The sleep needs of adolescents

HISD is considering moving HS start times EARLIER next year (look down toward the middle). But recent research implies that high school students do better later in the day; apparently puberty shifts the 'chronotype' of adolescents to an 'evening preference'. Some districts have shown improvement in student participation and behavior with later times. Other studies have shown a correlation between sleep deficit and reduced creativity and performance.

Of course changing start times for high school students also impacts school faculty and staff, and parents and families. Students may find it difficult to have after-school jobs, long extra-curricular activities, or away-games against schools in other districts. Nevertheless, it appears that with enough planning, the overall effects can be positive for all involved.

I recommend you read the article from the March 2011 issue of "Educational Researcher." Some of the references in the article may be available online if you can't get the link above; please see below.

• Black, S. (2000). A wake-up call on high-school starting times. Education Digest, 66(4), 33–38.
• Blatter, K., & Cajochen, C. (2007). Circadian rhythms in cognitive performance: Methodological constraints, protocols, theoretical underpinnings. Physiology and Behavior, 90, 196–208.
• Bonnet, M. H. (2000). Sleep deprivation. In W. C. Dement (Ed.), Principles and practice of sleep medicine (3rd ed., pp. 53–71). Philadelphia: Saunders.
• Cajochen, C., Blatter, K., & Wallach, D. (2004). Circadian and sleep-wake dependent impact on neurobehavioral function. Psychologica Belgica, 44, 59–80.
• Cajochen, C., Khalsa, S. B., Wyatt, J. K., Czeisler, C. A., & Dijk, D. J. (1999). EEG and ocular correlates of circadian melatonin phase and human performance decrements during sleep loss. American Journal of Physiology, 277, 640–649.
• Carskadon, M. (1999). When worlds collide: Adolescent need for sleep versus societal demands. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(5), 348–353.
• Carskadon, M. (2002). Adolescent sleep patterns: Biological, social, and psychological influences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Carskadon, M. A., & Acebo, C. (2005). Intrinsic circadian period in adolescents versus adults from forced desynchrony. Sleep, 28(Abstract supplement):A71.
• Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement. (1998a). School start time study. Final report summary.
• Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement. (1998b). School start time study. Technical report: Vol. II. Analysis of student survey data.
• Chandler, M. A. (2009, January 6). Fairfax plan would delay high school start at no cost. Washington Post.
• Crowley, S. J., Acebo, C., & Carskadon, M. A. (2007). Sleep, circadian rhythms, and delayed phase in adolescence. Sleep Medicine, 8, 602–612.
• Dahl, R. E. (1999). The consequences of insufficient sleep for adolescents: Links between sleep and emotional regulation. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 354–359.
• De Gennaro, L., Ferrara, M., Curcio, G., & Bertini, M. (2001). Visual search performance across 40 h of continuous wakefulness: Measures of speed and accuracy and relation with oculomotor performance. Physiology and Behavior, 74, 194–204.
• Dement, W. C., & Vaughan, C. (1999). The promise of sleep: A pioneer in sleep medicine explores the vital connection between health, happiness, and a good night’s sleep. New York: Delacourt.
• Dinges, D. F., & Kribbs, N. B. (1991). Performing while sleepy: Effects of experimentally-induced sleepiness. In T. H. Monk (Ed.), Sleep, sleepiness and performance. Human performance and cognition (pp. 97–128). Oxford, UK: John Wiley.
• Edgar, D. M., Dement, W. C., & Fuller, C. A. (1993). Effect of SCN lesions on sleep in squirrel monkeys: Evidence for opponent processes in sleep–wake regulation. Journal of Neuroscience, 13, 1065–1079.
• Fischer, F. M., Radosevic-Vidacek, B., Koscec, A., Teixeira, L. R., Moreno, C. R., & Lowden, A. (2008). Internal and external time conflicts in adolescents: Sleep characteristics and interventions. Mind, Brain, and Education, 2, 17–23.
• Giannotti, F., Cortesi, F., Sebastiani, T., & Ottaviano, S. (2002). Circadian preference, sleep and daytime behaviour in adolescence. Journal of Sleep Research, 11, 191–199.
