Primary School - no cars, they walk or cycle

[Geoff Lane]

I thought that I read an article a few days ago about a primary school who
achieved zero cars on the school run and all the children walk or cycle to
school. This wasn't in a sleepy rural hollow either - it was in a large
town or city. However, I haven't been able to find the article since. Has
anyone got a link to this? (I do hope I wasn't dreaming!)

--
Geoff

[Bob Johnstone[_2_]]

Geoff Lane wrote:
> I thought that I read an article a few days ago about a primary school who
> achieved zero cars on the school run and all the children walk or cycle to
> school. This wasn't in a sleepy rural hollow either - it was in a large
> town or city. However, I haven't been able to find the article since. Has
> anyone got a link to this? (I do hope I wasn't dreaming!)

It might be related to this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/factual/learningcurve.shtml

Bob

[Geoff Lane]

Bob Johnstone > wrote in news:Q25Ii.31785
:

> It might be related to this:
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/factual/learningcurve.shtml

That looks like it - thanks! The school quoted in that piece - New City
Primary School in Newham, East London - fits the bill very well and shows
that it can be done, even at primary school age.

Thanks again,

--
Geoff

[Richard Fairhurst]

On Sep 19, 12:11 pm, Geoff Lane > wrote:
> That looks like it - thanks! The school quoted in that piece - New City
> Primary School in Newham, East London - fits the bill very well and shows
> that it can be done, even at primary school age.

Sustrans has an excellent programme called 'Bike It' to encourage
cycling to school, principally in urban areas:

http://www.sustrans.org.uk/default.asp?sID=1102425335218

Richard

[Roger Merriman]

Geoff Lane > wrote:

> I thought that I read an article a few days ago about a primary school who
> achieved zero cars on the school run and all the children walk or cycle to
> school. This wasn't in a sleepy rural hollow either - it was in a large
> town or city. However, I haven't been able to find the article since. Has
> anyone got a link to this? (I do hope I wasn't dreaming!)

be easyer in a urban place, a rual school's catchment area will cover a
greater distance.

roger
--
www.rogermerriman.com

[JNugent[_2_]]

Geoff Lane wrote:

> I thought that I read an article a few days ago about a primary school who
> achieved zero cars on the school run and all the children walk or cycle to
> school.

What about the teachers?

[Marc Brett]

On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 17:49:51 +0100, JNugent
> wrote:

>Geoff Lane wrote:
>
>> I thought that I read an article a few days ago about a primary school who
>> achieved zero cars on the school run and all the children walk or cycle to
>> school.
>
>What about the teachers?

Don't you worry yerself, Mr. Nugent. There are still some people there
who, like you, cling to their automothingies.

[JNugent[_2_]]

Marc Brett wrote:

> JNugent > wrote:
>>Geoff Lane wrote:

>>>I thought that I read an article a few days ago about a primary school who
>>>achieved zero cars on the school run and all the children walk or cycle to
>>>school.

>>What about the teachers?

> Don't you worry yerself, Mr. Nugent. There are still some people there
> who, like you, cling to their automothingies.

It is teachers, other school staff and term-time parents released from
school-holiday-absence from their jobs who make most of the traffic
difference between term-time and holiday-time. That means that
castigating those involved in the "school run" is almost pointless.
The difference cannot be ironed out, even if some foolish people think
it can be.

[Marc Brett]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 00:28:33 +0100, JNugent
> wrote:

>Marc Brett wrote:
>
>> JNugent > wrote:
>>>Geoff Lane wrote:
>
>>>>I thought that I read an article a few days ago about a primary school who
>>>>achieved zero cars on the school run and all the children walk or cycle to
>>>>school.
>
>>>What about the teachers?
>
>> Don't you worry yerself, Mr. Nugent. There are still some people there
>> who, like you, cling to their automothingies.
>
>It is teachers, other school staff and term-time parents released from
>school-holiday-absence from their jobs who make most of the traffic
>difference between term-time and holiday-time.

An interesting assertion. References?

>That means that
>castigating those involved in the "school run" is almost pointless.
>The difference cannot be ironed out, even if some foolish people think
>it can be.

[JNugent[_2_]]

Marc Brett wrote:

> JNugent > wrote:
>>Marc Brett wrote:
>>>JNugent > wrote:
>>>>Geoff Lane wrote:

>>>>>I thought that I read an article a few days ago about a primary school who
>>>>>achieved zero cars on the school run and all the children walk or cycle to
>>>>>school.

>>>>What about the teachers?

>>>Don't you worry yerself, Mr. Nugent. There are still some people there
>>>who, like you, cling to their automothingies.

