There’s already a conversation going on in yesterday’s thread on this subject, but here’s CSD Mom’s report from last night’s Decatur School Board meeting…
Happy to report that the board tabled the vote. They approved the transportation plan with an amendment to remove the bell schedule. They’re going to talk about it further and possibly hold a special session later this month.
I was pleased to see not only parents commenting, but also two Decatur teachers and one DHS student. Dr. E and the board members also commented that they got lots of emails about this, including some from current students.
There was a lot of discussion about getting some creative ideas on the table to sort this problem out, and the general consensus after all was said and done was that there was a lot more thinking to do, and that no one really wanted any of the schools starting before 8 a.m.
OK, there are probably other more innovative options out there (people in the last thread suggested things like combining busses for various schools), but here is a fairly simple suggestion that I guesstimate would work within the current transportation plan:
I’m presuming that CSD decided that they had to spread out the start times a little bit to get all of the bus routes run without having Glennwood as a hub and having to run students to 5th Avenue. I’m also presuming that having 5th Avenue and DHS/RMS at opposite ends of the start times and 45 minutes apart is logistically important for getting the routes to work out without adding additional busses, and then having the 4 elementary schools starting in between.
We can keep the 45 minutes spread under the proposed Edwards plan plus the relative start times the same by (1) Moving the start time for DHS/RMS 1 hour later than in the Edwards plan (note that this makes DHS start only 10 minutes later than it does currently), (2) Moving the 5th Ave., start time 30 minutes earlier than in the Edwards plan, and (3) moving the elementary start times 15 minutes later than in the Edwards plan.
Here is the result. Read this as SCHOOL NAME: new proposed times [times under Edwards plan]
Decatur HS: 8:45-3:45 [7:45-2:45]
Renfroe MS: 8:45-3:45 [7:45-2:45]
Oakhurst ES: 8:15-2:45 [8:00-2:30]
Winnona Park ES: 8:30-3:00 [8:15-2:45]
Glennwood ES: 8:30-3:00 [8:15-2:45]
Clairemont ES: 8:15-2:45 [8:00-2:30]
5th Avenue 4/5: 8:00-3:00 [8:30-3:30]
There may be logistical problem I’m overlooking here, but this schedule seems to put most of the schools a lot closer to their past starting times than the Edwards schedule, and it allows the middle schoolers and high schoolers to have later schools times that would help them learn better given teenager circadian rhythms. The overall average later start times would help with bikers and walkers getting to schools while it’s light. And since the HS/MS start times are only 10 and 15 minutes later than they are currently, I’d hope that this would work out with athletics. (And in any case, I think improving learning is more important than any slight inconveniencing to athletic scheduling that might result.)
This makes a lot of sense. Please send it with to the board and applicable admins. I think everyone could easily live with this.
Thanks for the kind words. Just e-mailed the board and Dr. Edwards.
Thanks for a plan! I would only point out that timing is tight for parents with students at Clairemont and 5th Avenue. Perhaps if Clairemont started at 8:45, that would allow the 15 minutes between Glennwood and Clairemont, and give good time between Clairemont and 5th Avenue…
Here’s an alternative that appears to fulfill the requirements:
8:00-2:30: CL + GL
8:15-2:45: OA + WP
8:30-3:30: 5A
9:00-4:00: RMS + DHS
You’ll note that the older the children get, the later the start times. The start times for RMS + DHS could be pushed back an additional 15 minutes if it is absolutely necessary to have a 45 minute spread for busing between 5th Avenue and RMS+DHS start times.
I was surprised at last night’s BoE meeting when Simone Elder indicated that CSD believes they can meet all K-3 busing needs with only 2 buses. I am giving K-3 schools on the North side an additional 15 minutes to navigate the tracks. However, if it is possible for CL + GL to have the same schedule as OA + WP, then it would be possible to shift the overall start and end times for busing service 15 minutes either way. Note: The original plan has GL with an 8:15-2:45 schedule which would appear to indicate that this is possible.
TOK: The only problem I can see with your proposal is that the end times for Glennwood and Winnona Park coincide with the end times for 5th Avenue.