• Kirby, M., & D’Angiulli, A. (2009). Timing (not just amount) of sleep makes the difference: Event-related potential correlates of delayed sleep phase in adolescent female students. In N. A. Taatgen & H. van Rijn (Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
• Kryger, M. H., Roth, T., & Dement, W. C. (Eds.). (2000). Principles and practice of sleep medicine (3rd ed.). Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.
• Kubow, P. K., Wahlstrom, K. L., & Bemis, A. E. (1999). Starting time and school life: Reflections from educators and students. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 366–371.
• May, C. P. (1999). Synchrony effects in cognition: The costs and a benefit. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 6, 142–147.
• May, C. P., Hasher, L., & Foong, N. (2005). Implicit memory, age, and time of day: Paradoxical priming effects. Psychological Sciences, 16, 96–100.
• Millman, R. P., Working Group on Sleepiness in Adolescents/Young Adults, & AAP Committee on Adolescence. (2005). Excessive sleepiness in adolescents and young adults: Causes, consequences, and treatment strategies. Pediatrics, 115, 1774–1786.
• Mitru, G., Millrood, D. L., & Mateika, J. H. (2002). The impact of sleep on learning and behavior in adolescents. Teachers College Record, 104, 704–726.
• National Sleep Foundation. (2005a). Changing school start times: Arlington, Virginia.
• National Sleep Foundation. (2005b). Changing school start times: Denver, Colorado.
• National Sleep Foundation. (2005c). Changing school start times: Fayette County, Kentucky.
• National Sleep Foundation. (2005d). Changing school start times: Jessamine County, Kentucky.
• National Sleep Foundation. (2005e). Changing school start times: Wilton, Connecticut.
• National Sleep Foundation. (2006). Sleep in America Poll.
• Noland, H., Price, J. H., Dake, J., & Telljohann, S. K. (2009). Adolescents’ sleep behaviors and perceptions of sleep. Journal of School Health, 79, 224–230.
• Owens, J. A., Belon, K., & Moss, P. (2010). Impact of delaying school start time on adolescent sleep, mood, and behavior. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 164, 608–614.
• Petros, T. V., Beckwith, B. E., & Anderson, M. (1990). Individual differences in the effects of time of day and passage difficulty on prose memory in adults. British Journal of Psychology, 81, 63–72.
• Schmidt, C., Collette, F., Cajochen, C., & Peigneux, P. (2007). A time to think: Circadian rhythms in human cognition. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 24, 755–789.
• Taylor, D. J., Jenni, O. G., Acebo, C., & Carskadon, M. A. (2005). Sleep tendency during extended wakefulness: Insights into adolescent sleep regulation and behavior. Journal of Sleep Research, 14, 239–244.
• Wahlstrom, K. (2002). Changing times: Findings from the first longitudinal study of later high school start times. NASSP Bulletin, 86(633), 3–21.
• Wahlstrom, K. (2010). School start time and sleepy teens. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 164, 676–677.
• W.A.K.E.: Worried About Keeping Extra-curriculars. (n.d.). Disruptions.
• Wright, K. P., Jr., Gronfier, C., Duffy, J. F., & Czeisler, C. A. (2005). Intrinsic period and light intensity determine the phase relationship between melatonin and sleep in humans. Journal of Biological Rhythms, 20, 168–177.
• Wrobel, G. D. (1999). The impact of school starting time on family life. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 360–364.
• Yoon, C., May, C. P., & Hasher, L. (1999). Aging, circadian arousal patterns, and cognition. In D. Park & N. Schwartz (Eds.), Cognitive aging: A primer (pp. 151–170). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.

This, I don't understand

The Houston Chronicle published a story about the Texas unemployment tax going up again next year. The logic behind such a move is perplexing. The fund, which is established by the Texas Labor Code, increases its impact on businesses (especially small businesses) during bad years, and reduces its impact on business during good years. This is because the tax rate goes up in bad years; the rate is calculated (roughly, and in part: see 204.062ff) by taking the unemployment claims to September 30 (in bad years, this goes up) and dividing this by taxable wages for the same period (in bad years, this goes down). The result is to essentially exacerbate the effect of recession by putting a higher burden on solvent businesses to support the unemployment fund in bad years.