>>It is teachers, other school staff and term-time parents released from
>>school-holiday-absence from their jobs who make most of the traffic
>>difference between term-time and holiday-time.

> An interesting assertion. References?

Does it need proof?

Why else would it be that the traffic (in the SE at least) drops
noticeably during school holidays even well outside the "school run"
times? You can feel the difference at 06:45 and at 17:45, not just at
dropping-off and picking-up time.

Can you not see that all those people (as well as parents taking their
children taking to school - by whatever mode) travel in the rush hour
during term-time but do not do so during school holidays and half-term?

Surely your place of work must have several "term-time-only" workers?
I'd have thought most places have them in abundance nowadays. Not all
of them even need be physically taking their children to school, but
at least they aren't going to work.

>>That means that
>>castigating those involved in the "school run" is almost pointless.
>>The difference cannot be ironed out, even if some foolish people think
>>it can be.

[Paul Boyd]

JNugent said the following on 20/09/2007 09:02:

> Why else would it be that the traffic (in the SE at least) drops
> noticeably during school holidays even well outside the "school run"
> times? You can feel the difference at 06:45 and at 17:45, not just at
> dropping-off and picking-up time.

It isn't just the SE. Anyone who uses the roads just about anywhere in
the country will see the effect during school holidays for themselves.
It doesn't need some statisticians to spend time and money to come up
with what we can see with our own eyes.

Some people here seem to only accept things if some civil service
department somewhere has come up with a set of statistics, rather than
just opening their own eyes and seeing for themselves. The cry "Do you
have proof/references?" comes up on this group often (and only this
group, of all the various usenet and email groups I'm subscribed to).

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

[Paul - xxx (mobile)]

Geoff Lane wrote:
> I thought that I read an article a few days ago about a primary school who
> achieved zero cars on the school run and all the children walk or cycle to
> school. This wasn't in a sleepy rural hollow either - it was in a large
> town or city.

It'd have to be in an urban area.

My schools (I'm caretaker at both an Infants and Junior school) have
catchment areas that cover large areas of rural land with some pupils
travelling 11 miles.

Admittedly the majority travel less than three miles, but maybe 25/30%
travel more than five miles.

--
Paul - xxx (mobile)

[Andy Leighton]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:02:39 +0100,
JNugent > wrote:
> Marc Brett wrote:
>
>> JNugent > wrote:
>>>Marc Brett wrote:
>>>>JNugent > wrote:
>>>>>Geoff Lane wrote:
>
>>>>>>I thought that I read an article a few days ago about a primary school who
>>>>>>achieved zero cars on the school run and all the children walk or cycle to
>>>>>>school.
>
>>>>>What about the teachers?
>
>>>>Don't you worry yerself, Mr. Nugent. There are still some people there
>>>>who, like you, cling to their automothingies.
>
>>>It is teachers, other school staff and term-time parents released from
>>>school-holiday-absence from their jobs who make most of the traffic
>>>difference between term-time and holiday-time.
>
>> An interesting assertion. References?
>
> Does it need proof?
>
> Why else would it be that the traffic (in the SE at least) drops
> noticeably during school holidays even well outside the "school run"
> times? You can feel the difference at 06:45 and at 17:45, not just at
> dropping-off and picking-up time.
>
> Can you not see that all those people (as well as parents taking their
> children taking to school - by whatever mode) travel in the rush hour
> during term-time but do not do so during school holidays and half-term?

Hmm. Let us consider a primary school of say 300 pupils.

They would have 1 head, 1 admin person, at most 20 teachers and support
staff, maybe a few dinner ladies and a cleaner. Even if all those drove
it still wouldn't be that many. But still quite a problem if the school
has to provide parking places.

Or

A reasonable figure for pupils getting to school by car is 40% (although
some schools do very well and have a much lower figure). Obviously a small
proportion of those will be siblings. So I would say that would be
around 100 cars nearly all of which would be trying to access the same
road at approximately the same time.


I think it is obvious which is the worse problem for congestion. But
I would think that the school should also look at putting together a
travel plan for staff as well as pupils. It would help set a good
example for the kids if they see some of the teachers come in on bikes
or walk. In fact they may well have already done this - I don't know
and I guess you don't know either.

--
Andy Leighton =>
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

[Marc Brett]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:18:20 +0100, Paul Boyd <usenet.is.worse@plusnet>
wrote:

>JNugent said the following on 20/09/2007 09:02:
>
>> Why else would it be that the traffic (in the SE at least) drops
>> noticeably during school holidays even well outside the "school run"
>> times? You can feel the difference at 06:45 and at 17:45, not just at
>> dropping-off and picking-up time.
>
>It isn't just the SE. Anyone who uses the roads just about anywhere in
>the country will see the effect during school holidays for themselves.
>It doesn't need some statisticians to spend time and money to come up
>with what we can see with our own eyes.

