BBC breakfast: cycling to school



Peter Clinch wrote:

> John B wrote:
>
> > I think it is a move away from pupils having their 'own' desk at school where
> > they could store all their books. The result is they are forced to carry all
> > their books around with them. Some schools provide lockers, but not all, and
> > sometimes they are limited in supply.

>
> I never had such a thing once I was in secondary school. I did have a
> small locker, but I never used it much as it meant lots of faffing going
> to and fro, so I just carried my books with me. Unless things have
> changed a lot, school texts are not the size of the Britannica print
> version. It can be done.


Of course it can, but it is not always easy.

I had a traditional desk in the base classroom where everything was kept, so it
was mainly just only homework and library books that moved between school and
home.

Today my knee-high youngest daughter set off laden down.

Her rucksac usually has three or four books, packed lunch, bottle of drink, plus
papers, diary, pens and personal items.
Today it she also had to carry her Games Kit, so the boots were hanging on the
outside.
This was all backed up with a large carrier bag which contained a large biscuit
tin including flour, eggs, and other ingredients to make flapjacks. In the other
hand was her trumpet for her afterschool lesson.

The next daughter up set off with a similar rucksac with books, lunch and so on,
but also had an A1-Plus artcare folder containing all manner of graphics work. In
her other hand was a 'tool-box' containing paints, brushes, and all manner of
other art materials.

Both would have found it near impossible to ride a bike, indeed my youngest was
having difficulty even walking with her load.

It does seem to me that a lot more has to be carried these days. I used to carry
reasonable amount when I travelled to and from school, but it was nothing like the
youngsters now seem to need :-(

Perhaps all children should be issued with 8-Freights ;-)

John B
 
John B wrote:
> I once took the issue up of 'banned' cycling at a local school. Having got them
> to admit they coudn't enforce such a ruling, they then came back and said there
> was nowhere to store the bikes. i took great pleasure in showing them they
> actually had a bike shed.
> But that wasn't good enough either.
> They then argued they would need to insist on the pupils wearing helmets and they
> had no secure storage for them.
>


Asking what was their legal right to insist on helmet wearing halted
that in its tracks at our school.

> It made me want to scream.


You can probably hear me screaming as I wrote this:

http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/chrisg?entry=a_samll_step_forwards

The school was not being evil, just stupid. They have promised to
consult the cyclists (well me) before any new policy on cycling is written.

That excellent fact sheet will be making it's way to the school soon.

--chris
 
"Andy Leighton" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

>
> Ignoring the 4x4 issue - it appears that there are a few common issues.
>
> The weight of backpack. When I was at school we never carried anywhere
> near that weight (in fact I have only ever carried that kind of weight
> when going on an overnight backpack) - what has changed between then and
> now? Can things be changed so that children have to carry less weight?
> This is a general issue not just related to cycling.
>
> Nowhere secure to leave his wet clothes? What do they do with their big
> winter coats, hats, scarves and gloves? Do they carry them around all
> day?
> As far as I can see the only wet clothes he will have is a coat (which he
> will have anyway) and maybe some waterproof over-trousers (if well
> organised). The child will probably already be used to carrying around
> wet clothes anyway. We played rugby and hockey (football wasn't played at
> our school) and went on cross-country runs when it was pouring down. The
> kit ended up wet and muddy.


Often kids do have to carry stuff around all day. Gone are the days where
every school desk had a lid you lifted up to reveal cavernous interior for
the storage of books and *stuff* Gone are the days of every kid having a
coat hook with bench underneath and wire storage basket affir underneath for
the hanging up of PE kit, coats etc., etc. Many schools don't even have even
a *small* locker for every kid so stuff can be kept in during the day. When
Nathan was at high school, with no locker, no desk, no coat hook etc., his
teacher wouldn't even let him store his cycle helmet in the classroom
cupboard, so he ended up carrying that around all day too...

Cheers, helen s
 
John B wrote:
> Today my knee-high youngest daughter set off laden down.
>
> Her rucksac usually has three or four books, packed lunch, bottle of drink, plus
> papers, diary, pens and personal items.


If they are large textbooks that are not owned by the school, I am
seriously thinking of chopping them into smaller chunks and rebinding
them, soonly the appropriate section needs to be carried.
It seems eminently stupid to have to carry an entire GCSE course of
textbook everyday when one is only using a small part of it.

Then again, lugging all that lot round does give the kids some
exercise..

...d
 
Paul Weaver said the following on 27/06/2006 09:39:

> 2.5 miles, poor lamb. I used to *walk* that far to school. In the snow.


