Back in '50s I went to an all-academic HS that managed with 7 periods a day, one of which was lunch. Except for first period, they were all 45 minutes unless we had assembly, when they were shorter. We started at 9, had an 8 min homeroom, a 52 minute first period (first period was shortened on assembly days) and got out at 2:30. I still see nothing wrong with the shorter day. We nearly all went to college and found that we were much better prepared than the average student. In truth, I worked harder in HS than college (and harder in college than in grad school since I was taking more congenial courses in grad school).
I’m in HS now (different one this year than last, so I’ll list them both).
In Nevada: 8:00 - 2:15 (with 3 105-minute classes, a 45-minute lunch between Block 2 and Block 3 and 15-minutes passing after Block 1)
In Texas: 8:45 - 3:55 (7-minute passings and a 30-minute lunch)
I don’t think the solution is to start school later, I’m fine with it starting at 8:00 or 7:30 or whenever they want, but I really think that getting out earlier is a key factor. Because of proximity, my out-the-door times for the two schools are similar, so I don’t notice the time difference in the morning, but it hit me like a sack of gravel that by the time I get home, I’ve got a full 2 hours less time to do my AP homework. I think it’s in the best interest of all parties involved to go for an earlier start and an earlier out.
Maybe this is a factor and maybe it’s not, but the ‘keeping them off the streets’ thing might work into the logic of some scheduling because people would much rather that kids have free time in the morning than the afternoon. Less mischief and all that.
(That Nevada schedule was so incredibly sweet…)
9am to 3.30pm in my NZ high school . 15 minutes morning break with 45min (1 hr?, can’t remember) lunch.
Then I changed schools and had to go by bus. This changed my effective school hours to 7:30am to 4:45pm - stupid bus system…