There's no doubt about this. But is it the case that /most/ of the
increase in traffic in the morning commute is made up of this
population, and that school runs constitute only a minor proportion?
This is JN's assertion, which sounds extraordinary to me.

>Some people here seem to only accept things if some civil service
>department somewhere has come up with a set of statistics, rather than
>just opening their own eyes and seeing for themselves. The cry "Do you
>have proof/references?" comes up on this group often (and only this
>group, of all the various usenet and email groups I'm subscribed to).

Maybe this group has all too much experience in suffering the "common
sense" view that a certain cycling accessory (or facility) "obviously"
adds to safety, when detailed studies may well show the opposite.

[JNugent[_2_]]

Andy Leighton wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:02:39 +0100,
> JNugent > wrote:
>
>>Marc Brett wrote:
>>
>>
>>>JNugent > wrote:
>>>
>>>>Marc Brett wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>JNugent > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Geoff Lane wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>I thought that I read an article a few days ago about a primary school who
>>>>>>>achieved zero cars on the school run and all the children walk or cycle to
>>>>>>>school.
>>
>>>>>>What about the teachers?
>>
>>>>>Don't you worry yerself, Mr. Nugent. There are still some people there
>>>>>who, like you, cling to their automothingies.
>>
>>>>It is teachers, other school staff and term-time parents released from
>>>>school-holiday-absence from their jobs who make most of the traffic
>>>>difference between term-time and holiday-time.
>>
>>>An interesting assertion. References?
>>
>>Does it need proof?
>>
>>Why else would it be that the traffic (in the SE at least) drops
>>noticeably during school holidays even well outside the "school run"
>>times? You can feel the difference at 06:45 and at 17:45, not just at
>>dropping-off and picking-up time.
>>
>>Can you not see that all those people (as well as parents taking their
>>children taking to school - by whatever mode) travel in the rush hour
>>during term-time but do not do so during school holidays and half-term?

> Hmm. Let us consider a primary school of say 300 pupils.

> They would have 1 head, 1 admin person, at most 20 teachers and support
> staff, maybe a few dinner ladies and a cleaner. Even if all those drove
> it still wouldn't be that many. But still quite a problem if the school
> has to provide parking places.

> Or

> A reasonable figure for pupils getting to school by car is 40% (although
> some schools do very well and have a much lower figure). Obviously a small
> proportion of those will be siblings. So I would say that would be
> around 100 cars nearly all of which would be trying to access the same
> road at approximately the same time.

But not at 07:00, at which time (on a weekday) even during half-term
in autumn, the traffic is noticeably lighter than it is at the same
time on, say, a Tuesday in early October. The same goes for 17:45 or
even (in the SE) 19:00. That part of the difference is caused by
parents not going to work at those times of the year - not by "the
school run" (which I admit is an easy target, but just not the correct
one). And it is that part of the difference which indicates that there
is something bigger than just the "school run" going on during
term-time. The effect is even bigger during the peak summer months
when hundreds of thousands are not at their desks for stretches of two
or three weeks at a time.

> I think it is obvious which is the worse problem for congestion. But
> I would think that the school should also look at putting together a
> travel plan for staff as well as pupils. It would help set a good
> example for the kids if they see some of the teachers come in on bikes
> or walk. In fact they may well have already done this - I don't know
> and I guess you don't know either.

You have forgotten those parents (mainly mothers) who, even though
they may rarely go near the school at all - perhaps their children
even walk or cycle to school - go to work during term-time and do not
go to work during school holidays. That's what makes the difference
outside the (rather narrow) "school run" times.

Making repeatable observations and drawing up hypotheses as to the
causes of observed phenomena is the best way of doing things,
followed, of course, by proper empirical research before making hasty
- but convenient - decisions about who or what is to "blame".

[MJ Ray]

Paul Boyd <usenet.is.worse@plusnet> wrote:
> It isn't just the SE. Anyone who uses the roads just about anywhere in
> the country will see the effect during school holidays for themselves.

Aye, back to gridlock in Worle High Street again yesterday at ten to four.
Noticeable increase in large SUVs and people carriers driven by women with
one or two child passengers.

> [...] The cry "Do you
> have proof/references?" comes up on this group often (and only this
> group, of all the various usenet and email groups I'm subscribed to).

Well, that's reasonable. The above isn't conclusive, but is suggestive,
so let's try a ban and measure the change.

Kewstoke traffic scheme consultation, next Monday, 3pm-9pm, Village Hall.

