News You Can Use
Also from the district Student Assignment Plan webpage:
Wednesday, June 10
6:00-8:00 p.m.
Public Hearing: Student Assignment
John Stanford Center - Auditorium
8:00-9:30 p.m.
Drop In Question & Answer Session
Informal opportunity to ask questions of District staff
9:00 a.m. - Noon
John Stanford Center - Auditorium
Drop In Question and Answer Session
Informal opportunity to ask questions of District staff
Now why these opportunities to answer your questions about the SAP aren't front and center on the home page of the district's website is a mystery. This is the biggest issue on parents' minds and yet you are expected to check the SAP page everyday for updates.
Also from the FAQ page:
"Will students currently enrolled at non-attendance area schools be guaranteed an assignment to their attendance area school immediately?- New!
Providing stability for continuing students requires a transition period. Seats for continuing students from outside of the new attendance area cannot also be filled by students who live in the new attendance area but do not currently attend that school. For that reason, current students are not guaranteed immediate assignment to their new attendance area school. (italics mine)
The shift to automatic assignment to attendance area schools, other than for entry-grade students, will be determined by the transition plan. We will develop this transition plan after the Board approves the new student assignment plan and the new attendance area boundaries."
But then:
"If a family indicates that their priority is to have the siblings attend the same school and space is not available at the older sibling’s current school—or for both siblings at any other schools requested—the siblings will be assigned to the new attendance area school."
So if you have a sibling at a non-attendance school but want them to be together, they will move the older sibling to the attendance area school the younger one is assigned to BUT if you only have one student but want to move him/her to the new attendance area school, that's not guaranteed. I'm confused but I'm sure Tracy can straighten me out.
Comments
Weren't we promised that they would have staggered bell times when the District steamrolled stakeholder opposition to the co-location of the campuses?
Didn't a Court order the District to stagger the bell times for these schools?
What's up with that?
Actually, it isn't guaranteed that the older sibling will be moved to the younger sibling's school; what is guaranteed is that the siblings will be assigned together, if requested. Which school it actually is will probably depend on where the space is (or which would result in less overcrowding, as the case may be). So, if the assignment area school is more popular than the currently assigned school, it is entirely possible that some younger siblings will end up at the older sibling's currently assigned school.
What the compromise boils down to is the recognition that not everybody's preferences can be accomodated immediately. The SAP basically says that in this kind of case, placing siblings together will take precedence over getting non-entry level grade students in their attendance area school.
Nice for them I guess. Why the special treatment?
Roy, I think you're wrong -- I don't see anyway to interpret this statement other than to assume that if you have an entering K, who is guaranteed assignment to his/her attendance area, their sibling can also attend their school. They're working towards as rapid a shift as they can to attendance area schools.
And for people whose older child is in a non-attendance area school, you aren't loosing something that you would have otherwise had with the new system. You're loosing something extra, that wouldn't have been available under the old system. If, for example, you wouldn't have stayed in the system, or moved, if the plan had been developed already when your older child entered the system, you still have the chance to explore those options.
A) Guarantee that older sibling continues on at their currently assigned school.
B) Guarantee that entry grade sibling be assigned to attendance school.
C) Guarantee that siblings are assigned together, but no guarantee on location.
A family can select A and/or B, but if they do, then they won't have C. If they select C, they don't get A or B.
What is not clear at all is if a family selects C, will the district be limited to placing them at either the older sibling's currently assigned school or the attendance area school? Or is it possible that they will both end up at some other school where there is space? I sure hope the latter is not the answer.
I'm assuming Hale also gets its every Tuesday later start day (which the other high school don't starting this fall) because of this cost neutral thing.
So it's nothing to do with alignment of bell times or a later bell time because it's better for teens; it's about the money.
Here's my interpretation:
A) Guarantee that older sibling continues on at their currently assigned school.
B) Guarantee that entry grade sibling be assigned to attendance school.
[same as you]
C) Go through a list of other requested schools, including the older sibs current school, to see if there would be room for both siblings at any of them.
D) Assign both sibs to the first school that has spots for them. If none do, assign both sibs to the attendance area school.
But, I do think that the school system needs to make this point clear, using examples. I think there's a lot of confusion as people are adjusting mentally to the new system. And, as others have pointed out, since attendance areas and reference areas aren't going to match up, releasing the boundaries is going to make things even more complicated.
