BCT Editorial – 2/2/05

This page was last updated on February 5, 2005.

Wake up; Editorial; Beaver County Times; February 2, 2005.

I don’t know if this editorial was written as a joke or not.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“A wake-up call to public education continues to be ignored.”

[RWC] Does this mean the proposal would not affect private education? If not, why not?

“Education Week reports there is a broad consensus that something is seriously wrong with our high schools. However, deep differences, often political and ideological as much as educational, emerge once specifics come into play.

“However, one nonideological, nonpolitical and relatively easy measure that could be taken to improve high school performances continues to be ignored - starting class at a later time.”

[RWC] Don’t tell me this is a “nonideological” and “nonpolitical” proposal. The whole idea is to give cover to the public school establishment.

We have a common tactic of liberals. If someone doesn’t do what you want, he didn’t listen to you or he ignored you. It’s never that he listened but disagreed after careful consideration.

“The Associated Press reports medical studies have shown that teens naturally fall asleep and wake up later, and learn better later in the day. Dr. Peter Michelson, acting director of the Pediatric Sleep Medicine Program at Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh, said high school classes ideally should start around 10 a.m. or 11 a.m. and last until 5 p.m. or 6 p.m.”

[RWC] Note that the editorial didn’t include the alleged drop-off in learning associated with the earlier start time.

“You don’t need a doctor to tell you this. Just ask parents. Most will tell you that rousting their high school children out of bed before the sun starts to rise is not the best way to begin the day.

“The reluctance to change high school hours can’t be laid entirely on the education community. Too many parents and businesses that employ students part-time would be inconvenienced by the change.”

[RWC] Damn those inconsiderate parents and evil businesses! <g>

“How can we ask high school students to operate at peak efficiency when their young bodies and minds are a couple of hours away from being entirely awake? How can teachers be expected to enlighten young minds when their students are not up to speed?”

[RWC] Now we get to the crux of the editorial. Providing another excuse why the public school establishment is not to blame for student performance.

“Let’s face it. When it comes to improving public education, we talk a good game but we don’t mean it.”

[RWC] I would not be surprised to learn the Times editorial board also bought into “open classrooms” (classrooms without walls) and “new math.”

Anyway, let’s assume there is some validity to the “start classes later” proposal. Here are two “far out” proposals.

First, why not keep the same school hours but rearrange the schedule? For example, lead off the day with study halls, phys ed classes, extracurricular activities, et cetera?

Second, and the simpler approach, why shouldn’t parents be responsible and make sure their kids go to sleep early enough?

Oh wait, these proposals wouldn’t work because the public school establishment could no longer blame inconsiderate parents and evil businesses.