Bus and Bell Times
I couldn't recall if we had printed the schedule with both the bus and bell times. Here it is.
Bummer for Denny students - they got the earlier start time rather than Chief Sealth High. They start the earliest of all the middle schools (7:40 instead of 7:50 am). Sealth gets to start at 8:30 am along with Hale, Center School and NOVA.
I was looking over the list of elementary/K-8 schools that start at 9:20-9:30 am and that strikes me as pretty late for many parents. If you are at one of these schools, what's the reaction been?
Pinehurst, Laurelhurst, Van Asselt and South Shore are the "earliest" later starts at 9:10 am. Is this a Special Ed issue? I wonder why just 4 schools would start at 9:10 am.
I also note that the start time for earlier start elementaries ranges from 8:20 am-8:55 am (with stops at 8;35 am, 8;40 am, 8:50 am).
Bummer for Denny students - they got the earlier start time rather than Chief Sealth High. They start the earliest of all the middle schools (7:40 instead of 7:50 am). Sealth gets to start at 8:30 am along with Hale, Center School and NOVA.
I was looking over the list of elementary/K-8 schools that start at 9:20-9:30 am and that strikes me as pretty late for many parents. If you are at one of these schools, what's the reaction been?
Pinehurst, Laurelhurst, Van Asselt and South Shore are the "earliest" later starts at 9:10 am. Is this a Special Ed issue? I wonder why just 4 schools would start at 9:10 am.
I also note that the start time for earlier start elementaries ranges from 8:20 am-8:55 am (with stops at 8;35 am, 8;40 am, 8:50 am).
Comments
We're at a K8, and were a little worried about the early time this year. The mornings have been a bit of a struggle, but we have loved being out at 2:35.
I know, not going to happen in this district. But, you have to admit, it would be nice if they at least had a goal of optimizing start and end times around what works best for parents and kids.
I'm glad Jane Addams schedule isn't changing -- 8:05 dropoff and playground supervision, classes starting at 8:20. I would not be happy having to pay for before-school care as well as after-school.
I believe that the bus and bell times are set as they are to fit within the civil dawn and dusk times and thereby minimize student travel in the dark.
The elementary schools start later than the high schools - the opposite of what would be best for the students - because if it were the other way around, there wouldn't be enough time for the drivers to get from the end of their first afternoon route to the start of their second afternoon route before classes let out. I suppose they could fix that by extending the time between the first and second route in the morning, but I've never heard the reason that isn't practical.
As for the time difference between elementary and middle school and the impact on K-8s (elementary students having 30 minutes to kill after school and before the bus), I think that would be a PERFECT opportunity for all kinds of things including: supported homework time, world language instruction, supervised play, art, gardening, etc. It lacks only a little volunteer organization.
--a reader--
Charlie, it is interesting that a major goal of the current start and end times is to minimize the time in the dark. But that only raises the question whether that is what parents actually want. Is minimizing time in the dark really what most working parents want in terms of scheduling? Or would they prefer a 9am - 5pm schedule?
Do other schools have the $35 fee next year? If not, why just our school?
Well, teens travel in the dark, and they drive. Every year in our surrounding suburbs, teens die in the dark, in the morning, waiting for or walking to a school bus, hit by cars who didn't see them. I do not know of any such fatalities in the city. Do we simply have more visible streetlamps and sidewalks?
What is safer? Elementary school children escorted by parents in the dark in the morning or middle/high school children on their own walking or driving to school in the dark?
Fundamentally, school day and travel time fitting into civil day is impossible this far north, unless All students go 8:30 to 3:30 or thereabouts and no one travels more than 30 minutes.
Quick look at Bellevue and I see elementary start times around 8 AM and bus routes that fall during winter civil twilight or earlier. (
Is this mandatory? I mean, they can't make you pay.
--a reader--
Tongue in cheek, of course, but this is the flip side to any MAP boycott. We'll take the test if you do X (follow through on promises made, etc.).
What about after school? Sunset is 4:20 at the winter solstice.
Unless we go with more buses and part time drivers, we will not get every student to and from school during daylight all year round. So what is safer and what is more developmentally appropriate (which has an element of safety as well) and what is maximally convenient for families? I am not sure, but I am sure that our current bus schedule is far from optimal.
That said -- I don't imagine that it is legally enforceable against a family that can't/won't pay, just as they can't throw your kid out if he/she doesn't arrive with the correct number of spiral notebooks, etc.
It would be interesting to know what schools (and PTSA's) are doing in general around issues of "required" family contributions for crayons, notebooks, kleenex, pencils, etc.
I see kids walking by my house in the dark to get to Whitman. They look so young (& tired)! I would absolutely vote for later start times for elementary and high school.
Really? Because I've been working on this for years (and now both sons are graduated). And I know it's not just me. As for staff working on it, I've never seen any evidence of that. I doubt it will ever happen given the sports/after school activities focus.
TOPS mom
I feel the day is already too long, its late to start (now conflicts with dropping off my younger child at preschool on the way to work) and makes a long structured day. Wish we could start earlier.
"Next year there will also be a new $35 supply fee to pay for consumable supplies that the students use throughout the year. This fee will be collected when school starts in September and will be used to purchase supplies during the school year."
No mention of F/RL or any other exceptions, total fee limits per family, etc. I don't know about you but I can shop to get the usual school supply list for under $35 and so far there have been leftovers that come back at the end of each school year.
It is not required, and a scholarship can be requested from the PTA.
- A NE Parent
I also wonder what it covers? If it covers notebook paper, copier paper, pencils (colored and regular), glue sticks -- I am SURE I spend a lot more than $35 on those things.