I thought that reference areas were going away, in favor of the new attendance areas (with new boundaries). Is this what you mean, or is this something else that's new?
"What is an attendance area school?
An attendance area school is one to which elementary, middle-, and high-school students are assigned based on where they live, as long as the school can meet their needs.
What is a service area?
A service area is a geography within which various services, including transportation, are provided for students who live within it. Service areas use the same boundaries as those for middle school attendance areas."
So I think attendance area replaces reference school and service area replaces clusters (although we currently also have middle school regions as well and the above definition says middle school in it). So maybe we are skipping cluster and going from reference to region (albeit with the new names, attendance area and service area).
We had a full k-12 'option' school in the north/northeast in Summit... the only K-12 on the west coast, I understand, one of five nationally and the only one with a performing arts focus... and the trend internationally is to provide K-12 education in one institution, with a vertical curriculum with multiple learning strands that include sport, arts, technology, high level academics (math, languages) and performance.
We have a demographic growth spurt happening which will continue for the next 10 years at least... there are not enough alternative seats in the city to meet the demand and we have the silliness of busing Thornton Creek children across town to Salmon Bay...
Keeping Summit open would have achieved the need to provide Seattle kids with a second choice for alternative middle and high school... where are all the kids from TC, AS#1 (assuming we survive and keep our alternative character intact), Salmon Bay, Tops, Pathfinder, Orca etc going to go for their high schooling - Nova cant hold them all and doesnt necessarily suit them all...
And now 'alternative' kids have no performing arts opportunity (most alternative schools dont have the concentration on music etc that some mainstream elementary/middle schools can provide), so they'll be disadvantaged by both geography and experience in trying to get into the couple of traditional high schools which do have a performance programme....
I went to the last performance of Oliver at Summit yesterday...
I didnt see the principal, I didnt see any Board members or District Staff present... what I did see was a group of talented, dedicated children and young adults and their mentors/teachers, families and supporters putting on a wonderful performance, doing an incredible job with love and enthusiasm...
I'm not averse to change - but the change that comes has to be seen to be worthwhile and to be a better alternative to the current situation...
It is shameful that this school has been wiped off the face of the earth... in doing this, the District and the Board have demonstrated they know the cost of everything and the value of nothing ... Seattle - you wont know what you've lost for your kids and future generations until its gone, which will be in two weeks time....
I cried yesterday and I cry today for our kids in this District....
The comment above comes from a Board member's response to a request sent by Deirdre F to the Board, asking them to support JA K-8...
IS THIS FOR REAL - the Board wanted to open a K-5 and a MS in the north end a year ago and the Staff didnt want to talk about it???
Who serves whom here? This is a case of the tail wagging the dog...
Why didnt the Board stand up to the Staff and insist, especially as we parents presented plenty of verifiable data about the need in this area of the city?
Is this enough for a recall, on the grounds of malfeasance?
The staff smacked him down with an emphatic NO. They said that there was a yellow bus for Special Ed and that bus had to make another run, yadda yadda yadda.
Well, funny thing. It turns out that Hale CAN have their late start because Hale is cost neutral because that yellow bus doesn't have to make another run.
How can the Board rely on anything the staff says?
We already come in the car because the bus stop we've been assigned to is 10 blocks away - they wont let us use the one two blocks away, because it lies across a major arterial. And I would have to drive us there for the drop off and pick up every day, so what's the point in offering transportation in the first place?
And my son rarely wakes before 7.30am every day.... there's no way I could have him ready for the bus or an 8.20am school start, even if I did agree to wake him - he sleeps because his body needs the rest (and yes, he does go to bed at a reasonable hour for a 6 year old) - he often complains that there's no nap time in kindergarten... I dont expect his need for rest to change just because the District says school is to start an hour earlier.
What happened to all the talk about basing the school and bus times on the safety issues around daylight at each end of the day?.... and where's the logic in K-5 kids at K-8 schools having to go early, while elementary schools and two other K-8s (also alternatives like AS#1) dont have an early start at all?....
Lunacy
It may even be reasonable to demand that the teacher go out of his/her way to accomodate your protest.
However, it would also be perfectly reasonable for the teacher to refuse special accomodations to you and your child.
The half of civil disobedience that everybody seems to miss is that the person exercising it has to accept the consequences of their disobedience. When Thoreau protested the Mexican War by not paying taxes, he spent time in jail for it, and he never claimed that he shouldn't have been jailed.