But that could be solved by having those 2 schools start 15 minutes earlier at the same 8:15-2:45 schedule as Clairemont and Oakhurst.
Sure, that would be fine by me. I’m not sure why in Edwards’ proposal to the Board the elementary schools were slightly spaced apart like that, so I just kept them that way when I modified her plan (presuming that there was some reason for doing so). Maybe spacing them like that helps CSD do all of the busing for K-3 with just 2 buses somehow…? And depending on which buses are used for which routes, having the 2 elementary schools end at the same time as the 4/5 Academy might be fine. That would be my guess, but I really don’t know.
Oh, but the problem would be with parents who have kids up at both places, (K-3 and 4/5) picking them up at the end of day, I guess. Ah. Didn’t think of that. But that can be be tweaked without a whole lot of trouble.
Congrats to the board to doing what Dr. Edwards does not have the guts to do. Realize that these start times make no sense.
Seriously I am amazed that we, the citizens, are allowing the people who have ZERO stake in the outcome to determine when OUR children go to school.
I also can’t believe that in a city 4 miles wide we can’t figure out how to get kids to schools without buses. I understand middle school and High School busing. Unfortunately due to our flawed school decision of a few years ago I understand the need to bus kids to the 4/5 academy.
Has anyone looked at the detail of how lazy some parents are: At Oakhurst the list on the front door has over 50 kids taking the bus that live a few blocks from the school.
“Lazy” is an assumption. You could just as easily imagine them as “over-extended”.
I think the Superintendent and other administrators have a bit more than ZERO stake in the outcome.
Your comment sounds like you might have a case of the Mondays…hard to tell.
I’m sure that some citizens are equally amazed that we’d want people who’s job is advocating for the needs of their own child superseding those whose job is meeting the needs of *all* children (plus the taxpayers!).
I don’t need the desires of other parents dictating how my child is educated any more than I’d imagine they want me making decisions for theirs. Admittedly, there are some informed voices here on DM and I appreciate their counsel on these matters but, ultimately, their allegiance is to their own child(ren) just as my allegiance is to mine. Given that, I hope everyone continues to discuss, debate, yell, email, call and/or show up at school board meetings but I’ll stick with the administrators and educators for final decisions.
correct me if i am wrong but i thought under the new transportation guidelines that children who lived within a one mile radius of the school could not ride the bus…those on buses must certainly live further than just “a few blocks” from school.
That’s the stated rule but not the reality. There a a lot of stops that are well within the mile radius of the schools.
interesting….thanks for pointing that out. i had no idea…
Rob,
I was at the meeting last night. The board does indeed deserve our congratulations, particularly Ms. Rhame and Mr. Ahmann.
As to your point [“…allowing the people who have ZERO stake in the outcome to determine when OUR children go to school.”], it appeared to me that the bell schedule was drawn up by 3 people, Bruce Rhoaden, Simone Elder, and a woman whose name I did not catch. They were the ones who spoke and explained/defended it. Dr. Edwards repeatedly urged approval of the bell schedule, saying that it was needed to prevent a delay in the 4/5 academy certificate of occupancy.
But finally a board member, I think Mr. Ahmann, asked if the City of Decatur required that the bell schedule be included in the request for the C. O.
Awkward Silence…
…then, no, the final bell schedule, ummm, seems not to be required in final form right now.
Ms. Rhame put forward the motion to table the bell schedule, and made a couple of good points, noting especially that Renfro students would be out at 2:45 also under the plan, and that they are far less likely to be in either athletics OR under adult supervision during the afternoon.
Nice job, TOK! Please send it to the board!
By the way, everyone needs to read Principal McKain’s post yesterday (click “Bloggin’ Bulldog” at right). It explains just how much athletics drove the crazy idea of a 7:45 start.
I was a high school athlete and dabbled in college athletics (translation–I was not very good), and when the team bus left early, you were responsible for making up any and all classwork that you missed. It’s NOT that difficult, unless student-athlete in question isn’t really doing his/her schoolwork.
