FIRST TAKE In mid-April, members of the National School Transportation Association joined representatives
from NAPT and NASDPTS on the annual quest to lobby congressional members on Capitol Hill. Te main objective was to garner support of a proposed initiative to be undertaken by the U.S. Department of Transportation to implement a two-year, $5 million campaign to make the public more aware of the benefits of yellow school buses and, as a result, drive up student ridership. It was a timely visit, as a few weeks earlier I had asked STN contributor Michelle Fisher to ask around
Solving the Ridership Dilemma By Ryan Gray
the industry on how to best increase the number of student riders amid an economy that has schools cutting budgets at every corner, and transportation is often the first victim. NSTA President Donnie Fowler later told me that not as many senators had signed on as he would have liked to see, especially in his home state of Missouri. Ostensibly this was because they didn’t want to be seen in this election year and this economy as funding a new program, despite the fact the campaign would be funded by existing DOT money. Still, in the end, NSTA received enough House and Senate signatures to proceed. Yet, how to truly increase the number of children transported via yellow bus seems to be the $64
million question of the year. Tere are many ideas, suggestions and recommendations I’ve heard and read. Several are contained in this issue, such as in Fisher’s piece on page 28. By late April, a riveting report came across my desk that shed further light on why more kids
need to be on buses, an issue that behooves the industry to take notice. A year ago this month, the National Research Council and the Institute of Medicine, two of the National Academies of Science, held a workshop on student mobility. It was formed to study the impact of socioeconomics on the ability of urban and rural school children to get to and from school and how that affects their education. For several years, some in the industry have called on their peers to think of transporta- tion as an educational support activity rather than simply a logistical albeit extremely safe one. STN advisor Pete Meslin of Newport-Mesa Unified School District makes just such a plea this month in his “Analysis” opinion piece. Tat same evening, a NBC Nightly News report profiled school bus driver Rosemary Peterson in
Bradenton, Fla., who is “Making a Difference” by requiring her students to read a book during the bus ride and to then turn in a book report. Many of the kids are from single-parent households or are latch-key kids. Te results have been tremendous, as educators view the school bus as an invalu- able tool that is helping them teach — and reach — their students. Te industry can make the case to retain if not expand transportation services by using school
buses as a way to ensure educational quality and to provide stability and a least-restrictive envi- ronment to a different set of students with special needs. As the National Academies of Science workshop highlights, these students, often as young as 8 years old, are often the ones forced to move multiple times during their primary or secondary education career. Many can be considered homeless under federal law. Indeed, the report states: “…there are many opportunities for the fed- eral government to offer practical assistance. For example many school districts have struggled to provide the transportation that can make it possible for homeless and transient young people to stay enrolled at the original school. Lack of adequate funding for this frequently large expense, as well as administrative and other obstacles to transporting children within or across districts can be a daunting problem.” David Johns of the late Sen. Edward Kennedy’s office told the workshop attendees last June that
flexibility in Title I regulations and other federal infrastructure and transportation programs, “may provide means of supporting districts facing this problem.” Talk about an “ah-ha” moment. Many have said over the past few years that, if the industry is not careful, school busing nation-
wide could soon be relegated only to a related service for students with disabilities or Head Start. Perhaps. But, certainly many kids in more rural locales or in poorer neighborhoods rely on school busing as their only way of getting to and from school and must be actively pursued as riders. For this very reason, legislation in Utah was soundly defeated this spring because it would have cut all high school transportation, especially for kids in rural areas with no other way of getting to school. So, as the industry digs in its nails, clinging to what it fears could be the last vestige of its current self, options and alternatives do remain, that is, if the industry chooses to seek them out. And those options and alternatives squarely fall in the realm of doing everything in the collective power to support educational programs. It truly is not just about safety anymore but about access, equality, efficiency and proficiency. ■
12 School Transportation News Magazine June 2010
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60