Regards,
--
MJ Ray http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html tel:+844-4437-237 -
Webmaster-developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder,
consumer and workers co-operative member http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ -
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/

[JNugent[_2_]]

Marc Brett wrote:

> Paul Boyd <usenet.is.worse@plusnet> wrote:
>>JNugent said the following on 20/09/2007 09:02:

>>>Why else would it be that the traffic (in the SE at least) drops
>>>noticeably during school holidays even well outside the "school run"
>>>times? You can feel the difference at 06:45 and at 17:45, not just at
>>>dropping-off and picking-up time.

>>It isn't just the SE. Anyone who uses the roads just about anywhere in
>>the country will see the effect during school holidays for themselves.
>>It doesn't need some statisticians to spend time and money to come up
>>with what we can see with our own eyes.

> There's no doubt about this. But is it the case that /most/ of the
> increase in traffic in the morning commute is made up of this
> population, and that school runs constitute only a minor proportion?
> This is JN's assertion, which sounds extraordinary to me.

Nothing extraordinary about it at all ("this population" including
parents who work term-time but not during school holidays). It is the
only hypothesis which fits the observed facts (see the reply to
another poster).

What else do you say could account for the traffic level differences
two hours (or more) away from school arrival and departure times, even
outside peak package holiday periods?

I don't think many of us believe that significant numbers of children
or teachers have a two hour driven-commute to school, so there has to
be another factor at work.

[Paul - xxx (mobile)]

Andy Leighton wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:02:39 +0100,
> JNugent > wrote:
>> Marc Brett wrote:
>>
>>> JNugent > wrote:
>>>> Marc Brett wrote:
>>>>> JNugent > wrote:
>>>>>> Geoff Lane wrote:
>>>>>>> I thought that I read an article a few days ago about a primary school who
>>>>>>> achieved zero cars on the school run and all the children walk or cycle to
>>>>>>> school.
>>>>>> What about the teachers?
>>>>> Don't you worry yerself, Mr. Nugent. There are still some people there
>>>>> who, like you, cling to their automothingies.
>>>> It is teachers, other school staff and term-time parents released from
>>>> school-holiday-absence from their jobs who make most of the traffic
>>>> difference between term-time and holiday-time.
>>> An interesting assertion. References?
>> Does it need proof?
>>
>> Why else would it be that the traffic (in the SE at least) drops
>> noticeably during school holidays even well outside the "school run"
>> times? You can feel the difference at 06:45 and at 17:45, not just at
>> dropping-off and picking-up time.
>>
>> Can you not see that all those people (as well as parents taking their
>> children taking to school - by whatever mode) travel in the rush hour
>> during term-time but do not do so during school holidays and half-term?
>
> Hmm. Let us consider a primary school of say 300 pupils.
>
> They would have 1 head, 1 admin person, at most 20 teachers and support
> staff, maybe a few dinner ladies and a cleaner. Even if all those drove
> it still wouldn't be that many. But still quite a problem if the school
> has to provide parking places.

As an example take my Junior school. 297 pupils, I head, 2 admin, 9
class teachers, 23 LSA/School support staff, 1 SEN, 6 lunch supervisors,
5 kitchen staff inc cook, 5 cleaning staff, 1 caretaker(me). Some of
whom are part-time and not all work at the same time.

Out of all those only four walk to work, yet only two live more than 3
miles away. 3 use bicycles. The rest use their cars, none car-share.
All teachers, admin staff and LSA's use their cars.

Similarly at my Infant school, 275 pupils, 1 head, 2 admin, 10 class
teachers, dunno exactly LSA's etc as it changes frequently but the
school 'staff picture board' has 49 people on it, including me.

Only six walk to work (inc. me), six live more than five miles away, 2
cycle. Rest use cars, only two car-share. Again, all the teachers and
admin staff and most LSA's use their own cars. In addition there's a
Playgroup which has 4 staff, all of whom drive and a Nursery with 7
staff, 1 of whom cycles the rest drive.

* We did a study last year of just this problem as it's exascerbated for
us by having two schools on the same school field area, and accessed
'around the corner' from each other. It was noted that those most
highly paid staff (Teachers) were the only section to solely use cars,
and were the ones most unlikely to give them up, whatever the
alternative offered.

> A reasonable figure for pupils getting to school by car is 40% (although
> some schools do very well and have a much lower figure). Obviously a small
> proportion of those will be siblings. So I would say that would be
> around 100 cars nearly all of which would be trying to access the same
> road at approximately the same time.
>
> I think it is obvious which is the worse problem for congestion. But
> I would think that the school should also look at putting together a
> travel plan for staff as well as pupils. It would help set a good
> example for the kids if they see some of the teachers come in on bikes
> or walk. In fact they may well have already done this - I don't know
> and I guess you don't know either.