And another thing…why can’t Renfro and DHS students be ride the same bus???? The schools are really, really close to one another. And I think it is possible that some households may have kids at both schools. Wouldn’t that be more convenient for those who want/need to ride the bus to RMS & DHS?
JB–I do think they should combine some of the routes, either RMS & DHS or 4/5 & RMS. My middle-schooler waits for her bus across the street from the high schoolers waiting on their bus, and the buses actually pass each other on our street–they pick up at almost the same time. She says they’re three to a seat on her bus, though, but if we drew the routes slightly differently we might be able to squeeze those few high schoolers on.
Another thing I thought about last night is actually paying for bus service. Why not? Would it be a big deal for us to subsidize the bus ride? A quarter a day? $5 a week? $5 a month? Anything more than we’re doing now would help. I’m heavily in favor of using the buses over individual cars because of traffic and environmental issues. So if your child is not walking or riding a bike or carpooling, would you be willing to pay the bus to pick her up?
Simone Elder also admitted last night that they are not enforcing the “within 1 mile gets no service” rule and they can start doing that more next year. However, she admitted that safety always trumps that rule, so if your third grader has to cross S. Candler to get to Winnona Park and that doesn’t work for you, your child can stand at the bus stop and the bus HAS to pick the child up.
I just read the Bloggin Bulldog post – wow, the athletics thing really was a key input. Like JB, I was a student athlete in high school, and my home town had a school system very similar to Decatur. At the end of the day, sports are fun, keep kids healthy and out of trouble, and teach good lessons, but lets face, it, DHS is not a feeder school for the NBA, NFL, or MLB. Also, I remember there were teams we played that were an hour away and yes, those games were less enjoyable with all that bussing, but we survived. We just missed a few episodes of family ties and MASH 😉
OK, I am all for working for solutions and believe we can all come up with good ideas (like TOK)
How about less bus stops?
I have been behind a bus before that stopped 3 times in 3 short blocks, maybe one stop at the middle of the street would be more efficient.
JB,
Thanks for the clarification. By the way the 3rd person to help out with proposed start times was asst. Superintendent, Dr. Thomas Van Soelen, who happens to live in Lawrenceville.
So the third person drawing up the bus plans who JB thought was a woman was Dr. Van Soelen?
well, that would be an awkward mistake, but I think it was not Dr. van Soelen. I believe he spoke earlier, about tuition.
Here is the link to where Dr. Edwards cites the people who worked on the bell schedule.
https://eboard.eboardsolutions.com/Meetings/ViewMeetingOrder.aspx?S=4052&MID=18654
“Principals, Simone Elder, Thomas Van Soelen, and Caroline Wood have all been involved in the creation of the bell schedule for next year.”
Then it must have been Caroline Wood. I know Bruce Rhoaden by sight, and he and the two women went to the mike to answer questions from the board. That was when it became really clear that the admin wanted the plan to stand and pass all together, depsite what had been heard in the public comment time.
What did Van Soelen say about tuition
There were 153 tuition applications bringing in $15,300 to CSD just for applying.
https://eboard.eboardsolutions.com/Meetings/Attachment.aspx?S=4052&AID=288055&MID=18654
I appreciate Garrett’s generous points on the other thread and other’s points here appreciating the boards flexibility. But I am just astounded about how decisions are being made on such a low level of community input. The first time round ok, but then again it seems like lots of assumptions weren’t researched or challenged.
The fact that major assumptions about who can and can’t ride together were held as rigid without parent input is an example.
To design any process you need to start with the major goals and objectives, understand all the assumptions and which one’s are most important and then look at multiple options. And you can’t do this without sufficient input from all the stakeholders. I know they keep saying they have gotten feedback but if each time a new proposal is submitted it causes the community to scratch their heads and wonder…then you don’t have good input.
I have yet to hear any key guiding principals that aren’t about no new buses, or athletics. And as many have said that is tail wagging the dog! What is it that we want for our children and our community….. what are the important facts? What drives the order that schools should start? Are we really only now discovering that many teachers in our HS and MS have kids in the younger grades and so starting HS/MS before the younger grades causes an issue.