I support your right to not send your child to school for the first hour of each day. I also support the teacher's right to refuse to provide special instruction to your child. Nobody has an obligation to insulate you from the consequences of your own decisions.
Now, if you could get the entire class to come one hour late -- even on a rolling basis as you suggested in a different thread --THAT could be a more effective act of civil disobedience.
I have to agree with some of the other posters. 8:20 is not an unreasonable start time for an elementary school age child. It may take adjustment for your family, but is it really unmanageable? What if a parent had said that 9 was unmanageable and brought their child in at 10? Would you have expected the teacher to disrupt 20+ other student's learning to accommodate?
It was clear to me from the beginning that the talk about “alignment” was bull. Clearly this is just a cost-savings measure. But (aside from the district being duplicitous –and that’s a big aside), is it really a bad thing to save money? If starting some schools a little earlier can save a teacher’s salary, I am all for it. My kids and I certainly don’t like starting school/work as early as we do, but we all understand that we need to do it.
Switching a machine on at 6.30am and warming it up for an 8.20 production run is fine for a machine... it is too early for young humans, day in, day out... I'm not a machine, nor is my child... I want my child to live in a humane world that lives by the rhythms of living beings, not production lines ....
I dont get why so many parents are willing to go along with situations which we all bitch about here on the blogs as being bad, but we dont want to DO anything about it... when push comes to shove, we all fall into line - go along to get along - assuming we dont have the power to change anything...
Well we do have the power, we just have to choose to exercise it and to live with the consequences...
The system is created by and made up of people... people can change it...
And the longer we bitch but dont do, and allow each bad decision to be implemented, the more we lose and will have a harder time getting back.... RIFed teachers - we accept that (or the alleged necessity of that) and settle for bigger classes... you just try getting those ratios reduced when the so-called 'recession' ends and the financial good times roll again ... the line will be: see, your kids did perfectly well with bigger classes; academic outcome is not connected to class size - a line already being touted by MJG...
Where are you going to draw the line?
The 7:45 start time for 6-8middle schools has been eliminated with the bell time change. This is a positive change for many students district-wide and one you will also benefit from if your child attends a 6-8 middle school.
Most younger children do get up early and research shows they learn more in the earlier hours. Middle school is when all that begins to shift.
While the new transportation plan is far from perfect, protesting an 8:30 start time for a 1st grader by bringing him to school late each day is not fair to your child as his education will suffer due to missing important subjects taaught in the morning hours.
Where do I draw the line? I draw the line at my first grader being ignored because the teacher has to teach the lesson a second time everyday to your child, who is missing the first hour of every class day because you choose to keep him home. You bill yourself as a communications specialist. How exactly is the teacher supposed to communicate the days lessons to your child if he is not in school? It is beyond selfish on your part to demand his entire class bow to your will. You are absolutely entitled to any direct action you choose, but do not be surprised to find it less than popular with your child's peers and with their parents. How do you think that will affect your son?
why should AS#1 k-5 children have to come to school an hour earlier when all other elementary (K-5) children around the district get to keep their current post 9am times?
Why do two other alternative K-8s not have an earlier start time?
Why is the safety of K-5 children in elementary schools an issue (touted in the Board and District communications), but the safety of K-5 children in K-8 schools not an issue... is it safer for an AS#1 child to stand in the dark waiting for the bus at 6.45am, than it is for an Olympic View K-5 child?
I understand Sahila's frustrations with this, but I also think there are limits to individual child centered education -- what if her son was only really able to function at school after, say, noon? Would it make sense for the teacher(s) to have to redo everything starting at noon? No?
Well, how about at 11:30?
At some point, there's a line to be drawn. I am an AS1 parent, and I completely respect Sahila's decision to bring her son in late each day, but I cannot support the idea that teachers should have to restart the day as each child shows up. AS1 has always been about different pedagogies, different emphases, experiential learning, and so on - but we've always assumed kids would show up for those experiences, and indeed, it all culminates in a "rite of passage" which requires considerable preparation and timely performance.
I'm sympathetic, but I can't ask a classroom in my school to have a "do-over" every day.
http://as1web.com/?page_id=4
http://www.summerhillschool.co.uk/
In this context, I dont think my need to have my child's physical needs accommodated (as are spec ed kids' needs, for example) is unreasonable...
Most middle schools will start at 8:05 and K-8s at 8:20.If you have a child in elementary, check that schedule. It's a crazy quilt of 9:05 (which includes K-8s Salmon Bay and TOPS; what's up with that?)
