OT: Astonishing report from DfT

[Just Zis Guy]

I've just been notified about this report on the DfT website, 'Bringing children into the social
contract of road use' (DfT April 2003) - see http://tinyurl.com/w95d

My correspondent comments: "It is based around the premise that children aged between 5 and 8 should
be 'trained' in things like 'understanding of a driver's psychological limitations (reaction time,
attention, etc)' by the use of a 12 page booklet. But what is this 'social contract of road use',
and whose children have signed up to it?"

Here's a choice quote:

'The idea that the traffic flow may be too complex/too swift for one's skills, and that it is
appropriate to give up in such circumstances, is arguably the critical idea which the young should
be taught. Anecdotal evidence (supported by pilot work) suggests that the young may try to use
traffic skills, but when these fail, may go ahead with the crossing ("*then I shut my eyes and hope
for the best", as one 12-year-old put it * Thornton, 1998). Stopping such behaviour is essential.'

It seems that official policy is to defer to the car - no surprise there. No doubt there is a
similar booklet underway telling us cyclists that the solution to speeding traffic is for us to get
off the roads.

--
Guy http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk "Sic hoc adfixum in obice legere potes, et liberaliter
educatus et nimis propinquus ades"

 

[Dave]

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I've just been notified about this report on the DfT website, 'Bringing children into the social
> contract of road use' (DfT April 2003) - see http://tinyurl.com/w95d
>
> My correspondent comments: "It is based around the premise that children aged between 5 and 8
> should be 'trained' in things like 'understanding of
a
> driver's psychological limitations (reaction time, attention, etc)' by
the
> use of a 12 page booklet. But what is this 'social contract of road use', and whose children have
> signed up to it?"
>
> Here's a choice quote:
>
> 'The idea that the traffic flow may be too complex/too swift for one's skills, and that it is
> appropriate to give up in such circumstances, is arguably the critical idea which the young should
> be taught. Anecdotal evidence (supported by pilot work) suggests that the young may try to use
> traffic skills, but when these fail, may go ahead with the crossing
("*then
> I shut my eyes and hope for the best", as one 12-year-old put it * Thornton, 1998). Stopping such
> behaviour is essential.'
>
> It seems that official policy is to defer to the car - no surprise there. No doubt there is a
> similar booklet underway telling us cyclists that the solution to speeding traffic is for us to
> get off the roads.
>
> --
> Guy http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk "Sic hoc adfixum in obice legere potes, et liberaliter
> educatus et nimis propinquus ades"

I'm going for a job with a local council as 'Walking Officer'. I believe the point of this role is
to liase with schools to ensure that children are educated in 'the ways of the road'...oh how times
have changed. I mentioned in the job application that I've been practising for 42 years (no, I
didn't really but wish I had ;-) and that my time spent on my bicycle keeps me in touch with both
the very real and perceived dangers out there. Dave.

 

[-Lsqnot Respond]

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 09:43:15 +0000, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote:

>I've just been notified about this report on the DfT website, 'Bringing children into the social
>contract of road use' (DfT April 2003) - see http://tinyurl.com/w95d
>
>My correspondent comments: "It is based around the premise that children aged between 5 and 8
>should be 'trained' in things like 'understanding of a driver's psychological limitations (reaction
>time, attention, etc)' by the use of a 12 page booklet. But what is this 'social contract of road
>use', and whose children have signed up to it?"
>
>Here's a choice quote:
>
>'The idea that the traffic flow may be too complex/too swift for one's skills, and that it is
>appropriate to give up in such circumstances, is arguably the critical idea which the young should
>be taught. Anecdotal evidence (supported by pilot work) suggests that the young may try to use
>traffic skills, but when these fail, may go ahead with the crossing ("*then I shut my eyes and hope
>for the best", as one 12-year-old put it * Thornton, 1998). Stopping such behaviour is essential.'
>
>It seems that official policy is to defer to the car - no surprise there. No doubt there is a
>similar booklet underway telling us cyclists that the solution to speeding traffic is for us to get
>off the roads.

I think it's on the basis of this (or at least similar) document that Hants CC have virtually
banned cycling to primary schools. The guidance for school travel (available on the web) is pretty
strong against primary age children cycling. It would take a brave headmaster to go against the
guidance I suspect.

A Chairman of Governers I know was appalled [well, dismissive at least] when I suggested he include
cycling in the travel plan he was writing.

 

[Rifleman]

"Dave" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> keeps me in touch with both the very real and perceived dangers out there. Dave.
>
>
>

You've put the problem in a nutshell - "Real" and "perceived" danger. For example - they did a
survey some years ago as to the VAST numbers of parents who drove their children through Kings Cross
to school because of the "perceived" danger - when in fact at school opening and closing times, the
incidence of crimes committed in Kings Cross are actually some of the lowest in the country!

 

[Just Zis Guy]

[Not Responding] wrote:

> I think it's on the basis of this (or at least similar) document that Hants CC have virtually
> banned cycling to primary schools. The guidance for school travel (available on the web) is pretty
> strong against primary age children cycling.

