Make school decisions for students, not adults

In recent weeks, this newspaper has reported research that suggests the structure of the school day affects learning and child development. Specifically, research shows a correlation between academic performance and high school start times, and the benefits of scheduling lunch after elementary school recess instead of before.

With regard to the latter, several local schools -- including St. Helena Elementary and Okatie Elementary -- have followed the prescription of dietitians and behaviorists by scheduling play before mealtime. Their anecdotal observations mirror the research findings: Children consume more nutrients and waste less food when recess is scheduled before lunch; they also are calmer and quieter in the cafeteria and in the classroom.

And although research does not assert recess before lunch promotes better academic performance, most teachers would attest that attentive, well-nourished children are students primed to learn.

It is puzzling, though, that the idea of delaying high school start times -- broached only tentatively by public and private schools in Beaufort County -- hasn't gained more traction locally or statewide.

Research indicates the adolescent brain is wired much differently than the adult or pre-pubescent brain. Chemistry -- not lack of will or discipline -- makes it difficult for teenagers to simply wipe the sleep from their eyes and engage in subject matter at 8 a.m., about the time first period begins at most local high schools. Awakened at dawn, their brains still are releasing melatonin, which induces sleep and inhibits cerebral focus. The melatonin still is in their systems when the first bell rings.

To exacerbate the problem, teens are biologically inclined to fall asleep later than their parents or younger siblings. Teens who are late to bed and early to rise have difficulty retaining knowledge "because neurons lose their plasticity, becoming incapable of forming the new synaptic connections necessary to encode a memory," according to authors Po Bronson and Ashley Merryman.

"The more you learned during the day, the more you need to sleep that night," they add in "NurtureShock," a book about various childhood-development findings.

Anecdotally, there is evidence later high school start times boost student performance. For example, Bronson and Merryman cite a district in Edina, Minn., where high school students' math and verbal SAT scores rose dramatically after the start of school was pushed from 7:25 a.m. to 8:30 a.m.

Proposals to change start times often meet resistance, however: Extracurricular activities would start and end too late; teens would not be able to work after-school jobs; teens would not be able to look after younger siblings until their parents come home from work; and bus schedules would have to be rearranged.

Each of these concerns is surmountable. The bigger problem is that these arguments subjugate the education of teenagers to the convenience of adults or the demands of (non-essential) extracurricular activities.

Though the scientific findings might not be the lead-pipe cinch their advocates purport, neither are they dispelled head-on by these arguments. It's as if a homeowner, presented proof that termites have eaten away at the studs behind the drywall, refuses a repair because he would have to take the pictures off the wall.

When such "reasoning" reigns, is the chronically disappointing academic performance of our young people any wonder?