At some point after the initial proposal, the district removed those two schools from the earlier (Middle School/Secondary) start time tier, apparently because bus rides would exceed their one hour transportation standards. (Both TOPS and Salmon Bay draw from a fairly wide area.) The middle school part of those schools needs to have a longer instructional day than Elementary (6.5 versus 6), so the schools need to start earlier than the other Elementary tier schools.
I can only speak for TOPS, but there many people (predominantly parents of younger kids) who were furious with the initial proposal. Most staff, especially the middle school staff, preferred the earlier time, to align them with other middle schools and allow them, for example, to attend district meetings with their peers.
I could have lived with either proposal, and see clear benefits and drawbacks to both tier times for a K-8. In the end, the District did what they wanted, and Salmon Bay and TOPS have more or less the same start times they always have. Some people fear that once they start cutting transportation further, the long bus times will cease to be an issue, and SB and TOPS will be on the same schedule as the other K-8s.
And it also opens the door, as Josh Hayes points out, for all manner of special requests for coming into school at random times (or leaving at random times for that matter). You could end up with a chaotic classroom where kids are coming and going willy-nilly because of their parents' belief that they cannot adapt to a schedule. And all of the class would suffer from continuous distruptions.
Just as most of us have work schedules where we suffer pay cuts or being fired if we can't bother to arrive on time, schools, even alternative ones, have schedules and students need to be there in order for EVERYONE to get the most out of the day.
Honestly, if your son is so out of sync with the schedule in place, than you should simply homeschool him so that his special needs can be met. The school can't be expected to revolve around 1 child. Public school is just that-open to all, and there is no way on earth a school of any kind can accommodate several hundred or more individual schedules just because it suits those people.
You talk a good game about wanting all the kids to be at school at times proved by science to be beneficial to them and all, but you're willing to throw you're kid's whole class under the bus so that he alone gets his personal schedule and individualized instruction to boot. It's unfair to all of them.
You've mentioned before that your son has sleep apnea and can't get to school early because of that. Have you considered getting him an IEP that stipulates a later start? I know an adult with sleep apnea who has this accommodation at work.
While I'm not a big fan of early start times either, and actually didn't choose Orca because of this, I think that for most families, this is a preference not a need. I know a lot at Lowell are unhappy about that late (9:20) start that I like so much. However, it sounds like for your son, it may actually be an issue of accommodation of a physical need. And there is a system in place to address such things.
The teacher will do what they can do. What bothers me about these arguments against Sahila's stance is that this is exactly what SPS likes to see. They can continue to make inconsistent and costly decisions, decisions based on nothing more than Decider-style metrics, and let the rest of us go at one another over minutiae. I understand the counter arguments, but there is a bigger picture here.
She's already pointed out that flexibility is one of the hallmarks of AS #1. With Summit's failed principal now in charge, I don't expect what's left of AS #1's original mandate to remain. As a vocal alternative school parent, her voice - will - be heard, because after this shake-out, I expect some of the alterna schools will become independents.
Imagine SPS competing for dollars with some of the programs they destroyed. The wages of dividing the base?
School attendance is required by state and federal law. Given the requirement that children over age 7 attend school, the system HAS to provide appropriate options. (and yes, I'm familiar with homeschooling and the laws surrounding that option as well)
Of course it's difficult to have children arrive at school on different schedules, all the more difficult with a pre-set curriculum, large class sizes and mandated lessons. Sahila has clearly communicated her child's needs- the needs of many in our community. She is engaged, has offered alternative solutions and is now prepared to take a stand in the face of a system that disregards too many unmet needs.
Sahalia’s statement “I expect his teacher to make up the math and reading he will be missing in that first hour, which is when she says she teaches those subjects...." does not sound to me like one parent “asking for flexibility.” Where is the “asking?” To me it sounded like one parent demanding an accommodation that could negatively impact an entire classroom because she can’t possibly get her child up as everyone else.
I was unaware until another poster said something that Sahalia’s child actually has a physical condition that could require an IEP. If that requires special accommodation, the school should meet it, but I don’t think that necessarily will be handled by the classroom teacher (who, after all, does have dozens of other kids to work with).
Why is changing the start time a “costly decision”? If it really does save money (and maybe it doesn’t – with this district you never know), it sounds like a smart decision.
