Level 3 schools (the lowest performing 20%); the Board of Ed is charged with creating regulations regarding such a declaration of a "priority" school, taking:
...into account multiple indicators of school quality in making such designations, including, but not limited to: student attendance rates, dismissal rates and exclusion rates, promotion rates, graduation rates or the lack of demonstrated significant improvement for at least 2 consecutive years in core academic subjects, either in the aggregate or among subgroups of students, including designations based on special education, low-income, English language proficiency, and racial or ethnic classifications.
The teachers' union and school committee must then negotiate a waiver agreement (subject to approval of 2/3rds of those working at least 50% of their time at the school; if they can't come to agreement, the Commissioner can simply declare the school underperforming (Level 4)). The superintendent then convenes a turnaround stakeholder group. The turnaround plan then goes to the school committee for approval, as well as to the teachers' union for approval. If it doesn't get approved, the Commissioner can declare the school underperforming (Level 4). The plan goes to the Commissioner but is not subject to his approval. The "priority" designation is for two years, at which point it is reviewed by the Commissioner. (There's also a bunch of language which makes ch. 69 include "priority" schools, as well as "underperforming" (Level 4) and "chronically underperforming" (Level 5).)
It provides for regional school district planning boards and specifically allows for cities to be part of them. And there's a lot of language on this and I don't know why, so if anyone wants to clue me in, I'd appreciate it.

For the purposes of school discipline regulations, "a commonwealth charter school shall be considered a school district." They thus are held accountable for all portions of the law, including the revisions to chapter 222. They must post their policies pertaining to conduct on their websites. Charter schools thus must provide for alternative education for students suspended or expelled. Charter schools specifically must: 
...establish a panel consisting of 3 members of the board of trustees to hear appeals of disciplinary actions taken by the charter school, 1 of whom shall be the representative of the district school committee and 2 other members who shall be appointed by the chairperson of the board of trustees. Unless otherwise provided in this section, the panel shall have the same rights and responsibilities as a superintendent in hearing appeals and issuing final decisions.
...which brings us to the changes for charter schools. Their board of trustees are required to have at least one full-time teacher at the school, at least one representative of the sending district's school committee, at least two (or 25%, whichever is greater) parent or guardian of current students at the school, and high schools must have a current student member, all of whom are to be voting members of the board. Members of the Board of Trustees and their families may not materially benefit from the school (save the teacher may be paid). The same change is made for Horace Mann charters.

Charter school teachers must be evaluated as public school teachers are. They also shall if unionized acrue seniority and receive compensation equal to with that received by district teachers. Charter school teachers are to be certified by July 1, 2019, and charters must file plans about their progress towards making that happen.

Charter schools may not expand or create new schools if their suspension rate overall or for subgroups exceeds that of sending districts for the previous three years. This does not, however, apply to the alternative charters (we're getting there) and it may be waived for a subgroup if the gap is small and the Board of Ed feels they're making an effort.

Applicants for new charter schools have to meet with the superintendent of the district before applying, and they must explain how their program will compliment the district. They also must hold a joint hearing with the district school committee. Not doing so automatically disqualifies them from applying.

As part of the application process, the "superintendent may submit an analysis to the department that describes how approval of the proposed charter school may affect the district’s students," AND the Commissioner is REQUIRED to:
...explain in writing to the board that the commissioner’s decision is responsive to the district superintendent’s submission and provide an assessment of the accuracy of the analysis of the impact on the programs and services of the sending school district or districts...
Further, the Board of Ed is required to "substantially consider" materials submitted by the district in their decision on charters and:
When making a decision on an application, the board shall explain in writing how the decision takes into account the district superintendent’s submission under subsection (h) regarding how the school’s approval is expected to impact the district’s students.
It appears that the Senate believes that falls under the Board's purview.

Charter schools can only be created, renewed, expanded, or amended if they have an opt-out lottery system of some kind. This may (Bostonians, please note both the verb and the stress on it) be a unified enrollment system with the district, 'though if that is the case, the charter may only enroll students from the single district, may not displace district options in choices, and students cannot be compelled to attend a charter school. Charters that already exist may phase it in. All students eligible for enrollment are entered in the lottery ('though parents and guardians may opt their children out); those pulled may also choose not to enter the school. The charter will also create a waitlist through the lottery, from which it will backfill students into seats that open during the year for all grade levels; if the waitlist is exhausted, the charter is to conduct a new lottery.
Charter schools may offer priority enrollment to  at-risk students, students who are homeless, students who are pregnant or parenting or students who have dropped out of school.
Districts that rent space to charters can require that students in that district be given preferential enrollment, though (here and throughout) the low income percentages must be at least those of the sending district.
Charters may also preferentially enroll the children of their employees.

Charter schools are to update their waitlists monthly. They must include names and addresses, and they must include those taken off the list (either through enrollment or by request). Waitlists annually expire on July 1. Waitlists will be maintained separately for Horace Mann and Commonwealth charters; they will be available publicly (without student identifying information) on the DESE website.

Contracts and leases, partnerships, grants, and gifts must be posted on the charter school website.
No charter management organization may "exercise a proprietary claim" on practices at a charter school.
Charter schools may not charge tuition or fees. They may not require a contract be signed by parents or guardians.
DESE is charged with creating a charter and district exchange program, including the exchange of employees to share best practices.
Districts continue to provide transportation IF they and the charter agree on start times. If not, the charter school has to cover 50% of the cost. What if the district is just given a bill?
Limitations that districts put on busing also cover district charter schools; if there's transportation for specialized district programming, the charters are covered.
Districts also must provide charters with field trip transportation equal to the average field trip transportation for the prior three years provided by the district to their schools (easy in districts where we've long since stopped providing field trip transportation).

