Tought Leader
Questioning the Adequacy of Special Needs Bus Driver, Attendant Training
WRITTEN BY LINDA F. BLUTH, ED.D. A
preponderance of recent negative newspaper articles about school bus drivers and atten- dants responsible for transporting children with special needs and disabilities sparked
my curiosity about the adequacy of driver and attendant training for these children. In addition, my involvement as an expert witness for over two decades has identified numerous systemic weaknesses in driver and attendant training regarding the complexity of challenging special needs and disabilities. At this time, it is reasonable to question if states and school districts are taking into consideration the significant individual challenges associated with trans- porting children with special needs and disabilities prior to designing and implementing driver and attendant training programs. On this subject matter, I was unable to locate state-by-state comprehensive comparative data and information about driver and attendant training requirements. Available on multiple state websites is information on driver and attendant training require- ments. However, driver and attendant information about transporting children with special needs and disabilities was not consistently available. Two federal statutes that address transportation
services for students with disabilities are the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. It is well recognized that special education programs and services could not occur without school buses, drivers and attendants. IDEA and Section 504, however, do not specifically
address the required training content for drivers and attendants. Tis matter is left up to the states. It is com- mon knowledge and well established that school districts are required to ensure that bus drivers and attendants are fully aware of each student with a disability that rides in a school bus, including the impact of a specific disability on their school bus ride. School bus drivers nationwide have repeatedly shared with me that they are not provided sufficient informa- tion about children on regular routes with a disability prior to an unforeseen incident occurring. Te knowl- edge of drivers and attendants about specific disabilities of children transported on both regular and special routes varies significantly from school district to school district. It is not uncommon for drivers and attendants to share that their districts cite confidentiality require-
26 School Transportation News • JULY 2017
ments as the reason for not sharing information. Tis erroneous belief on the part of school adminis- trators has resulted in multiple instances of unnecessary mistakes on the school bus. Drivers and attendants have a right to information required to provide a safe ride. Te U.S. Department of Education publica- tion, Joint Guidance on the Application of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) And the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) To Student Health Records, November 2008, establishes that there is no violation in sharing pertinent information. If there is a “legitimate” reason to share information, school districts should do so in order to provide safe transportation.
A beginning point to examine the adequacy of driver and attendant for serving children with special needs and disabilities is a review and comparison of multiple job descriptions for both drivers and attendants. For these positions there was a common core of job responsibilities noted. Te information is summarized in the chart on the next page. (See table on page 28.) After compiling and reviewing these lists, it became evident to me that there is a disconnect between these job descriptions and the complexity of the children requiring specialized transportation services in order to provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE) under IDEA. Te following are recommendations for consideration for improving driver and attendant knowledge and skills for transporting the children with special needs and disabilities.
1. Age-appropriate interventions for all children with special needs and disabilities
2. Appropriate communication with verbal and nonverbal children
3. Behavioral intervention strategies that are used and successful in the classroom
4. Emergency planning for the different special needs and disabilities
5. Evacuation planning and strategies for the different special needs and disabilities
6.
Information and training about the impact of specific
CELEBRATING25YEARS
Linda Bluth is a quality assurance and monitoring specialist for the Maryland State Department of Education as well as the chair of the NAPT Special Needs Committee and a Tenured Faculty emeritus member of the Transporting Students with Disabilities & Preschoolers National Conference. She may be contacted at lfbluth@
verizon.net
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 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68