Despite the fact that they may not legally restrict the mode of transport used by any child, and
this policy is counter to Government guidelines. Oxfordshire is moving away from this policy.

> A Chairman of Governers I know was appalled [well, dismissive at least] when I suggested he
> include cycling in the travel plan he was writing.

I am a governor writing a travel plan ;-)

--
Guy http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk "Sic hoc adfixum in obice legere potes, et liberaliter
educatus et nimis propinquus ades"

 

[-Lsqnot Respond]

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 19:09:07 +0000, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote:

>[Not Responding] wrote:
>
>> I think it's on the basis of this (or at least similar) document that Hants CC have virtually
>> banned cycling to primary schools. The guidance for school travel (available on the web) is
>> pretty strong against primary age children cycling.
>
>Despite the fact that they may not legally restrict the mode of transport used by any child, and
>this policy is counter to Government guidelines. Oxfordshire is moving away from this policy.

I would be interested if you could post a reference to whichever govt. guidelines specifically
addresses primary schools.

I'd also be keen to find out how Oxfordshire moved from one stance to the other.

>
>> A Chairman of Governers I know was appalled [well, dismissive at least] when I suggested he
>> include cycling in the travel plan he was writing.
>
>I am a governor writing a travel plan ;-)

 

[Dave]

"[Not Responding]" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 09:43:15 +0000, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >I've just been notified about this report on the DfT website, 'Bringing children into the social
> >contract of road use' (DfT April 2003) - see http://tinyurl.com/w95d
> >
> >My correspondent comments: "It is based around the premise that children aged between 5 and 8
> >should be 'trained' in things like 'understanding of
a
> >driver's psychological limitations (reaction time, attention, etc)' by
the
> >use of a 12 page booklet. But what is this 'social contract of road use', and whose children have
> >signed up to it?"
> >
> >Here's a choice quote:
> >
> >'The idea that the traffic flow may be too complex/too swift for one's skills, and that it is
> >appropriate to give up in such circumstances, is arguably the critical idea which the young
> >should be taught. Anecdotal evidence (supported by pilot work) suggests that the young may try to
> >use traffic skills, but when these fail, may go ahead with the crossing
("*then
> >I shut my eyes and hope for the best", as one 12-year-old put it * Thornton, 1998). Stopping such
> >behaviour is essential.'
> >
> >It seems that official policy is to defer to the car - no surprise there. No doubt there is a
> >similar booklet underway telling us cyclists that the solution to speeding traffic is for us to
> >get off the roads.
>
> I think it's on the basis of this (or at least similar) document that Hants CC have virtually
> banned cycling to primary schools. The guidance for school travel (available on the web) is pretty
> strong against primary age children cycling. It would take a brave headmaster to go against the
> guidance I suspect.
>
> A Chairman of Governers I know was appalled [well, dismissive at least] when I suggested he
> include cycling in the travel plan he was writing.

I think there's an underlying reason behind this lack of drive for schools to encourage cycling for
their children and it's this.... If every child took the initiative where would all the bikes be
parked during the school day?.... OK, that's a bit silly. Let's say half the kids take it up?...
Nope, still a bit silly.... a quarter ?...That could still easily be 100 bike parking spaces for a
primary and several hundred for a secondary. THEN there's the matter of security....who is
responsible when little Johnny's bike gets nicked / scratched / punctured / looked at in a strange
way etcetc. - who helps the little darlings if they get a puncture / the chain comes off / the
handle bars 'twizzle all the way round' etcetc.

Personally, I would love to see more folks on bikes and I would love to see it start from an early
age, however I think the reasons above are probably sufficient to deter most schools, unless of
course, they are lucky enough to have the likes of Guy on their board of guvs, who will be able to
raise and maintain the enthusiasm to drive the project through. Dave.
p.s. - thinking of starting a company that hires cycle storage and security out to schools so they
don't have to worry about it. Do you think it's worth it ?? - and if you do, no nicking it, 's
my idea ;-)

 

[Dave]

"rifleman" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> "Dave" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > keeps me in touch with both the very real and perceived dangers out
there.
> > Dave.
> >
> >
> >
>
> You've put the problem in a nutshell - "Real" and "perceived" danger. For example - they did a
> survey some years ago as to the VAST numbers of parents who drove their children through Kings
> Cross to school because of the "perceived" danger - when in fact at school opening and closing
> times, the incidence of crimes committed in Kings Cross are actually some of the lowest in the
> country!
>
>

Here's a thought....if we were to get the kids on their bikes, riding to school and their parents
had got nothing better to be doing, would they turn to crime?!!?.... Greatest argument for the
school run yet ;-) - keeps parents out of crime..

 

[Rifleman]

"Dave" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:AAJwb.8550$K%[email protected]...
>
> I think there's an underlying reason behind this lack of drive for schools to encourage cycling
> for their children and it's this.... If every child took the initiative where would all the bikes
> be parked during the school day?.... OK, that's a bit silly. Let's say half the kids take it
> up?... Nope, still a bit silly.... a quarter ?...That could still easily be 100 bike parking
> spaces for a primary and several hundred for a secondary. THEN there's the matter of
> security....who is responsible when little Johnny's bike gets nicked / scratched / punctured /
> looked at in a strange way etcetc. - who helps the little darlings if they get a puncture / the
> chain comes off / the handle bars 'twizzle all the way round' etcetc.