It’s also hard for me to swallow the concern over a new bus when we designed a system that by its very nature may require another bus. (4 elementary schools, 3 schools for the whole city at various ages – on at the far end of town). I know money is likely not there. Are we just realizing this now?
sfmaster,
It appeared to me as though the administrators were dead set to ram through the new bell schedule, although I cannot imagine why.
The public comment time came early in the meeting. With a single exception, all the public comments were about the 7:45 start times, and every one of those were strongly against. As others have noted, the speakers were articulate and well-reasoned. They presented a variety of arguments against the 7:45 start, but Dr. Edwards’ defense of the plan consisted of the following:
1. We worked really hard on this
2. Well, we can’t please everybody
3. No new buses
4. It really isn’t about athletics
5. We need to get the CO for 4/5 academy…NOW
Only when the transportation plan came up for a vote (about 8:45 if memory serves), did it become clear that the Board was, er, not on board. And that the bell schedule did NOT have to be finalized for the CO request to go forward.
“To design any process you need to start with the major goals and objectives, understand all the assumptions and which one’s are most important and then look at multiple options.” Well, that was NOT the administrators appear to have done here.
Re schools riding buses together: To be fair to CSD, that issue has raised parents’ alarms in the past. For example, some parents didn’t like the idea of 4th graders riding the same bus as RMS students, i.e. nine year olds riding the bus with 8th graders many of whom already have facial hair and/or adult stature. Similarly, I can imagine parents of 11 year olds being concerned about them being on the bus with seniors in high school many of whom drive, are draftable, and eligible for STD treatment without parental consent.
The trick is getting feedback on the issue at hand rather than making assumptions based on past experience. For example, in this case, if you ask the parent of the 11 year old which they would prefer–that their child start school much earlier or that they be on a bus with high schoolers, the parent may prioritize and budge on one issue or the other. It also helps parents and teachers understand the complexity of decisions. If you just throw a bunch of decisions out at them, fait accompli, then parents are going to just react to them, one by one, a less efficient way of accomplishing consensus.
Point taken, Karass, about putting impressionable little kids on a bus where they will doubtless “learn” all sorts of new vocabulary words from the older HS crowd. However, I still think those impressionable little darlings may well live on the same street or in the same house as those older ones, meaning they’re already mixing and mingling.
True dat. My now first grader has two significantly older sibs. He was quoting Monty Python in pre-k, and he has seen way more iCarly shows than is healthy for a 7 y.o. boy!
Also keep in mind that my middle child, while in kindergarten (I kid you not) was approached by a classmate who told her he wanted to “have sex” with her. I had to explain to her what that meant at the tender age of 6.
The 4/5 kids have already heard pretty much every dirty word that you can think of by their 10th birthday. I would like to think that the bus ride is short enough and the supervision is effective enough that they won’t have to witness the sorts of nightmarish bus “episodes” that you hear about on CNN.
I rode the bus with kids through 8th grade from kindergarten on. Most of the older kids were super nice to us and I believe were better behaved because we were on the bus.
I think the parents of younger kids are worrying about even more intense things like violence and/or public (ahem!) “necking” or more. Now once your children are older, teenagers don’t seem quite so scarey. And if they are seeing gang behavior and unsafe sex on the bus, they aren’t reporting it. But Renfroe and DHS are pretty scarey looking institutions to parents until their own brood gets there. The green-grey cinderblock motif at RMS is particularly reminiscent of penitentiaries and psychiatric wards. You have to have children there to understand how warm and engaging a place it can be. It only has about one lockdown per year. (Whoops, there I go scaring the parents again.)
So there is violence and sex on the CSD buses?
Only on the K-3 routes. No, just kidding. That’s what parents of little kids only fear when they see older kids with facial hair and panic about their cute little ones being on the same bus. Truth is that half of those big lugs still can’t even tie their shoes consistently.
