The Effects of the Time of the Day on

Adolescent Student Achievement

Andrew Pang
The University of British Columbia

Introduction
In this paper, I will outline my inquiry about the effects of time the time of the day on
adolescent student achievement supported by a statement of the problem which my research will
address. I begin with an overview of the problem statement and then present the inquiry
question that will guide my project. The significance of my inquiry into educational theory and
practice and the importance to my reflections on how I came to select this inquiry and the ways
my personal and professional experiences, beliefs, perspectives, and views may inform and
shape this project. Related literature in the field from various sources will be presented followed
by a conclusion outlining the possible outcomes of my inquiry project.
Problem Statement and Inquiry Question
Research indicates that memory varies depending on the time of the day. Baddeley
(1970) was one of the first to demonstrate this by showing that short term memory is better in the
morning. However, Millar et al. (1980) showed that somewhat contrary to this finding, long
term memory is better in the afternoon. Karvelis (1987) brings light to these discrepancies when
discussing how different research designs, populations, and variables were not taken into account
and that for students in particular, the time of the day did not influence performance scores. A
rotating bell schedule is designed to equalize the discrepancies of the time of the day for classes,
but Clay (1974) found that the cons for such a system outweigh a fixed bell schedule.
Performance or achievement is defined as a students final grade for a given course, as
well as individual test or exam scores. Short term memory is defined as the capacity for holding
a small amount of information in mind in an active, readily available state for a short period of
time. Long term memory is defined as memory encoded for holding information in mind in a
retrievable state for a long period of time. Arousal is defined as the physiological and
psychological state of being awake or reactive to stimuli. Circadian rhythm is defined as
biological processes that oscillate through a daily cycle or about 24 hours (Wever, 1979).
Synchrony is defined as matching a preferred time of the day to study with when the studying or
testing occurs (Dunn, 1990).
From personal observations of different Math classes of the same grade, students are
seemingly more tired and unresponsive in the morning whereas they are much more awake and
responsive during the afternoon. Research has shown that different levels of arousal affect short
and long term memory (Walker et al. 1963). My experiences prompt me to wonder how students
are affected by the time of the day for performance scores. To help me develop an in-depth
understanding of my inquiry, the following question will guide my research:
What effects does the time of the day have on adolescent student performance?
Significance
My inquiry will be significant in the following ways: Students are seemingly more
aroused in the afternoon compared to the morning and a fixed school schedule unfairly
distributes student arousal to each class. This project may help me professionally by giving me a
new angle of consideration when planning my classes. If done, it may help students learn better
or make it fairer for students who would have otherwise been disadvantaged for always having
certain classes at certain times of the day. As well, it is possible that if students perform worse in
a subject as a result of this, they may in turn lower their interest in the particular subject. This
project may also help administrators in deciding whether or not to consider implementing a
rotating bell schedule again, as many of the cons Clay (1974) found that supposedly outweigh
the pros apply to American schools several decades ago and do not apply to many Canadian
schools today.
The Research Review
Time of day on memory
Memory is vital to student learning, and research indicates that memory varies depending
on the time of the day. Baddeley (1970) was one of the first to demonstrate this. In his
experiment, subjects were tested on two occasions, in the morning and in the afternoon. 24
sequences of nine numbers were read out to subjects, and they had to repeat back the sequence
immediately. The results concluded that short term memory was significantly better in the
morning than in the afternoon.
However, Millar (1980) showed that long term memory worked better later in the day
compared to earlier when different groups performed semantic classification tasks at one of three
times in the day.
Karvelis (1987) discusses this cause of this confusion by noting the variation of research
designs across studies. In particular, the age of the subjects was one of the main factors that
should be noted as some of studies consisted of only adults while other studies consisted only of
children or adolescents. When comparing two groups of childrens short term and long term
memory compared to the time of testing, no statistically significant evidence was found between
short or long term memory on the time of the day.