I can't seem to remember any of those problems cycling to school in the late 60's - but then most
people didn't have flash MTBs and there were a LOT more bikes around, so the need to steel them
wasn't as great....

 

[Just Zis Guy]

Dave wrote:

> I think there's an underlying reason behind this lack of drive for schools to encourage cycling
> for their children and it's this.... If every child took the initiative where would all the bikes
> be parked during the school day?....

Imagine how much worse it would be if everyone drove a car to work. Where would they put all the
cars during the day? Oh, wait....

> OK, that's a bit silly. Let's say half the kids take it up?... Nope, still a bit silly.... a
> quarter ?...That could still easily be 100 bike parking spaces for a primary and several hundred
> for a secondary.

At the rate of four bikes per Sheffield stand, costing £25 each, that's £625. How much does a
school car park cost to build & maintain?

> THEN there's the matter of security....who is responsible when little Johnny's bike gets nicked /
> scratched / punctured / looked at in a strange way etcetc.

Little Johnny. Try claiming from the school when Little Johnny gets his coat nicked and see how
far you get.

--
Guy http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk "Sic hoc adfixum in obice legere potes, et liberaliter
educatus et nimis propinquus ades"

 

[Just Zis Guy]

[Not Responding] wrote:

> I would be interested if you could post a reference to whichever govt. guidelines specifically
> addresses primary schools.

If you want the data for a particular purpose I would be inclined to email roger dot geffen at ctc
dot org dot uk, as the picture changes all the time.

Here's the document I'm reading at the moment:
<http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_localtrans/documents/page/dft_localtrans_504076-11.hcsp>

--
Guy http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk "Sic hoc adfixum in obice legere potes, et liberaliter
educatus et nimis propinquus ades"

 

[Dave]

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Dave wrote:
>
> > I think there's an underlying reason behind this lack of drive for
schools
> > to encourage cycling for their children and it's this.... If every child took the initiative
> > where would all the bikes be parked during the school day?....
>
> Imagine how much worse it would be if everyone drove a car to work. Where would they put all the
> cars during the day? Oh, wait....
>
> > OK, that's a bit silly. Let's say half the kids take it up?... Nope, still a bit silly.... a
> > quarter ?...That could still easily be 100 bike parking spaces for a primary and several hundred
> > for a secondary.
>
> At the rate of four bikes per Sheffield stand, costing £25 each, that's £625. How much does a
> school car park cost to build & maintain?
>
> > THEN there's the matter of security....who is responsible when little Johnny's bike gets nicked
> > / scratched / punctured / looked at in a
strange
> > way etcetc.
>
> Little Johnny. Try claiming from the school when Little Johnny gets his coat nicked and see how
> far you get.
>
> --
> Guy http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk "Sic hoc adfixum in obice legere potes, et liberaliter
> educatus et nimis propinquus ades"

All of which proves my point exactly ;-)....oh, hang on a sec., selective snipping..cheers Guy, I'm
on your side, just suggesting possible reasons behind lack of enthusiasm from schools, who, after
all, are only there to teach our children the curriculum <s? heh-heh> Dave

 

[David Hansen]

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 19:25:14 +0000 someone who may be "Just zis Guy, you know?"
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>Here's the document I'm reading at the moment: <http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_localtra-
>ns/documents/page/dft_localtrans_504076-11.hcsp>

I note that they drone on about, "Cycle permit schemes".

Perhaps you should suggest a car permit system, in which they check the car is roadworthy and has
passed a maintenance check, the driver has completed an approved training course, the car will only
be parked in an approved area, and the driver will follow a 'good motoring code'.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E I will always explain revoked
keys, unless the UK government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.

 

[Just Zis Guy]

Dave wrote:

> I'm on your side,

Irony filter packed up. Sorry

--
Guy http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk "Sic hoc adfixum in obice legere potes, et liberaliter
educatus et nimis propinquus ades"

 

[Michael Macclan]

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Dave wrote:
>
> > I'm on your side,
>
> Irony filter packed up. Sorry
>

IMHO you do seem a bit tetchy at the moment, displaying itself in a willingness to address everyone
as if they're P**l Sm*th.
___
Michael MacClancy

 

[Just Zis Guy]

Michael MacClancy wrote:

> IMHO you do seem a bit tetchy at the moment, displaying itself in a willingness to address
> everyone as if they're P**l Sm*th.

Not a surprise. Life is very stressful right now and I am also suffering from depression as I
occasionally do. And a chest infection which has reduced my average speed by 3mph, not that I could
ride fast on the roads in their present state anyway - too many fallen leaves, too much mud, too
many puddles stretching the entire width of the road. Normal service will be resumed as soon as
possible, but in the mean time if Sm*th and the crossposting Nugentoids would like to go and boil
their collective heads in a vat of their own ******** that would do a lot to brighten up my day.

--
Guy http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk "Sic hoc adfixum in obice legere potes, et liberaliter
educatus et nimis propinquus ades"