Comments on: A question or two about our kids and school

By: kevin andress

kevin andress — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 02:42:07 +0000

Nate, I respectfully and strongly disagree. There are opportunities in school for socialization — lunch, extracurriculars, some aspects of class. I'm sure their are other times. It's been a while, but several of my classes in high school allowed quiet socialization after work was completed. Classes like shop or home ec or yearbook or journalism allowed great liberties with talking in class (at appropirate times and at appropriate volumes).

Pat's rant just strikes me as silly. Typical study halls when I was in school could run to a hundred plus students in the cafeteria. Good luck with controlling noise in a group that size, and please note that the kids that actually want to study (albeit not on the first day, I suppose) are monumentally distracted by the noise.

It's called "study" hall for a reason.

By: alan t.

alan t. — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 04:17:07 +0000

Nate, it may be "utter nonsense," but that's the way it's been forever. If I talked in junior high study hall, we were either swatted or got detention. Or both, and plenty of it. The kinda stuff that if they did it to kids today, they'd be arrested by the cops, then sued by the parents.

If kids want to "talk" in study hall today, then simply play with your text-messaging thingies. The same way they're all text-messaging each other while sitting in classes.

By: Nate

Nate — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 03:49:34 +0000

Sorry, Kevin, can't agree with your lofty opinion on study hall. Aren't high schools supposed to be places for learning social skills, as well as book knowledge? You'd be surprised at the varied people you come in contact with during study halls, kids you'd never interact with otherwise. But when the study hall is run like a mute's prison, what good is that serving? Kids who *want* to study are going to make use of the free period, but to deny others the chance to even "whisper" to each other is utter nonsense. I echo others' sentiments: Why make school such a downer for kids? It only encourages their rebellion and desire to be there.

By: kevin andress

kevin andress — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 23:43:39 +0000

Post about schools, and watch the naysayers come out.

It wasn't that long ago that coaches like John Cheney (sp?) were praised for 6 a.m. workouts. Supposedly kept the players on the straight and narrow and kept them from staying up too late the night before. If I had 8 a.m. classes, I'd try and get in bed at a reasonable time.

When I was in high school, I liked earlier classes, in part because it made me more employable. My employer couldn't work me after 10 p.m. on week nights for most of my high school career, so that extra hour allowed me to work a 6-hour shift.

Aren't we really gagging at gnats on the first day, first period study hall kvetch? I'm pretty sure the reason the teacher was strict in his/her interpretation of study hall rules was because (s)he was setting the standard for the year. Many children, when given leeway at the start of the year will assume that anything goes for the rest of the year. So, for that one day they come to school, and they couldn't have brought a book or a magazine and read quietly? Really, was that asking so much? And are we really willing to make an issue of this?

By: Alex G.

Alex G. — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 19:29:08 +0000

To answer your second question, I agree with your perception of ridiculousness. Study halls when I were in high school were the same way, and I graduated in 2002, so we're not talking ancient history here. Study hall in our school was detention without being in trouble, for asking to go to the bathroom even merited a stern glare.

Perhaps what was even worse were the wonderful ways lunch periods were set up. We had nine time periods, and lunches were from fourth to seventh. Those who merited the fourth period lunch ended up with the wonderful lunch time of 10:30am! Those who ended up with seventh had to wait until 1:30, but you weren't allowed to snack on anything in class or in the halls, have a drink, or anything that might help you get through the day.

Schools take themselves too seriously, and it's what leads some of the smart kids to drop out. I still remember failing a persuasive essay in English class because the professor didn't agree with my opinion. I also got points taking off for using incorrect grammar in a quote. In a quote!

What a previous commenter said summarizes it the best: "It does no one any good, but I think a lot of it has to do with the Puritan theories that school shouldn't be any fun."

By: colin

colin — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:52:03 +0000

I especially agreed with this during high school. And even more especially after a weeknight of drinking.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 14:48:17 +0000

I imagine that part of it is also for the benefit of the working parent, who has a job shift that begins at 8 or possibly 9 in the morning, allowing them to drop the kids off in the morning and still make it to work on time.

By: RedHawk Rick

RedHawk Rick — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 14:27:23 +0000

In our district the buses have to do triple duty, hence some kids have to get up at such ridiculous times. I'm still having a hard time breaking the habit myself, as I had to get up with my daughter at 6 AM about ten years ago.

It does no one any good, but I think a lot of it has to do with the Puritan theories that school shouldn't be any fun.

By: Alex G.

Alex G. — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 13:53:00 +0000

The explanation I always got as a kid was the sake of extra-cirricular activities, namely the ones that needed to take place when it was still light outside. I never bought it. It was the same answer I got when I asked why elementary school kids, who are up at 5:45 and a ball of energy, got to go to school at 9am, but the junior high and high school kids, the ones in growth spurts and who need the sleep, had to be in at 7.

But yeah… It was the sports and extra activities that needed light. That was the reason I was always given.

By: DC

DC — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 13:46:53 +0000

Great Question- I've been frustrated over the same thing, too. Add to that how early this leaves kids out (around 3ish) around the community many with neither parent around and many with nothing to do. Doesn't make for a great scenario. Ironically, from what I've read and from conversations with educators one huge reason is athletics. High schools have to start so early a) because there are complex busing routes to be worked out with buses that also serve the middle and elementary schools and b) because of the many (wonderful) opportunities for after school practices, etc in all the athletic programming that takes place. No easy solutions, thats for sure. I was just recently shocked to hear how many little kids actually go hungry over the weekend because they don't have the school lunch program available; and this is right in my neighborhood. That is simply unacceptable.