Preference for the morning or for the afternoon and circadian
rhythms
In the past, it was popularly believed that morning was the optimal time for students to
study. Ideas such as the early bird gets the worm or waking up refreshed and ready to learn were
common, and were the basis of school schedules. However, evidence emerged to suggest that
for adolescents, this was not the case (Dunn & Dunn 1993, Wolfson & Carskadon 1998). Just
from general observations, we now see evidence against the idea that morning is the best time of
the day for adolescents. Examples of this include difficulty waking up, lack of attention, and
sleepiness during morning classes (Goldstein et al., 2007). In addition, Englund (1979) found in
a study that had college psychology students self measure that oral temperature, pulse rate,
arousal, anxiety, adding speed, short-term memory ratio, finger counting and tapping
measurements peaked at the afternoon while measurements such as sleepiness, deactivation, and
calmness peaked in the morning. These findings suggest there is a circadian effect on student
performance.
The idea of a circadian rhythm suggests an internal clock works in a 24-hour cycle. Our
cells contain internal 24-hour clocks that regulate daily activities, including sleep and wake
(Wever, 1979). People with irregular circadian rhythms may be subjected to work problems,
sleep problems, and cognitive problem, or bodily functioning problems.
Researchers have found that there is a preference for the morning for children, a
preference for the afternoon for adolescents and young adults, and a preference for the morning
again for older adults (Hasher, Goldstein, & May, 2005).
The bodys circadian rhythm changes for adolescents, telling them to fall asleep later in
the night and wake up later in the morning on average (Wolfson & Carskadon, 1998). This can
be attributed to how melatonin, a neurotransmitter responsible for sleep, is produced later for
adolescents relative to younger children or older adults. As a result, adolescents are less inclined
to be aroused, alert, or ready to learn in the morning (Adolescent Sleep Needs and School
Performance, 1998). Ironically, most high schools start earlier in the day compared to
elementary schools, giving adolescents less time to sleep. When Wolfson and Carskadon (1998)
compared students who were considered to have adequate amounts of sleep compared to students
who were considered to have inadequate amounts of sleep, they found that students with less
sleep tended to report increased levels of depressed mood, daytime sleepiness, and problematic
sleep behaviours relative to those who had more sleep. These findings further contradict the idea
that the morning is the optimal time for all ages. Hansen et al. (2005) monitored 60 incoming
high school seniors by having them record their sleep and wake cycles in diaries. They
confirmed that the start times of high schools contributed to adolescent sleep deprivation, and
also showed that student performance was better in the afternoon than the morning. They tried
exposing students to light in the morning to see if emulating the afternoon in the morning would
level off the differences in performance. They found no significant changes in performance
when comparing those treated with light and those who were not treated with light, emphasizing
the importance of the actual time of the day for student performance rather than aspects of the
time of the day.
Evidence suggests that the morning preference in children shifting to the afternoon
preference in adolescents can be attributed to the biological shift of entering adolescence. Kim et
al. (2002) showed from a study of 900 children ages 8 to 16 that the circadian rhythm shift
occurs at around the age of 13 with those below 13 to prefer the morning while those older than
13 to prefer the afternoon. Other studies have pinpointed the shift to occur at 12 years of age.
Whether it is 12 or 13, it is clear that the age that it occurs is near the age of puberty. The onset
of puberty for adolescents, waking behaviours such as mood, and school and task performance
are biological changes that adolescents experience and may be related to the circadian rhythm
shift (Carskadon, 1999). The biological changes are noted to be stronger by the age of 14, which
coincide with when the circadian rhythm shifts the most. This is the time in which most
adolescents will have fully experienced puberty. Adolescents in this age need more sleep, yet
high schools are making it harder for adolescents to have this sleep (Adolescent Sleep Needs and
School Performance, 1998). However, Wolfson and Carskadon (1998), have noted that while
there is a shift to afternoon preference at the beginning of adolescence, the learning preference
shifts back down towards the morning as the person ages.