So, at what point do parents realize that those big, scary adolescents are actually somebody else’s cute little cherubs who grew? And that their own little darlings are going to get hairy and smelly and goofy and big, a LOT sooner than they think?
Age 11 years 10 mos. for girls; age 13 years 2 mos. for boys. This is evidence- and research-based information published in the American Journal of Serial Moms. 🙂
Seriously, I think we could combine age groups on buses and be fine as long as our bus drivers were trained and authorized to keep good discipline and detect verbal bullying. Parents would have to accept that they would receive warnings and their children might be suspended from the bus if their behavior were inappropriate. Seat belts would help but they are an expensive addition to buses. Having said that, I can understand why CSD would be cautious about combining age groups. It would only take one serious incident to cause them a boatload of headaches and perhaps legal action.
So glad to hear parents espousing this viewpoint. I’ve long thought the opposition to putting all ages on the same bus was overwrought and somewhat unrealistic. If things are occurring on the school bus that would be that awful for little kids to be exposed to, that in itself is a problem that should be addressed forthwith. Meanwhile, I honestly think putting the little squirts on the bus with tweens and teens can have a civilizing effect. For one thing, kids who are blessed/cursed with younger siblings learn to take responsibility for them, and that includes refraining from saying/doing things that the little ones shouldn’t be exposed to. In a town this small it should be possible and IMO desirable to foster a sense of community so that big kids look out for little kids, whether or not they’re actually related, not only on the school bus but also at the park, at the pool, wherever they are. And if the budding maturity/responsibility doesn’t kick in, there’s always the threat of being “told on” by the little pests.
And speaking strictly as a taxpayer, I REALLY don’t want to be footing the bill for unnecessary age/grade segregation on the school buses.
I really like your comments.
Sounds positively Montessori-ish! 🙂
Can’t think of a reason why Montessori schools (or any other private institutions) should have a monopoly on high standards of responsibility and respect. Children will generally rise to expectations, and their tendency to police each other — if expectations are clear and consequences are real — should never be underestimated.
Also, I think the stink around 4th graders mixing with 8th graders was related to mixing them for the entire school year… day in and day out. Much of that argument also revolved around the Renfroe property not being big enough to house all of Renfroe plus the 4/5 (eventually in excess of 1200 k ids). Having them together on a bus for a short ride is quite different.
In my day, after dealing with the mean girls in the bathroom, the bus ride was the scariest part of the day. But that wasn’t in peace-loving Decatur….
“The trick is getting feedback on the issue at hand rather than making assumptions based on past experience.” Spot on, Karass.
Guess what, kids….???
The AJC has figured out that they got played….
For those of you who still pay to get a dead-tree version of the paper delivered to your house, check out the lower, right-hand column of page B5 (“County by County” in the Metro section). They report that…”pending approval from the board …” RMS and DHS “…will have classes from 7:45 am to 2:45 pm.”
Whoopsy…daisy…might not want to report the news that hasn’t quite yet happened, since it might get changed. Word.
Especially awkward in light of the piece appearing this evening on the AJC’s online version:
http://www.ajc.com/news/dekalb/decatur-school-board-rejects-908569.html
check it out…it may be in the dead-tree version tomorrow.
Question: Did Principal McKain really send an email/post to selected parents (certainly not all of us, as I can attest) BEFORE the actual Board meeting in an effort to steamroll this 7:45 start? And if so, WHY?
Again, we should commend the B of E, particularly Ms. Rhame and Mr. Ahmann, for asking probing questions. If not for the Bof E, [edited: no name calling] would have rammed this thing right on through. No questions asked. Everyone, please move along. Nothing to see here.
Nitpicking the AJC: why don’t they mention the teachers who spoke against the 7:45 start???? Both were very compelling, and for different reasons. Ms. Nahmias DEMOLISHED the notion that earlier starts could be considered good for academics. The Spanish teacher, a mother of 5, explained that she would have to be at school BEFORE her younger kids could be dropped off. So, no AJC, not all of the concerns were related to sleepy teens.
Just read the AJC story, which was interesting. The following leapt out at me:
Edwards estimates as many as 80 percent of the system’s students use one of the 14 school buses that cover Decatur’s 4 square miles.