Attrition, stability, and suspensions, including those of subgroups, must reflect those of the sending district for the previous three years; there is again a provision for a waiver if it's a small gap and "the charter school has made a rigorous effort to maintain all of its students."

Charter schools are to publish an annual report, including a financial report. The department is to create regulations regarding the net asset balance of charter schools. That is all to be on the charter school's website as well.

The Commissioner is charged with collecting attrition and stability data annually and making it publicly available.

DESE has until January 1, 2017 to revise its regulations.

DESE is to make recommendations regarding the revision of definition of low income by January 1, 2017.

There is to be a charter school funding commission with a report due January 1, 2017.

There is to be a commission on school start times with a report due December 31, 2016.

The State Auditor is required to issue a report on the first five years of the changes in chapter 222. It's to be filed with the Civil Rights division of the AG's office, among others, and is due December 31, 2019. 

Saturday, January 30, 2016

Wednesday, November 4, 2015

MASC delegates assembly

A quick summary of the actions at the MASC Delegates Assembly today (you can download our manual, which has the full text of all proposed resolutions, here)

  • Resolution 1, to work for a comprehensive study on high school start times, passed.
  • Resolution 2, to prioritize an agenda for support and services for children in poverty, passed.
  • Resolution 3, to determine where a child's test score counts by where they are on October 1, passed.
  • A "sense of the assembly" supporting a moratorium on high-stakes testing, passed 66 to 42.
  • Resolution 4, to support an equitable and sustainable placement program for homeless students, passed.
  • Resolution 5, to support a tax reform ballot initiative (not cited by name), failed on a counted vote.
  • Resolution 6, to call for a school committee seat on the Board of Ed, passed, as did a call for an end to the MGL that bars school committee members or district employees from serving.
  • Resolution 7, to call for an end of the use of TS Gold student assessment, passed.
The amendments to the bylaws passed unanimously.
Patrick Murphy of Barnstable was elected President-elect.
Beverly Hugo of Framingham was elected Vice President
Devin Sheehan of Holyoke was elected Secretary-Treasurer
...and Jake Oliveira of Ludlow becomes President in January by virtue of his election to President-elect last November.

Wednesday, September 30, 2015

Accountability: school start times

Perda: I had a good time, sorry for the heavy backup, I might have gotten carried away
I had a good time learning about
history 2000-01 when the committee took this up
Professor Wolfson, formerly of Holy Cross, now in Maryland
"pretty rare that you find...something that is so heavily one sided in one way or another"
literature from educational side, biology, economics, from other school systems
"all saying we see benefits from seeing kids start school later on"
challenge for district is how to do it
complex school system with a lot of activites and bussing and after school system
"it would take a lot to change"
"from the research you've read it, it's clear: you should do it"
Biancheria: received a number of calls on
look forward to having the discussion this evening
discussion in a process: would start the conversation, not looking for a vote today
look at pilot program for one of our schools?
"significant impact on student achievement"
duration and time of day one is expected to function
"clear that we have to look at this as something we may need to change"
shifts that people work and a change of shift
wonder what EAW would have to say; look to have what we do in the best interest our students
have input of everyone
O'Connell: US Air Force Academy moved time later
"I agree with you...all of those factors runs in favor of a later start time"
"only when you start to mix in other factors"
sports, taking care of other students, jobs working longer
"would like to see us take a focus on our academic students"
"may be most pivotal for the students that we most want to reach" (as sleep is more disturbed for more economically disadvantaged students)
"cut through issues" that may hold back
work on this over the next academic year
Novick: overwhelming evidence across the board: need to move the item forward
not social but biological: student biology shifts
more sleepiness leads to greater rates of depression
association of poor sleep habits and lower socioeconomic status
later start times: less tardiness, better attendance
coaches saw students who were less tired and more alert
students were calmer
fewer referrals
parents report children who were "easier to live with"
student did less risky behavior
fewer car accidents
Novick: recommendation of committee that move forward with discussion to implementation (with speed, adds Mr. O'Connell)
Biancheria asks that discussions start with teachers and parents
O'Connell asks that backup be referred to TLSS (but that we're taking our copies with us
Item held in Accountability, but committee encourages discussion to carry on in other subcommittees for "how it would work"

Sunday, September 27, 2015

Accountability meets this week

The Standing Committee on Accountability and Student Achievement has its first meeting since May of 2014 this week. On the agenda:

School accountability plans! Per Mass General Law, we do not approve school improvement plans, but we may review them. This week, in our periodic sampling, we are looking at the plans for Burncoat High School, Claremont Academy, and Forest Grove Middle School.

Secondary school start times! We have a BOATLOAD of backups on this (so just check out the link to the main agenda, above). For those following this, know that we have an item on it in EACH standing committee right now, and the idea is to review the research here first, then to move to the "how would it work/how much would it cost" in TLSS and F&O, and then (if we get there) move it to "what needs to change" in Governance.

Testing audit! It turns out that we've done some work on this: we have a report on student assessment done in house and we have the results of a WPS teacher survey on this issue.

Full confession: I have as yet looked at none of this. 

That's 5:30 on Wednesday in room 410 at DAB.