Cavallera and Giudici (2008) suggested that time of day preference, or Morningness-
Eveningness personality, is associated with the month of birth. They found through surveys
that those born in March to April were more associated with Eveningness while those born in
September to October were more associated with Morningness. They speculate that there is a
relationship between the light-dark cycle at birth has an impact on the light-dark cycle preference
in adolescents. That is, if someone was born in the winter, they were exposed to less light at
birth, and a preference for less light carries on through as they grow. This translates to the
person being more associated with Eveningness.
In a Biggers study (1980), a correlation was found between a students academic success
and the time of the day. Data was taken from 641 students ranging from grades seven to twelve
and found that 56.3% reported being most sluggish in the morning. At the same time, these
students had a lower grade point average in general compared to those who did not report being
sluggish in the morning.
Parker (2009) looked at a study of over 600 students and found that males performed
better at repetitive tasks in the morning while they performed better at perceptual tasks in the
afternoon. She attributes this change to the difference in testosterone levels, as a decline in
testosterone throughout the day may be associated with the increased performance in the
perceptual tasks. From this, she concludes that different times of the day may even be better
suited for different types of learning or assessment, as perceptual tasks are suggested to be best
done in the afternoon.
In a study by Ramirez et al. (2006), eight female undergraduate students aged 16 to 19
were given a stimuli presentation and response recording to assess them in a phonological and
visuospatial working memory task while having their rectal temperature, subjective sleepiness,
and subjective tiredness recorded. To test for working memory, the participants were given a
visual fixation mark at the center of the screen, then the appearance of four upper case letters,
then a distracter, and then a lower case letter. Participants then pressed a key for either a match
if any of the lower case letters matched the upper case ones, or another key if none matched.
The results found that working memory as well as other cognitive processes decreased as rectal
temperature decreased. It is also noted that rectal temperature increases in the afternoon
compared to the morning in adolescents, giving a correlation between working memory and time
of day.
Murray (1980) conducted a study where 61 students were classified as low reading
achievement subjects and 61 students were classified as high reading achievement subjects, all of
which were from 7
th
or 8
th
grade. The students then were assessed for their learning preferences
including the time of the day they best studied in. In the reverse direction compared to most
other studies, it was found that achievement in reading predicted the student learning style
preferences, and that female students with low reading achievement were predicted to be evening
learners.
Another perspective looks at the effects of lack of sleep. By depriving participants of
sleep for 72 98 hours, Morris et al. (1960) found that severe sleep deprivation could cause
visual misperception, temporal disorientation, and cognitive disorganization. Though this was
extreme amounts of sleep deprivation, one could argue that the lack of sleep adolescents have
may push them towards these problems.
Synchrony, matching preferences and the environment
Researchers have studied synchrony of the time of the day with students preference
towards the morning or the afternoon and how it affects their performance. This is done to see
whether or not students perform better or not when matching time of testing with time of
preference, and to see whether schools should take consideration as to when tests or other
evaluation tasks occur rather than simply ignoring the effects altogether. Dunn (1990) argues
that the time of the day as well as four other factors makes up 70% of achievement in students,
and that 60% of learning styles is biologically imposed. In addition, she argues that matching
preferences consistently with the learning environment will improve student achievement, as
well as attitudes towards school, less tension in classes, and increased school retention.
Furthermore, she attributes students failing the curriculum towards the mismatch between how
students are taught and what the students learning styles were rather than it being the curriculum
itself that is failing students.
According to Dunn and Dunn (1993), 80 85% of students can only learn best at a
certain time of the day, whether it be morning, afternoon, or evening, whereas only the
remaining 15 20% of students are versatile enough to learn at any time of the day without
being affected by the time. This stresses the importance of synchrony, as they argue that
learning is inhibited when they are forced to learn against their preference. In addition, they
found that when adolescents have their time of testing and preferred time to be tested
mismatched, their performance fluctuates more, which decreases the reliability of test results.