Just as you feel that this type of disagreement is just what the district wants (turning parents against one another), I feel that Sahalia’s strong statements and demands are what makes it so hard for us to address the very serious issues that negatively impact all students.
There's nothing whatsoever that's flexible about that. Nothing. Now, if her child deserves and gets an IEP, then I'm sure the team of people involved in that will find a way for her son to arrive late and still leave on time yet get the instruction he needs. But that's the difference-it would be s TEAM effort to meet a physical disability, not a single parent DEMANDING that SHE get HERS. I don't understand how you can't see the difference.
why the heck would a teacher plan to have reading/math, the most concentration intensive courses of the day for many students the first hour of school?
The SAP basically says that in this kind of case, placing siblings together will take precedence over getting non-entry level grade students in their attendance area school.
Sounds like families who have their children close enough to be in the same school have priority over families who chose to have fewer children or who can't afford to have them so close together.
Portland Or, also have a K-12 magnet school that has been around for 35 years and I expect that the huge state of California has a few as well maybe in Berkeley?
As a former chair of Summit K12 parent board, I would like to defend Roy Merca.
Yes I would agree he didn't have a strong relationship with the district and he could have been a much better advocate for the school.
However during the decades that Summit had an strong willed ( and hard headed) principal, he was able to work in the background, where he apparently feels more comfortable and is able to be effective that way.
The district has a habit of not supporting schools/principals and assigning them to buildings without making sure they are a good fit.
After having three different principals in my daughters six years at Summit, I was happy to have the principal at Garfield stay for four years.
A baseline of continuity is important for learning.
This starting a new" five year plan" every 18 months just doesn't swing it.
why the heck would a teacher plan to have reading/math, the most concentration intensive courses of the day for many students the first hour of school?"
Whyever not? That's when most elementary school students are at their freshest and most alert.
Helen Schinske
It was suggested at our (AS#1's) last site council meeting that the beginning of the day start with an exciting activity that kids would motivate kids and families to want to get to school on time. The new start time is 8:20 for AS#1 which is 40 minutes earlier than the current start time of 9:10. No decision was made but I know that the teachers are talking about how to adjust to the new schedule. I'm not sure if it works with the way PCP time is scheduled but maybe they'll have a K-2 and 3-5 class with AM academics and one with PM.
Its not me who is being inflexible - its the system... and I repeat, for the umpteenth time, that the system is an ethereal idea that only lives - manifests/is present in our reality - while a critical mass of people agree to give it form and power... its a creation of people, implemented and enforced by people and it ceases to exist or changes form when people decide no longer to support it....
I cant tell you how abhorrent it is to me to see human beings bending themselves out of shape to suit/please the system, which obviously does them harm, and then they expect/train their children to do exactly the same...
It makes me cringe with horror to see what we have done to ourselves, to our children, to our planet, all in the name of the 'system' and the 'group'...
I don’t want to keep picking on you, but I’m taken aback by your rhetoric. Your original post did not say that you were asking that the school honor your child's special need to sleep late. You said "my grade one child will be late every day and that I expect his teacher to make up the math and reading he will be missing in that first hour..." Can't you see why that would be offputting to other members of your community? Being attuned to all kinds of minds does not mean that kids get to arrive at school willy nilly.
If, instead, you had written "I expect the school to be flexible and work with our special needs..."? I would have understood and agreed.
I’m also confused by your statement about “the system, which obviously does them harm…” I’m not sure what harm you are referring to here. Can you elaborate? An 8:20 start time is not inherently harmful for healthy children. It clearly does not work for your son’s special needs, but that is something that you can work on with the school.
“Its not me who is being inflexible - its the system...” I just don’t see that the system has been inflexible at all. The system currently had a start time that was too late for Megan’s kids, but it was flexible enough that the teacher could accommodate them. Part of living in any community (a school, a family, a city) is being aware that certain community members needs will actually be in direct conflict with one another. The key to being a good citizen is to determine good solutions in these situations and accept that you won’t always get everything your way. How have you shown that you are willing to be flexible?
Sheesh-go live in the wilderness-grow your own food so you can avoid that system weave your own clothes, too. Homeschool, use wind power, and so on. Don't vote, live off the land, whatEVER.
All of your diatribes against "the system" of the school district end up with some level of ranting against the larger system OF WHICH YOU ARE A PART, whether you like it or not. There's got to be SOME kind of system in place, or you have anarchy.