A while ago there was a case of a mother abusing her son. The abuse was
serious, and I think she ended up in jail. However, one of the "abuses"
listed was making the child walk a mile to school each day, reported in
such a way that it sounded like a heinous crime!

When I was a kid, all my schools seemed to be a mile or so from my
house, and I walked that on my own or with friends probably from the age
of 7, locking the front door as I left and letting myself in when I got
home. My psychiatrist tells me that it's done me no harm whatsoever :)

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/
 
On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:14:49 +0100 someone who may be Chris Gerhard
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>The school was not being evil, just stupid.


How do you know?

Even if they weren't, does it make a difference? Intentions are all
very well, but it is the result that really matters.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
 
>>The school was not being evil, just stupid.
>
> How do you know?
>
> Even if they weren't, does it make a difference? Intentions are all
> very well, but it is the result that really matters.


The stupid can be educated, the evil merely introduced to The Lighthouse
Family...
 
David Hansen wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:14:49 +0100 someone who may be Chris Gerhard
> <[email protected]> wrote this:-
>
>> The school was not being evil, just stupid.

>
> How do you know?
>


I know because I contacted them and know the parties involved.

> Even if they weren't, does it make a difference? Intentions are all
> very well, but it is the result that really matters.
>


It makes a difference in that if they were evil they would be harder to
persuade and it would have ended up as a confrontation.

The result if unchallenged would have been bad but that is why cyclists
should challenge things and stand up and be counted.

--chris
 
On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:40:20 +0100 someone who may be Chris Gerhard
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>>> The school was not being evil, just stupid. [snip]

>
>> Even if they weren't, does it make a difference? Intentions are all
>> very well, but it is the result that really matters.

>
>It makes a difference in that if they were evil they would be harder to
> persuade and it would have ended up as a confrontation.


You were lucky then. The stupid tend to be difficult to persuade,
because they are stupid.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
 
David Hansen wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:40:20 +0100 someone who may be Chris Gerhard
> <[email protected]> wrote this:-
>
>>>> The school was not being evil, just stupid. [snip]
>>> Even if they weren't, does it make a difference? Intentions are all
>>> very well, but it is the result that really matters.

>> It makes a difference in that if they were evil they would be harder to
>> persuade and it would have ended up as a confrontation.

>
> You were lucky then. The stupid tend to be difficult to persuade,
> because they are stupid.
>
>


That would still not make them evil. Just stupid.

--chris
 
Paul Weaver wrote:
> I used to *walk* that far to school. In the snow.
> Uphill. Both ways.


That was rough. I only had to walk 2 km but I had to split the firewood
and light the fire when I got there. It used to take the ink about 2
hours to thaw on a cold day.

John Kane, Kingston ON Canada
 
Chris Gerhard wrote:
> David Hansen wrote:
> > On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:40:20 +0100 someone who may be Chris Gerhard
> > <[email protected]> wrote this:-
> >
> >>>> The school was not being evil, just stupid. [snip]
> >>> Even if they weren't, does it make a difference? Intentions are all
> >>> very well, but it is the result that really matters.
> >> It makes a difference in that if they were evil they would be harder to
> >> persuade and it would have ended up as a confrontation.

> >
> > You were lucky then. The stupid tend to be difficult to persuade,
> > because they are stupid.
> >
> >

>
> That would still not make them evil. Just stupid.
>
> --chris

Perhaps 'ignorant' or "woefully uninformed' would be better? The
action might be 'stupid' but that does not mean the people are. In
fact, their willingness to reconsider probably means that they are
neither evil or stupid just misinformed or uninformed.

John Kane, Kingston ON Canada
 
John Kane wrote:
> Chris Gerhard wrote:
>> David Hansen wrote:
>>> On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:40:20 +0100 someone who may be Chris Gerhard
>>> <[email protected]> wrote this:-
>>>
>>>>>> The school was not being evil, just stupid. [snip]
>>>>> Even if they weren't, does it make a difference? Intentions are all
>>>>> very well, but it is the result that really matters.
>>>> It makes a difference in that if they were evil they would be harder to
>>>> persuade and it would have ended up as a confrontation.
>>> You were lucky then. The stupid tend to be difficult to persuade,
>>> because they are stupid.
>>>
>>>

>> That would still not make them evil. Just stupid.
>>
>> --chris

> Perhaps 'ignorant' or "woefully uninformed' would be better? The
> action might be 'stupid' but that does not mean the people are. In
> fact, their willingness to reconsider probably means that they are
> neither evil or stupid just misinformed or uninformed.