Virostko (1983) conducted a study in which 286 students from grades 3 to 6 were
assessed on what their individual learning style time preferences, then had their instructional
schedule for math and reading determined, and then determined whether these significantly
affected achievement test scores in math and reading. The results showed that for young
students, those who had their time preference and class schedule matching achieved significantly
higher achievement test scores in both math and reading. Those who had their time preference
and class schedule mismatching had lower achievement in test scores. Though this was done on
an Elementary school level, it still shows that the effect of synchrony exists and can be a
significant factor for student learning.
Ammons et al. (1995) conducted a study to determine the effects of the time of the day
and synchrony on 5
th
grade student attention in addition to their achievement. Students were
given Learning Styles Inventories in order to assess what their time of day preference was.
Using scripted laser disk Science lessons, they were taught and tested in both the morning and
the afternoon, and then the results were compared with their time of day preference. Results
showed that matching the time of the day and student preference for the time of the day
increased student achievement, while reversing the time of instruction to the students preference
decreased student achievement. However, no real inference could be drawn between the time of
the day and attention, as only 5 students were showing signs of less attention but were too few to
be generalized to the population. They also suggest that one of the things high school
administrators should do is to get students to take the Learning Styles Inventories to assess their
time of day preference and use that to plan their courses accordingly. Examples of how to do
this would be to have courses that require less focus or concentration be done at times that do not
match the students optimal learning time, while leaving the harder, more academic courses for
the students optimal learning time.
Parker (2009) reviewed a study in which University students of ages 18 24 with an
evening preference were compared with seniors ages 60 76 with a morning preference. The
participants did a word recognition test in the afternoon and in the morning. Results found that
University students performed better in the afternoon, but did not outperform the seniors in the
morning. This suggests either a synchrony effect improved testing, age with time of testing
improved testing, or both synchrony and age interact to improve testing results.
Goldstein et al. (2007) studied the relationship between the synchrony of the time of the
day and adolescent students time of day preference, and how it affects any behavioural
problems in additional to academic achievement. 20 adolescent participants were assigned to
either match their preference or mismatch their preference with the time of the day. They then
took WISC-III subtests, doing tasks such as vocabulary, block design, and digit span, which
assessed their IQ. The results confirmed the synchrony effect for adolescents, as the participants
scored better in fluid intelligence tests when their time of day preference matched their time of
testing. However, for the crystallized intelligence test (vocabulary), there was evidence that
suggested some improvement, but no significant differences between those who were tested
against their time of day preference and those who were tested at their time of day preference
were found. This suggests that the synchrony effect only affects adolescent student performance
in some areas, rather than all areas, and it further backs up Goldstein et al.s (2007) idea of
scheduling certain types of classes at certain times of the day. However, when combining the
results of the crystallized and fluid tests, they found that on average, students with matching time
of day preferences and testing time scored approximately a 6 point difference in Full Scale IQ
equivalents compared to the students who did not match their time of day preferences with
testing time. This is noted to have serious consequences as this difference in performance in IQ
tests can be the difference between being accepted or being rejected from some special education
or gifted courses. In addition, they conclude that mismatching learning preference and the time
of the day that students take tests is a critical reason for adolescent failure in high school, and
that mismatching students preferred time to be tested and when they are tested leads to bias and
skewed results. This provides further evidence against the validity and reliability of many of the
standardized tests that are crucial to students futures, as these standardized tests do not reflect
what the students optimal capabilities are. Furthermore, the results of their study also suggest
that the effects of matching the time of testing with the preferred time of the day to be tested is
more likely to increase test scores than creating additional lessons to study for the test.
Moreover, sleep was measured to see if it had any effects on performance or if it would skew
results. Interestingly, they found that the amount of sleep that students get did not significantly
interact with the time of the day and the preferred time of the day.