Teachers, it was noted, are almost desperate NOT to have to give up
their cars, however good an example it might set. The cleaners and
kitchen staff are the opnly people who use bikes to get to school.
Indeed, Teachers wouldn't even consider giving up their cars. All the
LSA's said they'd consider walking/cycling, with various reasons
(weather, convenience, fitness) being cited both for and against it.

Our big concern recently is that we're shortly to have a 'Community
Health Centre' built which will take up some (more) of the school
grounds, but the architects have promised more car-parking area too ....
We currently use a fair proportion of one side of the school fields for
car-parking. It's a quagmire in winter and I regularly have to bring my
Land-rover to pull cars/delivery trucks out.

Empirical numbers I know, but I think indicative of the problems faced
when trying to educate people into not using their cars. In this case
the educators (teachers) simply don't see any benefits. Indeed when
asked for a benefit/problem balance, they came up with so many problems
with not using their cars it was felt and agreed that the _BEST_
solution was to increase car-parking for staff and make the
entrance/exit gates wider. (We have problems with the gateposts
constantly being hit by female members of staff who have problems
fitting their cars through the gap!)

We are getting a 20 mph limit imposed on all the streets in the area of
the schools, and there are soon to be 'residents only' signs going up on
the most adjacent streets as parental parking is a major problem.
Indeed we close the school gates at 8.20 each moring and 3.15 each
afternoon so parents can't use the car parks to turn around in or drop
their kids off.

--
Paul - xxx (mobile)

[Andy Leighton]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 10:31:56 +0100,
Paul - xxx (mobile) > wrote:
>>
>> I think it is obvious which is the worse problem for congestion. But
>> I would think that the school should also look at putting together a
>> travel plan for staff as well as pupils. It would help set a good
>> example for the kids if they see some of the teachers come in on bikes
>> or walk. In fact they may well have already done this - I don't know
>> and I guess you don't know either.
>
> Teachers, it was noted, are almost desperate NOT to have to give up
> their cars, however good an example it might set. The cleaners and
> kitchen staff are the opnly people who use bikes to get to school.
> Indeed, Teachers wouldn't even consider giving up their cars. All the
> LSA's said they'd consider walking/cycling, with various reasons
> (weather, convenience, fitness) being cited both for and against it.

I think that is quite depressing really. People aren't asking for
everyone to walk or cycle all the time or indeed that it will be
suitable for everyone. But people who don't even consider walking
or cycling a couple of miles seems to be a result of the car being
seen as a status symbol.

I remember when I was at school (much smaller than yours) in the 70s
there were very few teachers who drove in - partly because they wasn't
any parking at the school. As I walk past the same school today there
is a carpark which is full of about 10 cars.

--
Andy Leighton =>
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

[David Lloyd]

On 20 Sep, 09:02, JNugent >
wrote:
> Marc Brett wrote:
> > JNugent > wrote:
> >>Marc Brett wrote:
> >>>JNugent > wrote:
> >>>>Geoff Lane wrote:
> >>>>>I thought that I read an article a few days ago about a primary school who
> >>>>>achieved zero cars on the school run and all the children walk or cycle to
> >>>>>school.
> >>>>What about the teachers?
> >>>Don't you worry yerself, Mr. Nugent. There are still some people there
> >>>who, like you, cling to their automothingies.
> >>It is teachers, other school staff and term-time parents released from
> >>school-holiday-absence from their jobs who make most of the traffic
> >>difference between term-time and holiday-time.
> > An interesting assertion. References?
>
> Does it need proof?
>
> Why else would it be that the traffic (in the SE at least) drops
> noticeably during school holidays even well outside the "school run"
> times? You can feel the difference at 06:45 and at 17:45, not just at
> dropping-off and picking-up time.
>
> Can you not see that all those people (as well as parents taking their
> children taking to school - by whatever mode) travel in the rush hour
> during term-time but do not do so during school holidays and half-term?
>
> Surely your place of work must have several "term-time-only" workers?
> I'd have thought most places have them in abundance nowadays. Not all
> of them even need be physically taking their children to school, but
> at least they aren't going to work.
>
>
>
> >>That means that
> >>castigating those involved in the "school run" is almost pointless.
> >>The difference cannot be ironed out, even if some foolish people think
> >>it can be.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

When the schools are off, it is not just the motorised traffic
associated with the schools that drops, it is the foot traffic aswell.
With the removal of school crossing patrols and the kids who use other
pedestrian crossings in the area, the other traffic that would usually
be delayed around schools is able to flow more freely.

