By Richard Kaufman
The issue of school start times in Greenwich has become a heavily debated topic ever since the school district implemented the change which went into effect last fall.
Previously, Greenwich High School started classes at 7:30 a.m., and dismissed at 2:15 p.m. These times were pushed ahead by one hour in order to positively impact students’ quality of sleep, overall health and learning experience.
However, the change brought about a myriad of problems which have become amplified in recent months, such as insufficient lighting for athletic teams and practices during winter months, and increased traffic and congestion on Hillside Road.
But last Thursday at the Board of Education’s meeting at Riverside School, Superintendent of schools, Dr. Jill Gildea, announced that the district will not be seeking a change in start times following a lengthy public hearing which featured multiple parent-speakers and students.
The board also reviewed a survey which was taken by parents, students and school employees over the winter.
Overall, according to the survey, students prefer the release time to be at 2:45 p.m. or before.
Alissa Landberg, a senior class president, said she ran a “breakout group” at GHS which discussed the issue of start and dismissal times.
“The students like the 8:30 a.m. start, they say they feel more awake, energized and ready for the day by starting one hour later,” Landberg said. “The problem lies in end time. Students say that they can’t focus and even fall asleep in their last block classes. Even after-school activities were discussed due to the timing and traffic. Students can’t work or volunteer for as much time as they want or need because of the late end time.”
Landberg said the students brainstormed ideas such as cutting blocks by four or five minutes in order to save time at the end of the day, or adding 30 minutes to the end of the day for study hall, or cutting passing time by a minute.
“The students see the difference between ending at 3:15 p.m. versus 2:45 p.m., and believe by shortening classes, they will be more focused within the shorter blocks,” she added.
According to the survey, support for the school start time changes implemented this year was mixed. While 38% of respondents approve or strongly approve of the changes to school start times, 45% disapprove or strongly disapprove. Also, it was found that students are more alert in class but have less time for homework.
However, more parents approve or strongly approve (48%) of the new start times than school personnel (13%).
During a public hearing at the meeting, several parents and students spoke in favor of keeping the start time as is.
Gildea said that a steering committee, which is looking at the logistical impact of the start times, was established to explore options to mitigate some of the compression that students are experiencing at the end of the day. The committee met on April 26 to discuss these issues.
Kendra Farn, a former graduate of GHS who has a child in eighth grade that will enter the high school next year, spoke in favor of the start times.
“What kind of message are we sending if after only eight months at it, we’re already considering a change?” she said, noting that the change in start time has had a positive impact on students’ circadian rhythms and sleep quality. “Our motto should be, ‘If it’s good for our kids, then my God, we’re going to do it,'” she said.
Another parent, Carol Marinelli, said her two daughters wake up every morning feeling refreshed.
“None of the so-called problems that have been cited, such as increased traffic, sports conflicts, are equal in importance to student health,” she said. “We must and can find other solutions to those problems. Please do not take away even 15 minutes of that precious morning sleep time.”
Following the public hearing, Gildea put to bed any thought of returning to the old start times. “We are not entertaining any discussions about returning to the old start time,” she said.
But the survey indicated that the data collected did not reflect a full year of policy implementation, and that “some of the items [in the survey] can have broad meaning and are open to interpretation of participants.”
Board member, Peter Sherr, said he was worried about these various caveats related to the survey.
“I’m really concerned when they’re calling out this many caveats to be careful about the survey and the analysis of the data,” he said.
Gildea said she was dismayed that so many people have been debating the issue of schools start times, and that she hopes long-term logistical solutions can be reached in the future.
“I’m unhappy that people feel so unhappy. I feel so sorry about that. I would like to calm people down,” she said.
“I have no doubt it’s going to be just fine. I have no doubt we’re going to come up with great recommendations. We have an incredible town, we have great people working and lots of people willing to share their time and talents and commitment and information,” Gildea added. “We may not have a perfect data set, we may not have a perfect survey.”
Gildea indicated that more data and additional surveys would be looked at.