Parker (2009) analyzed a number of studies and found that the time of day preference
affected students achievement, attitudes, attention spans, tensions, behaviours, and/or
attendance. In addition, she notes that the effects of synchrony can contribute to student learning
more than differences in sleep, interventions, tutoring, and remediation. She also notes findings
that suggest that matching learning and the preferred time of the day for learning affected
underachieving adolescents more than average achieving adolescents, but had an even greater
effect on achieving students. In addition, she states that research has found that adolescent
students who subjectively considered themselves to be morning types performed better in the
morning while adolescents who subjectively considered themselves to be afternoon types
performed better in the afternoon, suggesting that adolescents can reliably predict their own
optimal time to learn or be tested.
Yoon et al. (2008) conducted a study in which adolescents performed various cognitive
tasks. The synchrony effect was shown again when students performed better as the day
progressed. What they found was that mismatching preference with learning time resulted in
students having less control over attention span, ability to evaluate and discriminate, and
memory, all of which are important for learning effectively.
Callan (1998) conducted a study where 245 9
th
grade students were assessed on their time
of day preference by using Learning Style Inventories. They were then given an algebra test in
their Math class. Using these results and cross referencing with the students preferred time of
the day, they found that students who were morning learners performed better in the morning
than morning learners in afternoon and students who were afternoon learners performed better in
the afternoon than students who were afternoon learners in the morning. Unlike other designs
however, he looked at and found that morning students who were tested in the morning did better
than afternoon learners in the morning and afternoon students who were tested in the afternoon
did better than morning learners in the afternoon. This finding goes against other findings that
suggested that afternoon learners performed better than morning learners in general, and again
further stresses the importance of synchrony.
Gadwa and Griggs (1985) conducted a study in which learning styles of 103 high school
dropouts, 213 randomly selected high school students, and 214 alternative students who studied
in the evening were assessed. Consistent with Murray (1980), they found that high school drop
outs had a tendency to prefer evening as their best time of the day to learn, and had a tendency to
find the morning a difficult time to learn in. This suggests that the mismatch between when
schools occur and when their preferred learning time occurs is negatively affecting their
performance in school and puts evening learners at risk for dropping out of high school.
Bell scheduling
Implications from much research have suggested changing the bell schedule, or how
classes are set up to accommodate for the differences in preferences for the time of the day.
According to Ramirez et al. (2006), one problem with some high schools is the tendency
to put harder subjects in the morning while putting easier classes in the afternoon. This is
somewhat counterproductive, as adolescents in general prefer the afternoon, and it would make
more sense to then schedule those classes that require more attention and concentration in the
afternoon.
Sousa (2003) states that sleep/wake cycles begin later for teens than for the younger
student and the adult. He further argues that while some adolescents are adept in the morning, it
is still more difficult for most adolescents due to their biology, hormonal concentrations, and
circadian rhythms that regulate their ability to focus and learn. According to the article School
mornings too early for studying students (2008), adolescents are waking up as much as 2.5 hours
earlier than what their circadian rhythm tells them to wake up at. This implies that high schools
should start later in the day rather than before 9 a.m. A study looked at the effects of changing
the starting time of a Minneapolis, Minnesota high school (Viadero, 2001). Benefits reported
include improved attendance, improved enrollment, and decreased failure rates. However, it is
noted that the schedule changes did not significantly affect students grades. On the other hand,
long-time teacher Richard S. Schwartz reports that kids are absolutely coming in more ready,
more prepared to learn, and sharper.
Winget et al. (1985) looked at the effects of circadian rhythms on athletics. They found
that teams who were instructed in the morning only remembered the moves or maneuver as if
they had only had 3 hours of sleep. They suggest that learning athletics would be best done in
the afternoon.
Ammons et al. (1995) suggests that an alternate approach to changing the bell schedule is
to implement a rotating bell schedule. In this, classes are scheduled to mix when a class occurs
during the day. For example, one day might have classes ordered 1-2-3-4, while another day
might have it ordered 2-3-4-1 or 4-3-2-1. They argue that by doing this, students will be exposed
to an optimal time of the day for each class at least sometimes instead of either always or never.
This would reduce any bias that the time of the day has on classes. It may also be used to a
teachers advantage in that a teacher could wait for their class to be in the afternoon before
administering a test. This would however require teachers to be fully aware of the effects of the
time of the day on adolescent performance before it could become useful.
