Well when you realize we treat school as glorified babysitting and not just education, part of the reason becomes more obvious. Parents work 40 hours so we need kids in school roughly that length of time. Especially when both parents have to work to afford to live.
We need to uplift a lot about the entire system for it to work.
But then it’s not so much sports. The real cause is it’s childcare while parents work.
In my family member’s district, that’s not even a consideration. And weirdly many in the district have a shared overall employer and work starts at 5am to 7am for many of them. Leaving the other parent to drop off or making kids ride the bus solo.
The only thing dictating the schedule is sports. You get some parents that complain about everything. Meaning a fraction of a percent will complain about school starting too early, too late, on days it’s too windy, on days the sun is too bright, whatever. Parents are super awful nowadays. But all that is noise. The only complaint en mass they get that isn’t political/vaccine/FoxNews is sports related. Game started too late/early, not enough fields for all the kids to practice. The million dollar astroturf is bent the wrong way now, and needs maintenance IMMEDIATELY.
There was a high school building that got severely flood damaged in a hail storm. Parts of it are still boarded up and not fixed. But the $30m+ stadium they don’t need is almost finished.
Yup. Spent high school in a relatively large city with dozens of high schools, had stadiums galore, and temp classrooms in porta-buildings that leaked all winter and sweltered in the spring and summer and most of the fall. No money to pay teachers aids, no COLA raises for educators, but somehow the football stadium screen got an upgrade regularly and shiny new jerseys and helmets for the sportos.
Sports in education is a cancer. (source: see NCAA.)
This is it, regarding Canada at least. I took a course called HIstory of Canadian Education, the education system in Canada was created because of rising hooliganism in cities, as rural couples moved into cities and took factory jobs, and left their children home to fend for themselves.
YUP. I went to a small middle of nowhere school that punched far above its weight in academic performance and well below its weight in sports. Sports budget was consistently enormous compared to everything else and then would have massive splurge years on fucking stadium lights. That shit will never ever remotely meet its value but its the agenda.
I don’t think this is the whole picture, it doesn’t explain why we have such similar school schedules in other countries where school sports aren’t so relevant
All school schedules historically are because of farmers and blue collar worker schedules.
Now that we’ve outlawed child labour (well, it’s coming back…) and your family’s survival doesn’t count on getting those crops picked, we now have freedom to choose school hours at any time. Those countries without such strong sports have had few issues moving it to later start. It’s the sporty ones that resist.
The poorer countries that still have mostly basic labour students and/or child labour are still on an early schedule for the same reason the more developed nations started out that way.
I’d say the only outlier is China. They start early and go loooooong. That’s for bashing in some of the best education at the expense of most other things. There’s probably a happy middle ground in there somewhere.
It’s a bit depressing to me that we’ve known this for at least twenty years, and possibly more and it’s still a problem.
A major concern has been busing. Even in normal times, districts use the same buses and drivers for students of all ages. They stagger start times to do that, with high schoolers arriving and leaving school earliest in the day. The idea is that they can handle being alone in the dark at a bus stop more readily than smaller children, and it also lets them get home first to help take care of younger siblings after school.
If high schools started as late as middle and elementary schools, that would likely mean strain on transportation resources. O’Connell said Nashville’s limited mass transit compounds the problem.
“That is one of the biggest issues to resolve,” he said.
This is basically it, school systems not wanting to buy the extra buses or hire the extra drivers they’d need.
Unfortunately I don’t see this ever being solved without a major cultural/financial shift in the USA towards properly funding education. Too much financial pressure to have fewer buses and fewer drivers. If my high school and middle school had started at the same time as the elementary, that’d be like 14 new buses alone at $60k-$110k a pop, not including driver wages and the diesel for each one…and we had more than one high school and middle school in our district. So it’d be more like 50 new buses, just to start HS and middle school at the same time as elementary. The cost would eat smaller districts alive. It’d be several million just to procure the buses new.
It’s baffling how many U.S problems can be traced back to car-oriented development.
Here in Sweden, dedicated school buses are uncommon - getting to school is usually a matter of walking when young, and then using the common public transportation when older, or biking, or a mix of those two.
Here’s how I got to school while growing up:
- Years 1 -6: school 0.4 km away, walked or biked
- Years 7-9: school 2 km away, biked or took the bus
- Years 10-12: school 9.1 km away, took the bus to school
Note that this was one of the most car-oriented cities in Sweden of about 100k people, meaning that this experience is probably unusually bad for Sweden.
I won’t argue that the US is exceedingly car-focused, but that’s partly because distances travelled are greater. When I was a kid, my elementary school was 2.6 miles (4.18 km) from my house, and many classmates would have been even further. I had classmates who had a 45 minute bus ride (time stretched by making multiple stops obviously). While I’m sure 5 year olds can bike 2.6 miles, it’s probably not ideal and certainly not ideal in snow/sub-zero (Fahrenheit) temps. Much of the US is just very spread out.
When I was at school, the bus was a charter from the company that ran the local public bus fleet. Every other time it was running public routes or just part of that companies reserve.
But this was in the UK, where dedicated school buses are exceptional.
In the school district that I live in (and where my kids attend school), elementary school starts earliest and middle/high school both start at roughly the same time.
I’ve found that this works really well since my youngest wakes up and is ready to go earliest anyways, I don’t have to adjust my schedule because they’re out of the house before I have to get to work and I would need after school care regardless. My older kids can more or less fend for themselves before school so I don’t need to worry about them while I get to work before they leave.
If elementary school started at 9 like high school and middle school I’d have to organize care for my youngest both before and after school since I’d be working at both times.
And now imagine if instead of making new schools in places where everybody needs to be driven there either by car or by bus we build them so the majority would walk or bike as it is the more convient option. Other countries like Japan can imagine. Turns out it’s actually better to walk/bike to school even who knew!
The problem is you’d have to build not just schools, but entire neighborhoods so they are walkable + tunnels under any larger roads between them, or maybe guarded crossings would do here and there. While it could certainly be done, the majority of the US is built to be car centric from the ground up.
schools are largely daycare facilities for the low/middle income brackets.
Because school is entirely geared towards parents. Nothing about school is actually good for the people going through it, but the system doesn’t actually care about them, and isn’t designed to.
Nothing? I’d argue that learning mathematics is good for people going through school but then again I’m no expert in education.
There’s nothing fundamentally wrong with having a classroom of students being taught a curriculum. It’s effective even if it’s inefficient. The execution is lacking for sure, but to suggest that none of it is good for students is a little dramatic.
Really? The thing most people end up using the least in their lives beyond an elementary school level?
Math education is a crapshoot for most people. All it does is serve as a way to make them feel bad about themselves for not being interested in what people like you tell them to be interested in.
Thank god computers are putting math majors out to pasture.
No, I’d argue learning history and how to read is more important than anything else the school system provides. It’s what follows most of us throughout our entire lives.
Math and literacy are both fundamental and essential tools for a self sufficient adult. You don’t need to remember how to to apply the quadratic theorem or complete the square outside of high school for most jobs. You do need to remember how to read and basic concepts like compound interest or multiplication. People who don’t are ill prepared for life, not just adulthood.
John Caldwell Holt, either “Instead of Education” or “How Children Fail.” I should reread them; is been a while.
I meant sources showing how “school is entirely geared towards parents” and how “the system doesn’t actually care about them [children], and isn’t designed to”
honestly abolish school. I can’t imagine subjecting my hypothetical child to what I went through.
I wouldn’t go so far as to abolish school completely, but things definitely need to change. Kids deserve so much better