I think it is pretty stupid to put forward a policy that prevents the
one person who regularly cycles to the school with his children doing it.

Particularly as when the policy was discussed by the Governors one of
the Governors made that point and suggested that she bring it home to
show me which she did I wrote a new one for them which they some how
ignored.

--chris
 
On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:41:10 +0100 someone who may be Peter Clinch
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>> I think it is a move away from pupils having their 'own' desk at school where
>> they could store all their books. The result is they are forced to carry all
>> their books around with them. Some schools provide lockers, but not all, and
>> sometimes they are limited in supply.

>
>I never had such a thing once I was in secondary school.


Agreed. With the exception of the lower sixth I never had any sort
of locker at school and we could not leave books in desks either. We
carried them, no matter how we got to school. That included walking
six odd miles each way during the occasional bus strike. However, I
did usually use a fairly rural route on these occasions in order to
maximise the length of time spent crossing fields, crossing (by
bridge) the (heavily polluted by coal dust) river, walking lanes and
crossing the railways (by footpath crossings and a road level
crossing). No bright clothing, no helmet and never any great
problems, despite the "safety" mob of today being horrified by all
these activities.

Some decades before my mother and aunt walked across the top of a
weir (which feeds the docks via a large pipe) in order to cross the
same river, rather then use the bridge. I would certainly never have
done that.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
 
On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 17:01:25 +0100 someone who may be Chris Gerhard
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>> You were lucky then. The stupid tend to be difficult to persuade,
>> because they are stupid.

>
>That would still not make them evil. Just stupid.


As I pointed out earlier, the motivation is largely irrelevant.
Whether people are evil or stupid matters little, what matters are
their actions.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
 
David Hansen wrote on 27/06/2006 20:43 +0100:
>
> No bright clothing, no helmet and never any great
> problems, despite the "safety" mob of today being horrified by all
> these activities.
>


Outside our girls' sixth form college on Monday, none of the many
students leaving on bikes wore helmets or bright clothing (at least not
in the sense you meant it). But then it is Cambridge and cycling is a
normal activity.


--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci
 
Tony Raven wrote:

> David Hansen wrote on 27/06/2006 20:43 +0100:
> >
> > No bright clothing, no helmet and never any great
> > problems, despite the "safety" mob of today being horrified by all
> > these activities.
> >

>
> Outside our girls' sixth form college on Monday, none of the many
> students leaving on bikes wore helmets or bright clothing (at least not
> in the sense you meant it). But then it is Cambridge and cycling is a
> normal activity.


I have been talking to a parent today about yet another school that issues
a cycle permit to students who wish to arrive by bike.
To obtain the Permit they must jump through various hoops.

They must:
i) have a certificate to say they have undertaken recognised
cycle-training;
ii) agree to always wear a helmet;
iiii) maintain their bikes in good roadworthy condition.

They have 'helmet monitors' who stand outside the school gates and if no
helmet is seen the student has their Cycling Permit cancelled. Staff also
patrol the bike sheds to check brakes and so on.

What is so ridiculous is that many of the junior schools that feed into
the college do not provide cycle training and I doubt anyone is going
around checking the teacher's cars.

John B
 
In article <[email protected]>
John B <[email protected]> wrote:
<snip>
> Both would have found it near impossible to ride a bike, indeed my youngest was
> having difficulty even walking with her load.
>

A bike trailer would make her life much easier then ...
 
On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 22:35:55 +0100, John B <[email protected]>
wrote:

>I have been talking to a parent today about yet another school that issues
>a cycle permit to students who wish to arrive by bike.
>To obtain the Permit they must jump through various hoops.
>
>They must:
>i) have a certificate to say they have undertaken recognised
>cycle-training;
>ii) agree to always wear a helmet;
>iiii) maintain their bikes in good roadworthy condition.


We have no such ridiculous permits.

Children aged 3 - 11 cycle to school, either alone or with their
parents and leave their bikes in the sheds.

The only checking I've ever done is:
1. to count the number of bikes
2. that all bikes are locked - I put a lock on the 15 unlocked ones.
 
On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 22:35:55 +0100 someone who may be John B
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>I have been talking to a parent today about yet another school that issues
>a cycle permit to students who wish to arrive by bike.
>To obtain the Permit they must jump through various hoops.


You should ask them if they will only allow parents to drive
children to school if they have obtained a permit in a similar way.
If they don't then the school is not being stupid, it is being evil.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54