And I agree with Gabrielle, your original post said nothing about working WITH the school to attend to your kid's special needs-just demands that they will do what you want, when you want it.
That paints you as a difficult person to work with regharding any sort of compromise.
"That paints you as a difficult person to work with regharding any sort of compromise."
. . . enough said.
http://www.summerhillschool.co.uk
My child has a need to sleep - whether that's a medical need (it was at one point) or just a biorhythm that's normal for him....
9.10am was too late for Megan's girls, 8.20am is too early for my son...
there you have it - unique individuals with unique needs and both being forced to subjugate their needs to the demands of a system...
I'm demanding - yes demanding rather than begging 'please will you' - that the system meet my child's needs...
And no, agribean - I dont want to leave the system, go feral and live in the woods and homeschool... what I want to do is humanise our society so that people dont have to isolate themselves in the woods to be real, living, breathing, growing, happy, fulfilled, connected, joyful individuals ... and one of the places that change starts, is in schools....
And I have to say, in my 51 years experience, asking 'nicely' doesnt get you much of what you really want... that's programming to make you conform and toe the line and stand in line and be grateful for the crumbs you are given...
Look at how this District operates - hundreds if not thousands of parents asking the Board 'nicely' to please reconsider and look at this data which clearly shows that the decisions being made are flawed ... and what have you got for you 'niceness'? Diddly squat... the Board (or rather the Super) continuing on their merry way and we're told to suck it up for the good of the whole...
You might not like my blunt talk... my guess is you dont like it because its telling you a truth you dont want to hear... if you acknowledge the truth in what I am saying, then the next step is that you have to make some choices - turn your back or take some action...
What you choose is totally up to you... I know what path I've chosen...
Ja and AS1's start/end times are 820A-235P
Eckstein's start/end time is 805-235
It appears that Eckstein students are in school 15 minutes per day longer than AS1 and JA students.
Could this be so? That's an hour and 15 minutes per week, or 5 hours per month, of extra class time for Eckstein students.
Am I missing something here??
I think I take a more holistic view of the entire problem, however: there is no school district without the families in it, and the families have no schools without the administration (even in the Free School model, that's undeniable).
I hope that AS1 provides a balance between the top-down model our beloved Superintendant believes in and a democratic, bottom-up focused model that energizes parents, teachers, and students alike.
In that context, we can no more accept a demand from the district ("all of you must take the WASL! Instantly! Schnell, schnell!") than we can accept a demand from a parent or student -- the school is not "the man". The school is not "the system". That kind of Manichean view is immensely destructive, and cannot produce sustainable schools. It's not you against the world: it's you, and Connor, and the teachers, and the students, and their families, and, yes, the district, all working together.
My Quaker upbringing is probably showing at this point, but no community can survive when people demand things. They survive, and flourish, when people work toward things. The bumper-sticker phrase is, don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. In every phase of life, and I do mean Every Single One, demanding perfection can only lead to heartbreak. There ain't no such animal.
In the end, we make compromises, because we live enmeshed in each other's lives. Purity is for fanatics.
Current AS1 times are 9:10 to 3:15, for a 6:05 day, and next year is 8:20 to 2:45, not 2:35, I think, for a 6:25 day. That's five minutes less than Eckstein?
Since Eckstein is a comprehensive, with time to move between classes and all, I don't find that too surprising. I think the extra 20 minutes at AS1 next year is taken up with expanded math/reading times and coaching and all that happy horse -- uh, pucky.
I bet you are right about Eckstein getting extra time due giving kids 5 minutes to change classes 5X a day. Never thought about that....
I wouldn't agree. Students who need transition space and time to adjust to the classroom are going to take more than a few minutes to focus. Often buses are late as are children who walk, and just one child coming in late is a disruption and distraction.
Working parents also try and schedule appts for before school, to minimize wasted time from work/school.
Best times for study is more dependent on learning style- not age.
NewHorizons.org has many articles discussing this topic in greater detail.
Anyway, we're supposed to have 90 minute math and reading blocks next year, so how could you miss both math and reading if you only miss the first hour of school?
It seems I'm unreasonable, inflexible, selfish, not community or group oriented, a hell raiser, irrational etc, etc...
I'm grateful to this forum because its a wonderful trigger for deep thinking and self and situational analysis...
For a while, I was taking to heart the criticism that I was not 'nice', too demanding, unpleasant, not willing to compromise... that if I didnt like the system and wasnt willing to suck it up for the sake of the group, I ought to take my son and myself and go feral in the woods somewhere and homeschool...