80%??? Can that be even close to correct? For K-3 and HS, I’d be shocked if the number is north of 50%. Does anybody have access to actual data though (not just a sense-of-shock-o-meter)?
I’m pretty suspicious of that high a ridership estimate too. If I had to guess off the top of my head, I would have said K-3 50%, 4/5 60%, RMS 50%, DHS 20%, and that’s even counting a one-way trip as full ridership. But “off the top of my head” is a mish-mosh of assumptions that may or may not be true–e.g. DHA kids tend to ride the bus to K-3 and 4/5 but not RMS and DHS, families who live .5 miles tend to walk/cycle/scoot, RMS kids with a long walk are willing to take the bus but DHS kids will sweat it out, etc.
How did they estimate bus ridership so high?
1) They could have counted bus transportation forms and divided by the student population. Well, that may be objective and measurable method, but it counts something completely different–it counts permission to ride the bus, not actual bus ridership. I fill one out for both children every year even though this year, between a child who cannot get up to save their life and a child who would not be caught dead riding the bus anymore, plus after care, our family has ridden the bus exactly once–the second day of school, one-way at that. But other years, one child rode the bus home some days and the other rode both ways. So I never know what kind of year it’s going to be in terms of bus-riding.
2) They could have asked the bus drivers to keep a talley for each student riding the bus and then get a daily count of children riding the bus either way, being sure not to double count a child who rides the bus both ways. They could average the daily counts over several days to deal with fluctuations in ridership, e.g. lower on Fridays or higher on rainy days. That methodology would give a good count as long as they didn’t double count children riding both ways.
3) Or they could have asked the bus drivers to count heads and record the counts for each trip. But then how did they handle the counts? If they added mornings and afternoon counts together, then it would be an overestimate because students who ride the bus both ways shouldn’t be double counted. Or they could have divided the daily count by two but then it would be an underestimate because some children just ride one way. (Or they could divide by a number that took into account an estimated proportion of one-way riders but that would introduce assumptions that would have to be validated).
4) Or they could have asked bus drivers “about how many kids….” but I would not trust that kind of estimate given that drivers have many routes and some people can estimate well, but most cannot. Plus it’s in the drivers’ interests to estimate high!
5) I know they didn’t poll families but that would be another way to estimate ridership. E.g., “How many children in your household ride the bus at least once a week, either way?”
Inquiring minds want to know….
Why not have seating assignments? Give the kids two weeks to decide if they are bus riders, then make a chart. You could group by ages. Seems it’d help to curb antics since you could better pinpoint who’s doing what. Occasional riders could give the driver a rider’s slip on the days they decide to ride. (A chart + rider slips would be handy to have in case of a bus accident.)
And Safe Routes could be expanded to include volunteer bus riders.
And you could put cute colors or smiley faces on the seats for the youngsters. That would serve as an effective repellent for the older, cooler kids.
and, yes, I am new to the bloggy-thing as well as CSD. Hope I haven’t destroy the “regular” JB’s mellow streetcred.
Why, smiley faces in addition to using a seating chart like many other districts do would be great! How wonderful if everyone would approach life with a smile rather than a sneer!
For the folks who are considering the suggestion-Seating charts also help bus drivers learn the kids’ names.
[ and to JB (blue)- It’s generally considered good manners to switch to a new name once you realize it’s already being used. There was the possibility that JB (green) was logging in from a different computer. ]
Maybe it’s the % of kids who have EVER ridden the bus in a given school year?
That would explain the 80% but I can’t figure out how they would measure that without asking the parents (or the kids). They could use the bus permission slips but they measure permission, not ridership. If other parents are like us, they fill them out annually just in case they ever need bus access. It’s a big problem if you suddenly want your child to ride the bus but you don’t have have the bus transportation form filed in the right place so the child’s name is on some list that either the bus driver or principal’s office has (and it usually takes several days and calls to get it right if you didn’t submit the form early enough). But it’s not a problem if you fill out a form and never ride the bus.