And finally, if the price seems high for the materials covered, I wonder whether it is set assuming that a certain percentage of kids simply will not be able to pay -- so it is targeted to cover what they assume will be that percentage.
Jan - it's the lack of detail that concerns me since those two sentences at the bottom of page 2/3 are it and we're 51% F/RL. I guess we'll find out more in August if we get the usual school supplies checklist to shop for?
The requested fees don't bar a student from attending school. Although, would suspect more and more common with all of the cuts to school funding and more and more PTA monies earmarked for funding actual teachers vs. providing extra for enrichment, art projects, field trips, and the like.
- A NE Parent
All of the comprehensive middle schools have the full 6-1/2 hours (Denny is actually 6 hrs 40 min), but South Shore is the only K-8 meeting the state requirement. All the rest of the K-8's show 6hrs15minutes (except for Salmon Bay which might be a mistake, showing 6hr15min for the 6-8 and 6hr25 min for the K-5).
This means 8 of the 10 K-8s are shortchanging their middle school students by 15 minutes a day. That doesn't seem much until you multiply that by 180 days and suddenly it boils down to 45 hours (or almost 7 full days) less instruction for those students. The district is well aware of this and ignores this state regulation each year when they assure the state that all our schools are "well within compliance".
As SP says, add that up and it is real time lost and yet the district continues to get waivers for their schedules.
As for all the staff hating the move to a later start time, I spoke with one of the TOPS kindergarten teachers last year when word of the move to an early start time came out. She seemed really upset, saying something like she didn't know what she would do with the kids that early in the morning. This year, all the kindergartners went straight to the gym after the bell rang. I think that was the teacher's way of trying to get the kids up and ready to focus in class.
I know the change in start times isn't the best for everyone, but I just wanted to provide a counterpoint to the "everyone at TOPS hates it" post.
There are some advantages to just asking for a check. The same brands and styles are purchased, so kids don't fight over them. It saves time to make one big purchase instead of one for every family. It can save money because the teacher is making one big purchase instead of families making 30 little ones.
-An alarming increase in the number of unsupervised children (including kinders) dropped 1 hour or more BEFORE the doors open by parents without the means to pay for before school care
-Significant decrease in parental involvement with staff at start of day due to need to drop and dash or the use of day care services.
-Despite promises of transportation within safety hours, busses do NOT deliver children before dangerous dusk hours in the winter (and yes, those children do walk home alone - not everyone has the flexibility to meet the busses)
-For the parents able to pay the price tag, increases of $500+ for additional childcare each month.
We've met with Sundquist and to date neither he nor the district has ever delivered the actual savings from this current transportation plan. Percentages are thrown out, but no hard numbers. I'd like to see the hard numbers, because the costs to our students and their families in compromised safety, failure to teach students during their best learning hours, decreased parental involvement and cold hard cash outlays keep piling up.
Furthermore, he did indeed report that the district is working on flipping the start times for high school/middle school with elementary start times, but the "historical" practices of playfield requirements are "really complicated." In other words, sports wags the dog yet again and despite everyone's acknowledgement that the best learning practices for children and teens is not being addressed by these start times, NOTHING WILL BE DONE ABOUT IT.
This is a huge issue for me and I've been bringing it up at our BLT meetings for three years. Our K-8 used to have a longer day for 6-8 but it went away during the first round of transportation changes. At first our new admin denied the day had ever been longer (that was sort of surreal for me) and then they started saying that it was the union's fault. K-8s do run into trouble because K-5 teachers contract for a 6 hour day and 6-8 for 6.5, so the K-5 teachers aren't obligated to supervise the younger kids for the extra minutes. I've been told that SEA is working on a variation in contract language that covers K-8s.
I wonder how South Shore and Salmon Bay are able to work around that? I expect that SS has it written into their MOU and SB just works it out between staff and admin like our school used to. It may entail paying for extra recess supervision for the younger kids.
Re going back to the late start. I was surprised at how well the early start worked for our family and will actually miss it. But if that is the price TOPS has to pay to hold onto our north and south end kids then I think it's well worth it.
I'm not sure I understand what this means. How would she not know what to do with the kids at 8:20a when she would at 9:20a?
And I did not say that "everyone at TOPS hates it", just those I have spoken to and heard about. I mention it because I was surprised at how many negative comments I'd heard. Thanks for providing the other side.
TOPS mom
"I'm not sure I understand what this means. How would she not know what to do with the kids at 8:20a when she would at 9:20a?"
From my conversation with her, I understood it to mean the start time was too early, the kids would be sleepy, and it would be harder to get them to focus in class.
Depending on where the child lives and the time of year, they could be regularly rising before sunrise to get to school at 8:20am as opposed to 9:20am. I don't know about anyone else, but it's pretty hard for me to get my kids up before sunrise -- regardless of when they go to sleep.
Furthermore, the school district's bone that is supposedly going to be thrown us: $$ for before school programming to get those kids inside the building for safety reasons. Not that before school programming to keep kids safe inside a building is a bad thing, but isn't the point of the later start times to SAVE $$?
The district also keeps telling us that these late starts are in line with other local districts. Has anybody heard of any other place where elementary schools start at 9:35 am?
And as regards volunteer coordination to provide the programming--we are seeing less parent connection to the school with these late starts. Our school already relies very heavily on volunteer efforts for tutoring, event planning, in-class support, fundraising, etc. We are burning out the few folks we have who have the time to volunteer, and our PTA doesn't have the funds to pay for extra programming. We shouldn't be the go-to for providing babysitting (even if it is an opportunity for extra tutoring and enrichment) for kids who really should be in class by that time.
We are Title 1 with 50%+ F/RL lunch. What makes them think the majority of the students' families can afford this per-student fee on top of back to school supplies & extra childcare expenses for starting school an hour later than usual?