The fund is organized as a reserve (see section 203.028(b)), so contributions should instead be increased during good years, to reduce the load on businesses during bad years. This would allow the state to assess businesses when they can best afford it, and save money for periods when businesses could use a break.

Disclaimer: I'm neither an economist nor an actuary. There may in fact be sound business reasons why the tax is structured the way it is, but I'm afraid they're too obscured by what seems like an obvious flaw in the reasoning behind the calculation. I'd appreciate any comments explaining why the current setup makes sense.

Vote - Texas Constitutional Amendments

Early voting starts this week in Harris County for the ballot on Nov 3. Please vote for mayor and your council candidates. There are also 11 propositions on the ballot, some of which are described in the Houston Chronicle:

• Short descriptions of all the proposed constitutional amendments;
• Propositions 2, 3, 4, and 5;
• Propositions 1, 6, 7, and 8;
• Proposition 9 (Texas Beaches Open Access);
• Proposition 10 (Emergency Service Districts);
• Proposition 11 (constraints on eminent domain);

Full descriptions are propagated by the Texas Legislative Council in this document. Please look particularly at Prop 9 (Texas Beaches Open Access) and Prop 11 (constraints on eminent domain).

Candidate endorsements by the Chronicle are here:

• Houston Mayor
• Houston Controller
• At-large Council seats
• District Council seats

The Houston Chronicle on Saving Newspapers

Yesterday, the Houston Chronicle editorial board weighed in with its suggestions on how to save themselves and their industry. As I outlined more broadly last week, these particular suggestions either make no sense or would be counter-productive. However, let's discuss each of the three Chronic proposals (cribbed, ironically, from the Dallas Morning News publisher):

1. Provide temporary tax relief by passing the Baucus-Snowe Act, which would allow newspapers (or any other businesses) to offset losses from 2008 and 2009 against the past five years’ earnings. This may be a bad suggestion from a tax point of view; currently businesses can take current losses and "roll them forward" to offset future tax burdens. This would allow businesses to make the offset today against past taxes, and get a big refund from the IRS. What this might do is encourage newspapers owners to take the refund up front, then declare bankruptcy and close. Hardly seems like a public good.

2. Give newspapers a limited antitrust exemption that would allow them to share ideas and investigate collaborative new business models. This is a very bad idea; collusion would potentially allow the small number of newspaper publishers nationwide an opportunity to distort the market to their own economic benefit, to the detriment of all their readers and customers. Funny that the newspapers, who have been such proponents of the "free market", argue against letting the market decide their fate, now that competition has dramatically reduced the amount of advertising revenue they can extract.

   Today less than 275 of the nation's 1,500 daily newspapers remain independently owned, and more than half of all U.S. markets are dominated by one paper. Why would we allow such an already small number of players in the market to collude on price-fixing? It makes no sense.

3. Allow newspapers to devise a way to ensure fair compensation from Internet outlets that use their content to generate their own advertising revenues. This is the one that confuses me the most, probably because I don't use any Internet outlets which use newspaper content to generate advertising revenues. I do occasionally visit Google News, which gives me headlines; when I click on a headline, it takes me to the publisher's site, where they can serve me all the ads they want; I can't read the content on the Google News site. What about using a search engine to discover articles? As it turns out, the search function on the Houston Chronicle's own web site is so poor that the best way to find articles on their site is to use an external search engine. So where is the free ride? It seems the Chronic should be paying Google for the visitors they bring to the site.

   The Chronicle should, in the interest of fairness and accuracy, let us know how many of the visitors to their site arrive from Google News, or various search engines; we would then know how much value those "parasites" are actually providing to this content provider. I'll go out on a limb and suggest that without the online aggregators and search portals, no one from outside Houston would have any reason to visit www.chron.com - nor would they know it existed unless they stumbled upon it at random..

I also don't get the idea of "Topic A: allowing newspapers to become nonprofit organizations." As I pointed out, newspapers already have the option to emulate The Texas Observer and Mother Jones Magazine, which are publications supported by non-profit foundations. Why would we need to make any other changes to the tax code just for newspapers, since that solution is already available to them?

