(Getty Images)
The Nevada State Board of Education is trying to force another sham initiative on the K-12 public school system. Under the guise of supporting the health and well-being of students, the Board is pushing mandatory minimum start times for public high schools in Nevada.
There is consensus that adolescents do not get an appropriate amount of sleep each night that is endorsed by pediatricians. There is no proven causal relationship that high school start times are responsible and a lack of evidence that changing them will mitigate this problem. A change may result in negative consequences for a majority of students.
There is consensus amongst pediatricians that adolescents do not get an appropriate amount of sleep each night. But there is no proven causal relationship that high school start times are responsible. Such a change may result in negative consequences for a majority of students.
Students will have their school days extended. Athletics and extracurricular activities will be extended later into the evening. Yet, there is no guarantee changing school start times will result in academic improvement.
Families that rely on older siblings to provide supervision of younger brothers and sisters until parents arrive home, will be impacted negatively. This is especially true in low-income families. Extending the school day will disrupt those with family responsibilities after school; such as working at their parent’s restaurant or pushing cattle on the family-owned ranch.
A bogus survey was made available online to help garner support for a nonsense initiative. It was purely a political exercise. Decisions should not be based on biased surveys or anecdotes from a few disgruntled parents and students.
Much of the research provided was unrelated or contained spurious data. Similar to scientists hired by tobacco companies in the 1970’s concluding that “smoking does not cause cancer.”
There is no conclusive evidence that high school schedule changes will correct sleep deprivation or adolescent sleep issues. Only one study (from the ones presented to the Board in 2023) semi-recommended later school start times. It came with two major caveats; that more research is needed and pilot studies (with careful data measures to prove efficacy) should be done before full implementation.
There are many other factors that cause sleep deprivation of adolescents. Caffeine intake. An inordinate amount of time spent on social media sites, texting, messaging and online gaming. And of course, a lack of family and parental control. Some international studies directly implied that family solutions were needed, not school solutions.
Being on time and fitting into a productive learning environment are positive habits. Most students have successfully adjusted to present bell schedules.
One of the duties of public education is to help build cooperative and productive citizens. The high school experience provides a transition to real world responsibilities where commitment is necessary for success. Colleges, employers and the military do not specifically cater to the sleep needs of individuals.
There is no professional credibility in this recommendation. Despite a severe lack of evidence of any efficacy, it is the same proposal presented to Board members last year. Again, with no plan to assess positive or negative effects on student outcomes or pilot programs.
Appropriate start times are needed to efficiently and effectively manage a high school building. Bell schedules should fit the needs of the school community. They should be set by each school district; especially in rural counties and those with four-day schedules.
Attempting to cure the perceived ills of the Clark County School District (CCSD) comes at the expense of the other 16 county school districts. No Nevada school district supports this change.
In CCSD, it will inconvenience those that have successfully adapted to the present schedules, cause significant disruption to athletic programs and other extracurricular activities and create additional transportation costs to an already financially challenged CCSD.
All 17 public school districts in Nevada and the Nevada Association of School Superintendents (NASS) are against this mandate. As usual, educational expertise is ignored by the President of the State Board of Education and Superintendent of Public Instruction.
They both previously supported replacing the ACT with an unknown and unrecognized (by any colleges or universities) college entrance exam to be contrived by a private testing service. This initiative also lacked organizational support and reeked of incompetence and corruption.
Is this really a “no brainer” decision as suggested last year by the State Board president? No. It seems to be a brainless suggestion based on emotional feelings.
The Nevada State Board of Education would be making a decision based on misinterpreted research. Its impact shouldn’t be minimized.
Unfortunately, the State Board has some voting members that may naively follow an ineffective and inappropriate recommendation. Please take care when voting for candidates seeking a seat in the current election.