And then I remembered Rosa Parks, by her actions 'demanding' her seat on the bus - not asking 'nicely', but demanding and standing (or sitting) her ground; Martin Luther King, demanding civil rights and an end to racism; Nelson Mandela demanding an end to apartheid; Gandhi demanding self rule for India; people here demanding an end to the Vietnam war; American colonists demanding independence from the British Crown and so it goes on...
All change comes when someone (or a group of people) decides that there needs to be movement away from the status quo... and generally, there is an investment by some (many)in keeping the status quo exactly as it is, never mind the costs the status quo inflicts on those it impacts, so there is resistance.... most change begins by people asking for change... but usually the resistance is too strong and nothing happens... so the energy shifts and people have to demand change... and finally, change comes....
There are those who will think that bringing up the names of these historical figures is hyperbole and not relevant to what's going on in this District, but I put it to you that the only difference is a matter of scale....
Please note that while I have spoken plainly, bluntly even, nowhere have I advocated for violence... all my suggestions for putting pressure on the District and the Board to change the direction we have been going in and to reconsider obviously flawed decisions, based on flawed and incomplete data, have been non-violent - changing the way we communicate to empty-centre circles, concensus-based decision making, a formal complaint campaign, rolling school boycotts... and my call for action comes after watching for almost a year people 'ask nicely' of the Board and District to consider community input and reconsider the direction they are taking on behalf of our children.
History tells us that asking nicely doesnt work... so what will?
Contributing, rather than demanding.
When I am new to any organization or community, I ask "how can I help?", not "how can you help me?" As I become part of the community, I usually find that all of my legitimate needs and requests are met by the community to the maximum extent possible, usually with very little fuss. However, when I demand things from the community or from individuals in the community, the response is grudging, at best, if not outright rejection.
Human beings naturally tend toward reciprocity, of all types of behavior. If one behaves civilly towards others, others will usually return the favor. On the flipside, if one strikes first, expect to be struck back.
Confrontation has its place: for instance, when confronting injustice, which is what Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King Jr., Nelson Mandela, and Gandhi were all about. However, part of their strength was that even while confronting injustice, they were all very civil in their actions and temperate in the tone of their speech. People respected that because it was clear that they still respected the humanity of those that opposed them. These people were all forceful and principled, but their public persona wasn't abrasive and disrespectful.
In your particular case, your son may or may not have a legitimate need to arrive at school later than 8:20; I'm certainly in no position to judge one way or the other. If there is a legitimate need, the culture of AS#1 is such that I am fairly positive (based on my own experience at the school) that it would have been accepted as legitimate and would have been accomodated just fine without a big hullabaloo. I really don't understand why you took the approach you did - in that context, it most definitely wasn't necessary, and I think you have upset some people at the school that you will have to continue to work with in the future.
I feel I have done my bit at AS#1 - not as much as I could and in an intermittent and inconsistent manner sometimes when I have had trouble juggling my other commitments, but not the least either ... and I've stuck my neck out for both the alt community and other schools also - I'm one of the petitioners on one of the four law suits filed against school closures...
Besides - I've already done my bit in that sphere of the circle of life, first time round with my first kids - president of preschools and PTAs, volunteering in schools, fundraising, school work parties, mentoring students, working on government projects to broaden female middle and high school students' career aspirations... all that good warm fuzzy/wuzzy stuff that makes the world a better place for our kids and everyone else...
Problem is, this system here is the most broken one I have observed and participated in while living in 5 countries... and the warm fuzzy approach you advocate, which I have been watching for the past year and which I have heard reports of going back more decades than anyone cares to count, doesnt seem to have changed anything much for the better....
Show me some positive results/changes that were achieved in the last year by the approach you advocate...
Alternatively, we could agree to disagree and you tackle the problem your way and I'll do it my way... perhaps between the two different approaches, we in the community will finally have an impact in this District...
You seem so incredibly unhappy with the district, and from your posts I have to think that some of it is caused the attitude that you are bringing to it. Every other poster I have followed on this board, no matter how angry they get at the district’s decision making process, ends up saying something positive about their child’s teacher, principal, or school community. Your child’s school has a history of accommodating kids with special needs around start times. Why do you think it will be any different next year when the start time is a little earlier? You are making an issue where there isn’t one. And offending a lot of people in the process.