David Lloyd (at work)

[Paul - xxx[_2_]]

Andy Leighton wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 10:31:56 +0100,
> Paul - xxx (mobile) > wrote:
>>> I think it is obvious which is the worse problem for congestion. But
>>> I would think that the school should also look at putting together a
>>> travel plan for staff as well as pupils. It would help set a good
>>> example for the kids if they see some of the teachers come in on bikes
>>> or walk. In fact they may well have already done this - I don't know
>>> and I guess you don't know either.
>> Teachers, it was noted, are almost desperate NOT to have to give up
>> their cars, however good an example it might set. The cleaners and
>> kitchen staff are the opnly people who use bikes to get to school.
>> Indeed, Teachers wouldn't even consider giving up their cars. All the
>> LSA's said they'd consider walking/cycling, with various reasons
>> (weather, convenience, fitness) being cited both for and against it.
>
> I think that is quite depressing really. People aren't asking for
> everyone to walk or cycle all the time or indeed that it will be
> suitable for everyone. But people who don't even consider walking
> or cycling a couple of miles seems to be a result of the car being
> seen as a status symbol.

Wouldn't be so bad if they gave each other lifts, or did a car pool
thing maybe, which was suggested, but no, they all come in their own cars.

> I remember when I was at school (much smaller than yours) in the 70s
> there were very few teachers who drove in - partly because they wasn't
> any parking at the school. As I walk past the same school today there
> is a carpark which is full of about 10 cars.

If we have 10 cars, the car park's empty.

--
Paul - xxx

[Clive George]

"Andy Leighton" > wrote in message
...

> I think that is quite depressing really. People aren't asking for
> everyone to walk or cycle all the time or indeed that it will be
> suitable for everyone. But people who don't even consider walking
> or cycling a couple of miles seems to be a result of the car being
> seen as a status symbol.

In the case of teachers, I'm not so sure about it being a status symbol, but
rather that "It's the done thing". "Need to carry xx books home for marking"
is the normal reason given, and I reckon this might have translated into a
general understanding that a car is "necessary".

Of course there's plenty of people like Tom giving the lie to this, but
they're very much a minority - possibly even seen as a strange and/or
superheroic one. ("he can do it, but I can't since I'm not as good as him")

cheers,
clive

[Andy Leighton]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 12:53:36 +0100,
Clive George > wrote:
> "Andy Leighton" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> I think that is quite depressing really. People aren't asking for
>> everyone to walk or cycle all the time or indeed that it will be
>> suitable for everyone. But people who don't even consider walking
>> or cycling a couple of miles seems to be a result of the car being
>> seen as a status symbol.
>
> In the case of teachers, I'm not so sure about it being a status symbol, but
> rather that "It's the done thing". "Need to carry xx books home for marking"
> is the normal reason given, and I reckon this might have translated into a
> general understanding that a car is "necessary".

That's not the case for infants though is it? My nephews don't do lots
of work which is marked outside of school. Even in juniors they
generally don't take in lots of homework every day - but even if they
did twenty school exercise books is hardly a massive load to carry.

--
Andy Leighton =>
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

[Clive George]

"Andy Leighton" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 12:53:36 +0100,
> Clive George > wrote:
>> "Andy Leighton" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>> I think that is quite depressing really. People aren't asking for
>>> everyone to walk or cycle all the time or indeed that it will be
>>> suitable for everyone. But people who don't even consider walking
>>> or cycling a couple of miles seems to be a result of the car being
>>> seen as a status symbol.
>>
>> In the case of teachers, I'm not so sure about it being a status symbol,
>> but
>> rather that "It's the done thing". "Need to carry xx books home for
>> marking"
>> is the normal reason given, and I reckon this might have translated into
>> a
>> general understanding that a car is "necessary".
>
> That's not the case for infants though is it? My nephews don't do lots
> of work which is marked outside of school. Even in juniors they
> generally don't take in lots of homework every day - but even if they
> did twenty school exercise books is hardly a massive load to carry.

Bet you'll find similar rationalisations though.

I know teachers who cycle. It's obviously possible, but it's not percieved
as being so. Note I did put "necessary" in quotes - I don't actually believe
it.

cheers,
clive

[[email protected]]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:57:50 +0100, JNugent
> wrote:

>Marc Brett wrote:
>
>> Paul Boyd <usenet.is.worse@plusnet> wrote:
>>>JNugent said the following on 20/09/2007 09:02:
>
>
>Nothing extraordinary about it at all ("this population" including
>parents who work term-time but not during school holidays). It is the
>only hypothesis which fits the observed facts (see the reply to
>another poster).
>
>What else do you say could account for the traffic level differences
>two hours (or more) away from school arrival and departure times, even
>outside peak package holiday periods?
>

In my office lots of full time staff take leave during school holidays
to be with their children. I would suggest that the number of people
on leave at any one time is greater during school holidays.

