Search bioRxiv⌕ Search

bioRxiv · 10.1101/2021.07.29.452310

Are flexible school start times associated with higher academic grades? A 4-year longitudinal study.

Abstract

The mismatch between teenagers late sleep phase and early school start time results in acute and chronic sleep reductions. This is not only harmful for students learning in the short-term but may impact on students career prospects and widen social inequalities. Delaying school start times has been shown to improve sleep but whether this translates to better achievement is unresolved. The current evidence is limited due to a plethora of outcome measures and the many factors influencing sleep and grade/score trajectories. Here, we studied whether 0.5-1.5 years of exposure to a flexible school start system, with the daily choice of an 8AM or 8:50AM-start (intervention), allowed secondary school students (n=63-157, 14-19 years) to improve their quarterly school grades in a 4-year longitudinal pre-post design. We investigated whether sleep, changes in sleep or frequency of later starts predicted grade improvements in the flexible system. Our mixed model regressions with 5,111-16,724 official grades as outcomes did not indicate meaningful grade improvements in the flexible system per se or with previously observed sleep variables (nor their changes) - the covariates academic quarter, discipline and grade level had a greater, more systematic effect in our sample. Importantly, this finding does not preclude improvements in learning and cognition in our sample. However, at the dose received here, intermittent sleep benefits did not obviously translate into detectable grade changes, which is in line with several other studies and highlights that grades are suboptimal to evaluate timetabling interventions despite their importance for future success. Significance statementEarly school start times worldwide clash with teenagers delayed sleep-wake rhythms. This mismatch results in sleep restrictions below healthy amounts, which compromises health and performance and further aggravates social disparities. Since adequate sleep is important for learning and concentration, there is the strong expectation that counteracting sleep deprivation with delayed school starts results in better academic achievement. We add important high-resolution, longitudinal data to this unresolved scientific debate. When controlling for confounders, our results do not support that improved sleep leads to grade changes within 1.5 years in a flexible start system. While grades are suboptimal to measure later school start effects on performance, they nevertheless open doors to higher education worldwide and thus determine future trajectories.

Source connections

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Biller, A. M., Molenda, C., Obster, F., Zerbini, G., Foertsch, C., Roenneberg, T., Winnebeck, E. C.. 2021-08-03. Are flexible school start times associated with higher academic grades? A 4-year longitudinal study.. https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.29.452310

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

Evaluating Large Language Models as Tools to Navigate Researchers in Rapidly Evolving Research Landscapes: A Case Study in Cancer Drug Response Prediction

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as promising tools for assisting researchers in automating and accelerating the synthesis of literature reviews. However, their reliability is a significant concern due to issues like factual inaccuracies and hallucinations. The key question is whether LLMs can reliably provide comprehensive, up-to-date overviews and analyses. This study evaluates the performance of three leading LLMs (OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, and DeepSeek) on the complex task of generating a comprehensive survey paper on deep learning for cancer Drug Response Prediction (DRP). By testing both standard and Deep Research (DR) / Deep Think (DT) modes of LLMs with prompts of varying detail, this paper assesses key academic dimensions, including reference management, content quality, and analytical depth. Key findings reveal that while DR modes of LLMs significantly improve reliability by eliminating hallucinations, performance variations exist across models and prompts. A trade-off between reference quantity and integration quality was observed, and even the best-performing models lacked the analytical depth of human experts, often requiring extensive human supervision. The study concludes that LLMs currently serve as powerful assistive tools but still cannot replace the critical validation and synthesis provided by human researchers. Choosing the best LLM to use depends on the task in hand, while several strategies can be implemented to improve the produced output.

scientific communication and education↗

A bibliometric analysis of gender in microbiology collaborations

Women are underrepresented in senior academic positions within microbiology globally. Studies show that gender bias affects the progression of women in academia, but there is evidence that improving conscious awareness of bias can improve equity in this regard. Here we carry out a bibliometric analysis of review articles within the microbiology field to investigate the statistical associations with author gender. We analyse the publication data from 1857 review articles published between 2010 and 2022 in three leading microbiology review journals: Nature Reviews Microbiology, Trends in Microbiology, and Annual Review of Microbiology. We find a significant association between the gender of the lead author and the gender of co-authors in multi-author publications. Review articles with men lead authors have a significantly reduced proportion of women co-authors compared to reviews with women lead authors. Given the existing differences in the proportions of men and women in lead author positions, this association may have important consequences for the relative visibility of women in microbiology, along with potential negative impacts on scientific output relating to reduced collaboration diversity. We further probe associations between gender and citation metrics, acknowledgement of contributions, and publishing during the Covid-19 pandemic within microbiology reviews.

scientific communication and education↗

Does it pay to pay? A comparison of the benefits of open-access publishing across various sub-fields in Biology

Authors are often faced with the decision of whether to maximize impact or minimize costs when publishing the results of their research. For example, to potentially improve impact via increased accessibility, many subscription-based journals now offer the option of paying a fee to publish open access (i.e., hybrid journals), but this solution excludes authors who lack the capacity to pay to make their research accessible. Here, we tested if paying to publish open access in a subscriptionbased journal benefited authors by conferring more citations relative to closed access articles. We identified 146,415 articles published in 152 hybrid journals in the field of biology from 2013-2018 to compare the number of citations between various types of open access and closed access articles. In a simple generalized linear model analysis of our full dataset, we found that publishing open access in hybrid journals that offer the option confers an average citation advantage to authors of 17.8 citations compared to closed access articles in similar journals. After taking into account the number of authors, journal impact, year of publication, and subject area, we still found that open access generated significantly more citations than closed access (p < 0.0001). However, results were complex, with exact differences in citation rates among access types impacted by these other variables. This citation advantage based on access type was even similar when comparing open and closed access articles published in the same issue of a journal (p < 0.0001). However, by examining articles where the authors paid an article processing charge, we found that cost itself was not predictive of citation rates (p = 0.14). Based on our findings of access type and other model parameters, we suggest that, in most cases, paying for access does confer a citation advantage. For authors with limited budgets, we recommend pursuing open access alternatives that do not require paying a fee as they still yielded more citations than closed access. For authors who are considering where to submit their next article, we offer additional suggestions on how to balance exposure via citations with publishing costs.

scientific communication and education↗