Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Start Times topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents, middle-school students urge later start times, citing sleep research and driving safety
Summary
A parent and two eighth-grade students told the board they want middle- and high-school start times moved later — to about 8:30 a.m. or later — citing national sleep guidelines, improvements in attendance and reduced teen crash risk reported in other districts.
At the public-comment portion of the Cheltenham board meeting, a parent from the Cedarbrook/Cedarburg area and two eighth-grade students urged the district to consider moving middle- and high-school start times later, citing sleep research, attendance and safety benefits observed in other districts.
The comments matter because school start times affect students’ sleep, daytime functioning and, for older students, crash risk associated with drowsy driving. Parents and students said they want the district to study schedule changes and consider alternatives used elsewhere.
The parent speaker, who identified herself as representing a parent perspective and said she brought two students, summarized research she said supports later secondary start times: “National sleep organizations say that 08:30AM or later is best for the school age of children.” She told the board that districts that moved start times later have seen attendance and grades improve and that older student drivers show reduced crash rates after start-time changes.
Two Cedarbrook Middle School students, Sebastian Bagioli and Everett Cohn, presented the student perspective. Bagioli and Cohn said they had produced a class podcast debating later starts and summarized their findings: students who get more sleep have better productivity, academic outcomes and emotional control. “Less sleep is often linked to negative emotions,” one student said, adding that sleep loss can contribute to bullying and depression.
The students also emphasized limits: they opposed pushing start times “too late” — for example, more than an hour later — because of after-school sports, homework and activity schedules. The parent noted some local high‑school scheduling work that offers a staggered option — a “win” period — but said it creates equity issues for students who rely on buses.
District representative Kaufman was asked to collect a copy of the students’ podcast and materials; the board indicated staff would accept those resources for consideration. The board did not vote on any start-time policy at the meeting.
Speakers asked the district to study transportation implications alongside start-time benefits; the parent noted the current route consolidation (three transport schedules this year instead of four) as a potential operational opening to adjust secondary start times.
No formal board action was taken; the comments were placed in the public record for board and staff consideration.