ME

[[email protected]]

On Sep 20, 2:06 pm, Andy Leighton > wrote:
> That's not the case for infants though is it? My nephews don't do lots
> of work which is marked outside of school. Even in juniors they
> generally don't take in lots of homework every day - but even if they
> did twenty school exercise books is hardly a massive load to carry.
>

More like a hundred exercise books, the class will be 30+ and there'll
be an english book, a maths book, a science book, probably more, plus
card, paper etc to make the flash cards/work sheets etc for the
following days lessons.

I think it might have changed now but when my parents were teaching,
infant teachers got no time to do any of this so it all got done at
home (or they would work late at the school).

Additionally, infant teachers never sit down, they're continually
moving from desk to desk and bending down to desks that are really
much too low so being able to relax into a comfy chair in a car at the
end of the day rather than spend more time hunched over a bike is
going to be hard to sell unless they are already very keen cyclists.
(Actually I'm amazed infant school teachers don't have more back
problems than they appear to do)

Tim.

[Andy Leighton]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 08:29:15 -0700,
> wrote:
> On Sep 20, 2:06 pm, Andy Leighton > wrote:
>> That's not the case for infants though is it? My nephews don't do lots
>> of work which is marked outside of school. Even in juniors they
>> generally don't take in lots of homework every day - but even if they
>> did twenty school exercise books is hardly a massive load to carry.
>>
>
> More like a hundred exercise books, the class will be 30+ and there'll
> be an english book, a maths book, a science book, probably more, plus
> card, paper etc to make the flash cards/work sheets etc for the
> following days lessons.

They set homework in all of those areas to be done all together and
marked together? Doesn't sound very organised. I am not doubting
that at some times a teacher will be ferrying raw materials back to
home, or completed stuff back to school but I do doubt that they will
need to do that every single work day.

> Additionally, infant teachers never sit down, they're continually
> moving from desk to desk and bending down to desks that are really
> much too low so being able to relax into a comfy chair in a car at the
> end of the day rather than spend more time hunched over a bike

Hunched over a bike? Choose the right bike and you don't hunch over
the handlebars.

--
Andy Leighton =>
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

[Ekul Namsob]

Andy Leighton > wrote:

> On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 08:29:15 -0700,
> > wrote:
> > On Sep 20, 2:06 pm, Andy Leighton > wrote:
> >> That's not the case for infants though is it? My nephews don't do lots
> >> of work which is marked outside of school. Even in juniors they
> >> generally don't take in lots of homework every day - but even if they
> >> did twenty school exercise books is hardly a massive load to carry.

> > More like a hundred exercise books, the class will be 30+ and there'll
> > be an english book, a maths book, a science book, probably more, plus
> > card, paper etc to make the flash cards/work sheets etc for the
> > following days lessons.
>
> They set homework in all of those areas to be done all together and
> marked together? Doesn't sound very organised.

Students expect their classwork to be marked too.

> I am not doubting
> that at some times a teacher will be ferrying raw materials back to
> home, or completed stuff back to school but I do doubt that they will
> need to do that every single work day.

One reason why school teachers get long holidays is that they have a
tendency to work exceedingly hard during term time.

Secondary school teachers like me have it easy, IMHO, compared to those
in primary schools. Although all teachers now have the contractual right
to 10% PPA (Planning, Preparation and Assessment) time during the
timetabled school day, it is not possible for any dedicated teacher whom
I have ever met to complete all the necessary PPA during school hours.

Many of us have kids and therefore need to leave school in time to pick
them up from school. It is in the nature of schools that they tend not
to be very accessible by public transport. This is one reason why school
buses are common.

It takes me 20 minutes, on a slow day, to get to school by car. On a
good day, I would still be on the bus to the railway station, from where
I would need to catch two trains if I used public transport. My school
is in the unusual situation of being in the town centre. Primary schools
tends to be sited in far more obviously residential areas than secondary
schools and a lot of good teachers cannot afford to live within easy
walking or, even, cycling distance of the good schools.

Cheers,
Luke

--
Red Rose Ramblings, the diary of an Essex boy in
exile in Lancashire <http://www.shrimper.org.uk>

[Tom Crispin]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:57:50 +0100, JNugent
> wrote:

>Nothing extraordinary about it at all ("this population" including
>parents who work term-time but not during school holidays). It is the
>only hypothesis which fits the observed facts (see the reply to
>another poster).
>
>What else do you say could account for the traffic level differences
>two hours (or more) away from school arrival and departure times, even
>outside peak package holiday periods?
>
>I don't think many of us believe that significant numbers of children
>or teachers have a two hour driven-commute to school, so there has to
>be another factor at work.