I am sympathetic about the plight of the newspapers; I have good friends who either work at papers or who have family members there. I wish them all the best as they try to navigate the new economic conditions, and try to survive after playing in the free market and having their indirect compensation model undermined by new competition for advertising. But, much like the health insurance providers, the big record labels, and the merged banking and investment institutions, I won't miss them if they end up disappearing. I think there are enough indicators that the functions they serve either aren't necessary or can be handled by other market players.

Save journalism, not newspapers

I'm a big fan of David Simon, the creator of HBO's The Wire, Generation Kill, and The Corner. Yesterday he appeared before a panel of Senators from the Commerce committee, and participated in a discussion of the fate of newspapers in the US (reported in Dallas Morning News).

As usual, his analysis is spot-on; it should be, he's been trying to tell us of the problem for over a decade. Newspapers are losing readers because they're doing a worse and worse job of covering the news and their communities; in the fifth season of The Wire, the Baltimore Sun pretty much missed or buried all the actually big news events that took place. He identifies the root cause: driven by a desire to make larger and larger profits, corporate-owned newspapers have been trying to reduce costs (personnel, mostly) while increasing circulation (to be more valuable to advertisers). This has led to overworked editors and a decimated newsroom, with fewer tenured reporters. The net result has been a disaster for journalism, and as Simon warns, will eventually lead to an environment in which public officials no longer feel constrained by the watchful eye of the fourth estate.

Sadly, I disagree entirely with his two proposed solutions to the problem.

• Newspapers should charge readers for the content they create. Simon belittles the belief that "information should be free" on the Internet; it's this "freeloading" attitude toward newspaper content that is part of the problem, and the best solution is to figure out how newspapers can charge their readers for access to the content. After all, this content is costly to create; journalists, photographers, editors, managers must be paid, and their expenses covered while working on long running stories.

  While he's correct on the costs, he's coming to the wrong conclusion. Newspapers have never charged readers directly for the content therein; most of what you pay for covers the cost of raw materials and delivery. Newspapers have always paid for content indirectly by selling advertising, and there's no reason to expect that to change on the Internet. Yes, it's harder to make as much money - the newspaper is no longer the exclusive (or premier) advertising delivery vehicle for the community, so it can't charge a premium for the service. That's not the fault of the Internet readers; it's just a side effect of being in an economy where competition has sprung up for advertising dollars.

  If you make readers pay for content, fewer readers will come; that's a downward spiral, which seems only to lead to a small number of people paying large amounts of money for reporting, leaving the rest of us out in the cold. That's certainly not the model that speaks truth to power; only widely disseminated reporting can effect social change. In a strange sense, we've always had a small number of people paying for journalism - advertisers have often realized their power and attempted to use that to influence editorial decisions - but in the end, the need to deliver a large audience to advertisers has driven the delivery systems (newspapers, radio, television) to disseminate their product as widely as possible as cheaply as possible, to the benefit of society and to each of us individually.

  So how should newspapers recoup the cost of doing great journalism, if advertising dollars won't cover them? I don't know, but I do know that charging for content is likely to be a dead end. Instead, publishers should charge for some added value: access to archives, alerts for breaking news, or some other popular service. While we still have a multiplicity of news providers, we're likely to see experimentation in this area.

  One chilling suggestion Simon makes is that Congress consider relaxing anti-trust prohibitions so newspapers can collaborate on how best to charge for their content. The very last thing we need is a collusive attempt to establish a single business model, perhaps even the least efficient or effective one available. This would be analogous to relaxing anti-trust laws so software companies can collaborate on how best to eliminate their open-source competitors. It's a very bad idea.

• Change the tax code to make newspapers tax-exempt, as non-profit organizations. This is a heavy-weight non-solution to the problem, and it's a suggestion which gives an unfair competitive advantage to newspapers over other content producers such as television, radio, and of course Internet-only sources. It's also unnecessary; the Texas Observer and Mother Jones Magazine are two examples of publications run by non-profit foundations (full disclosure: I contribute to both). Therefore, a solution is already out there; in my opinion, we don't need to exempt newspapers especially from taxes in order to save journalism.