Clay (1974) attempted to find the pros and cons of a rotating bell schedule. However,
while the existence of some pros was mentioned, the actual pros were not listed. It is stated that
the cons heavily outweighed the pros, which was why rotating bell schedules were rare at the
time. However, these cons were unrelated to student achievement. For example, one con was
that it rotating bell schedules were an inconvenience to student teachers, as they still had classes
while they taught and could not take them if the class they taught rotated into a conflicting time.
Another example was that students were getting confused by the schedule itself.
Conclusions
The time of the day plays a crucial role in adolescent student achievement, and high
schools need to take this into consideration. Adolescents, unlike children and older adults, tend
to have a preference to learn during the afternoon or sometime later in the day. Synchronizing
adolescents preferred time of the day to learn with when they learn or get tested significantly
improves their results compared to when they are not synchronized. Changing the bell schedules
to address these issues is a potential solution, but is being met with many challenges.
Many relevant questions were raised while conducting this inquiry and were not found.
For example, all research on synchrony examined the effects of the time of the day on students
who had a preferred time. However, what effect if any does the time of the day have on students
with no preference? This has been simply assumed to not have an effect since they claim to have
no preference, but perhaps the effect of the time of the day goes beyond student preferences.
Another thing I have to note is that no research was found on the effects of the time of the day on
teacher performance. Do teachers instruct equally well at all times of the day or do they unfairly
and unknowingly teach some classes better simply because of the time of the day? In addition,
almost all research on synchrony divided time into the morning, afternoon, and evening.
However, I would argue that the categorization needs to be divided further. For example, if there
are 4 classes a day, the first and second while the third and fourth one might have a different
dynamic, but are classified as the same in these studies. Arguments such as third period being
optimal because it is right after lunch while fourth period being non-optimal due to students
being distracted since it is the last period of the day could be made.
Unfortunately, many of the implications of this research have to do with changing the
bell schedule, something that is outside of my power as a teacher candidate. However, being
aware of these effects, I will try to equalize the discrepancies amongst the classes that I will
teach to try to attain equity. If the difference in arousal is a cause of the time of day effects, I can
then try to raise the level of arousal in morning classes by getting students to do light exercises to
jog their brain instead of waiting idly like they would while I take attendance. Another thing I
could do is to allow the option of having retests after school to allow the morning classes a
chance to do tests in the afternoon. Furthermore, if I ever teach in a school with a rotating bell
schedule, I can use it to my advantage to try to schedule tests when the class is in the afternoon.

References
ABC News (2008). School mornings too early for studying teens. Retrieved from
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2008-04-03/school-mornings-too-early-for-studying-
teens-report/2392548
Adolescent Sleep Needs and School Performance. (1998, November). New York State United
Teachers Bulletin, 19.
Ammons, T. L. (1995). The effects of time of day on student attention and achievement.
BADDELEY, A. D. (1970). Memory and time of day. Quarterly Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 22(4), 605-609. doi:10.1080/14640747008401939
Biggers, J. L. (1980). Body rhythms, the school day, and academic achievement. The Journal of
Experimental Education, 49(1), 45-47.
Callan, R. J. (1998). An experimental investigation of the relationships among the time-of-day
preferences of grade nine students taking a sequential I test in algebra and
achievement in the test. ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing).
Carskadon, M. A. (1999). When worlds collide: Adolescent need for sleep versus societal
demands. The Phi Delta Kappan, 80(5), 348-353.
Cavallera, G. M., & Giudici, S. (2008). Morningness and eveningness personality: A survey in
literature from 1995 up till 2006. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(1), 3-21.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2007.07.009
Clay, K. (1974). Pros and cons of the rotating schedules. The Clearing House, 48(9), 533-536.