I am the travel plan champion at a large primary school in SE London.
I run a similar cycle training scheme to Liz Bowgett at New City
Primary School, though Liz runs a far more relaxed and less formal
scheme than mine and is more involved with walking initiatives. I
know Liz very well and have spent some time with her at New City.

Our pupils start to arrive for breakfast clubs from 7.30am, and
continue to arrive until 9am when school starts. The infants leave
school at 3.15pm, the juniors at 3.20pm, though many pupils take part
in extra curricula activities which may finish at 4.30pm, 5pm, 5.30pm
or 6pm. There is also an after school club and pupils attending may
be collected anytime between 3.30pm and 6pm.

In other words, not all pupils arrive at 9am and not all pupils go
home at 3.30pm. In secondary schools, the school day may be even more
staggered.

During my time as school travel plan champion there has been a modal
shift in the way pupils travel to school.

2004
Walk 58%
Driven 33%
Public transport 8%
Cycle 1%

2007
Walk 43%
Cycle 28%
Driven 19%
Public transport 10%

There has been no significant shift in the mode of transport for the
staff. But while 98% of our pupils live within 2 miles of the school,
only 50% of staff live within 2 miles.

[Tom Crispin]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 13:06:43 -0000, Andy Leighton
> wrote:

>On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 12:53:36 +0100,
> Clive George > wrote:
>> "Andy Leighton" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>> I think that is quite depressing really. People aren't asking for
>>> everyone to walk or cycle all the time or indeed that it will be
>>> suitable for everyone. But people who don't even consider walking
>>> or cycling a couple of miles seems to be a result of the car being
>>> seen as a status symbol.
>>
>> In the case of teachers, I'm not so sure about it being a status symbol, but
>> rather that "It's the done thing". "Need to carry xx books home for marking"
>> is the normal reason given, and I reckon this might have translated into a
>> general understanding that a car is "necessary".
>
>That's not the case for infants though is it? My nephews don't do lots
>of work which is marked outside of school. Even in juniors they
>generally don't take in lots of homework every day - but even if they
>did twenty school exercise books is hardly a massive load to carry.

20 books!?

More like:-
30 A4 English books,
32 C5 Maths books,
30 C4 Science folders.

They fill 2 Ortlieb panniers and make me go down hills like a bat out
of hell!

[Andy Leighton]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 20:50:40 +0100,
Tom Crispin > wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 13:06:43 -0000, Andy Leighton
> wrote:
>>That's not the case for infants though is it? My nephews don't do lots
>>of work which is marked outside of school. Even in juniors they
>>generally don't take in lots of homework every day - but even if they
>>did twenty school exercise books is hardly a massive load to carry.
>
> 20 books!?
>
> More like:-
> 30 A4 English books,
> 32 C5 Maths books,
> 30 C4 Science folders.
>
> They fill 2 Ortlieb panniers and make me go down hills like a bat out
> of hell!

Well it has all changed since my day then. We had thin A5 exercise
books and handed stuff homework in on loose-leaf sheets.

--
Andy Leighton =>
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

[Dave Larrington]

In ups.com,
> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to
tell us:

> Additionally, infant teachers never sit down, they're continually
> moving from desk to desk and bending down to desks that are really
> much too low so being able to relax into a comfy chair in a car at the
> end of the day rather than spend more time hunched over a bike is
> going to be hard to sell unless they are already very keen cyclists.


Subsidised recumbents for infant teachers.

Problem solved :-)

--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
Although the hippopotamus hath no sting in its tail, the wise
man would rather be seated upon the back of a bee.

[JNugent[_2_]]

wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:57:50 +0100, JNugent
> > wrote:
>
>
>>Marc Brett wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Paul Boyd <usenet.is.worse@plusnet> wrote:
>>>
>>>>JNugent said the following on 20/09/2007 09:02:
>>
>>
>>Nothing extraordinary about it at all ("this population" including
>>parents who work term-time but not during school holidays). It is the
>>only hypothesis which fits the observed facts (see the reply to
>>another poster).
>>
>>What else do you say could account for the traffic level differences
>>two hours (or more) away from school arrival and departure times, even
>>outside peak package holiday periods?
>>
>
>
> In my office lots of full time staff take leave during school holidays
> to be with their children. I would suggest that the number of people
> on leave at any one time is greater during school holidays.
>
> ME

And that is another factor.