  On the other hand, I do support one of his suggestions, which was to give some sort of tax preference to a particular one-time event: the transfer of ownership of a newspaper from a for-profit corporation to some non-profit organization (such as an independent foundation, as above). This one-time benefit would help more quickly close the book on the disastrous experiment of having Wall Street own newspapers. I don't mind paying holding companies a bribe to divest themselves of the real assets, the personnel and the presses, as long as the transition is to an ownership structure which is more robust and responsive to its readers.

Another model for funding journalism is the curious system that is found in the United Kingdom: the British Broadcasting Company (BBC), funded by a tax on radios and televisions. It's a progressive approach to the problem; journalism (and to be fair, entertainment) is seen as a necessary public good, and so it's financed by a tax levied by the state. Interestingly, the result has not been an organization that shies away from attacking politicians - in effect, biting the hands that feed it. It's sadly a model which will never fly in the United States.

David Simon makes another good point: journalists require standing to be taken seriously by the people they're interviewing and/or reporting about. Traditional newsrooms have nurtured the careers of those journalists who are now household names, either nationally or in their community; elected officials tend to be more careful when challenged by these reporters because they know they have a constituency. The non-profit foundation model can hopefully also nurture the careers of "rock star" reporters, who can supplement their salaries or other compensation with speaking fees and book deals. Perhaps what we'll end up seeing are even more specialized journalists, who get to know a particular geographical area or topic really well, and become worldwide authorities on their subjects. I especially like his quote on page 7 (of 10) of his testimony; read the whole thing when you get a chance:

When I was in journalism school in the 1970s, the threat was television and its immediacy. My professors claimed that in order to survive, newspapers were going to have to cede the ambulance chasing and reactive coverage to TV and instead become more like great magazines. Specialization and beat reporting were the future. We were going to have to explain an increasingly complex world in ways that made us essential to an increasingly educated readership. The scope of coverage would have to go deeper, address more of the world, not less. Those were our ambitions. Those were my ambitions. ...

In summary, I think the problem is how do we save journalism, not "how do we save newspapers". Journalism is a system we know, and one whose contours aren't likely to change; you need to pay for good writers, good interrogators, and people who can pull the story together. That's what we need to make sure persists, not the particular delivery system.

Get out of jail, free

The Houston Chronicle has an article about technology at the Houston Municipal Court system. The court's computer network has been hit, hard, by a virus - the report suggests Conficker but the chief technical director for the City doesn't think so. The effects include a shutdown of the muni court on Friday, and a suspension for arrests for Class C misdemeanors.

To me it seems clear there are a number of lessons to learn:

1. Keep your critical computers away from the Internet. There are computers which are necessary for your department to function, and then there are the computers people use for less critical purposes. Think strongly about keeping an "air gap" between your critical infrastructure and the Internet.
2. Avoid an operating system monoculture. Another hard thing to do - it's a trade-off between being easy to manage (the Southwest Airlines approach) and being robust. Having even 20% of your computers running something other than Windows can mean the difference between an inconvenient virus attack, and shutting down your courts for the weekend.
3. Migrate off Microsoft Windows. It's a bug-ridden virus magnet.The sooner you move away from MS Windows on your critical infrastructure machines, the sooner you become more resistant to viruses and worms.

Houston Chronicle - loose reporting

Mike Glenn of the Houston Chronicle reported yesterday about an HISD teacher who was escorted off campus because a drug-sniffing dog identified her vehicle. Inside, there were some unidentified pills, for which the teacher could not immediately produce a prescription. Students were in tears as they heard of her being taken into custody by district officials.

I'm disappointed by this article. This isn't reporting; it's repeating an unsubstantiated allegation against an HISD teacher. Until there's proven wrongdoing, this event should be treated as discretely as possible. The paper should only publish this kind of information when it turns out to be an example of an employee who is under performing, is dangerous to students, or who will be disciplined by the district. I would be encouraged if the Chronicle were to adopt such a policy going forward.

To compound this particular affront, Roberts is a small enough school that its identification of the teacher, while attempting to walk the line between descriptive and anonymous, is in fact sufficient to let everyone know who it is. We all hope this will turn out to be a misunderstanding, quickly resolved; however, the publicity the Chronicle has afforded this case has served to add damage to the reputation of a long serving and much beloved teacher, who we hope to see back in the classroom soon.