Dunn, R. (1990). Rita dunn answers questions on learning styles
Dunn, R. S., & Dunn, K. J. (1993). Teaching secondary students through their individual
learning styles: Practical approaches for grades 7-12. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
ENGLUND, C. E. (1979). Human chronopsychology: An autorhythmometric study of circadian
periodicity in learning, mood and task performance. ProQuest, UMI Dissertations
Publishing).
Fabbri, M., Mencarelli, C., Adan, A., & Natale, V. (2013). Time-of-day and circadian typology
on memory retrieval. Biological Rhythm Research, 44(1), 125-142.
doi:10.1080/09291016.2012.656244
Gadwa, K., & Griggs, S. A. (1985). The school dropout: Implications for counselors. School
Counselor, 33(1), 9-17.
Goldstein, D., Hahn, C. S., Hasher, L., Wiprzycka, U. J., & Zelazo, P. D. (2007). Time of day,
intellectual performance, and behavioral problems in Morning versus Evening type
adolescents: Is there a synchrony effect?. Personality and Individual Differences,
42(3), 431-440.
Hansen, M., Janssen, I., Schiff, A., Zee, P. C., & Dubocovich, M. L. (2005). The impact of
school daily schedule on adolescent sleep. Pediatrics, 115(6), 1555-1561.
Hasher, L., Goldstein, D., & May, C. (2005). It's about time: Circadian rhythms, memory and
aging. In C. Izawa & N. Ohta eds. Human learning and memory: Advances in theory
and application. Kansas: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
KARVELIS, E. M. (1987). Time of day and student performance in long and short term memory
tasks. ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing).
Kim, S., Dueker, G. L., Hasher, L., & Goldstein, D. (2002). Children's time of day preference:
Age, gender, and ethnic differences. Personality and Individual Differences, 33,
1083-1090
Millar, K. (1980). Time of day and retrieval from long-term memory. British Journal of
Psychology, 71, 407-14.
MORRIS, G. O., WILLIAMS, H. L., & LUBIN, A. (1960). Misperception and disorientation
during sleep deprivation. Archives of General Psychiatry, 2(3), 247.
doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1960.03590090003002
MURRAY, C. A. (1980). The comparison of learning styles between low and high reading
achievement subjects in the seventh and eighth grades in a public middle school.
ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing).
Parker, L. M. (2009). Matching Time of Day and Preference for Adolescent Achievement.
ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway, PO Box 1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106.
Ramirez, C., Talamantes, J., Garcia, A., Morales, M., Valdez, P., & Menna-Barreto, L. (2006).
Circadian rhythms in phonological and visuospatial storage components of working
memory. Biological Rhythm Research, 37(5), 433-441.
doi:10.1080/09291010600870404
Sousa, D. (2003). The leadership brain: how to lead today's schools more effectively. Thousand
Oaks, California: Corwin Press.
Viadero, Debra. (2001). Study finds benefits from starting school later in the day. Education
Week, 21(1), 11.
VIROSTKO, J. (1983). An analysis of the relationships among academic achievement in
mathematics and reading, assigned instructional schedules, and the learning style
time preferences of third, fourth, fifth, and sixth grade students. ProQuest, UMI
Dissertations Publishing).
Walker, Edward L., and Robert D. Tarte. "Memory storage as a function of arousal and time with
homogeneous and heterogeneous lists." Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal
Behavior 2.1 (1963): 113-119.
Wever, R. (1979). Topics in environmental physiology and medicine: The circadian system of
man. In K. Schaefer, (Ed.) New York: Springer-Verlag.
Winget, C. M., DeRoshia, C. W., & Holley, D. C. (1985). Circadian rhythms and athletic
performance. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 17(5), 498-516.
doi:10.1249/00005768-198510000-00002
Wolfson, A. R., & Carskadon, M. A. (1998). Sleep schedules and daytime functioning in
adolescents. Child Development, 69(4), 875-887. doi:10.2307/1132351
Yoon, C., May, C, Goldstein, D., & Hasher, L. (2008). Aging, circadian arousal patterns, and
cognition. In D. Park & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Cognitive aging: A primer (2
nd
ed.).
Psychology Press.