If they are measuring “ever ride the bus”, they need to discount the first week of school. Many K-5 children think the bus is theoretically cool and start the year earnestly avowing that they will get up in time to catch it. But that resolve peters out by the second week of school and many parents are back to frantically driving to beat the bell schedule. And in the afternoon, “cool” at the K-5 level is being a “walker/rider”, probably because many walker/riders persuade their parents/babysitters to let them play on the school playground for awhile before going home (to make up for lack of recess sometimes 🙂 .) It makes working parents who have to use aftercare feel terribly guilty sometimes.
Look at the way that sentence is worded in the article. I bet it is based on permission slips.
I’ll check with the Asst. Superintendent.
If the data used are indeed from the permission slips, CSD will probably note the phrase “as many as” was used by the AJC. “Edwards estimates as many as 80 percent of the system’s students use one of the 14 school buses that cover Decatur’s 4 square miles.” Well that phrasing makes the range from 0% to 80% which is not helpful since we already knew that the estimate is somewhere between 0% and 100% given some basic mathematical property of proportions which I cannot remember but is up there with communative, distributive, and multiplicative. And it’s misleading in the case of permission slips being used as a proxy for bus riders. We are focussing on the upper end of the range–80%–even though the proportion could just as easily be much lower, given that, of those parents who fill out bus permission slips reflexly every year, many of their children will not end up riding the bus.
Feeling slow-witted and flabbergasted at the same time here. 14 SCHOOL BUSES? For this tiny little burg? How can we need more than four or maybe even three? I don’t usually have specific opinions about operational and scheduling issues, assuming that educators and families are better equipped to figure out what works. But this whole thing is starting to seem beyond ridiculous, and common sense seems to have gone out the window. And 14 buses sounds expensive. I want assurance it’s really necessary.
Why can’t we do the following:
AM – WP bus pick up all kids in that zone, drop little ones at WPES, then move on to 5th Ave, Renfroe and DHS. Glenwood bus ditto. Clairemont bus ditto. As each bus comes to 5th Ave, sweep up the Oakhurst Elem kids along the way and drop them off either before or after stopping at 5th Ave.
PM – Reverse engines. Load up at DHS, then Renfroe, then 5th Ave (or do those three in reverse order), then go to respective elementary schools, then distribute all children at home. Use the slightly longer day at the K3 schools for some extra recess.
Don’t charge anybody extra for riding the school bus — isn’t it something we want to encourage people to do?
Knock the 1-mile radius exclusion down to 1/2 mile and make exceptions for safety situations, e.g., if a kid would have to cross a big or busy street without a crossing guard. Again, shouldn’t we be running the most efficient bus system possible, and at the same time, encouraging people to use it?
Here’s a question for the ‘rents among us: are there designated bus stops kids walk to in this city? In my observation, kids are picked up outside their front door. Wouldn’t sending all of a neighborhood’s kids to a few key intersections shorten the time it takes to run a bus route?
No, there are designated stops. Kids do not get picked up by their front doors.
OK. Thanks. Good to know!
And the bus stops seem to have been passed down through the ages. They outlast any computerized printout, which is good because the computerized printouts always have strange numbers of children on them that never seem to correspond to the homes in our neighborhood or what I see going on or coming off the bus. No matter what the printout says, the kids in our neighborhood congregate in large clumps at two bus stops about 1/3 mile apart. And all the buses stop there.
Actually, my second grader gets picked up at my front door because she would have been the only person at the designated bus stop intersection. I am terribly spoiled by it, and it was the bus driver’s idea, which is also appreciated. I don’t know how often that happens.
Just got notice the my son will have bus service for Winnona Park Elementary, and we only live .6 miles away. Funny thing is that we did not get bus service now while we are at Oakhurst which is .9 miles away.
We now have to cross Candler, but it is apparently going to be swimming with crossing guards so I don’t understand why we have bus service. I used to have a kid at Winnona and I prefer crossing Candler with a guard to Winnona over walking along College Avenue to Oakhurst any day.
Smalltowngal:
That what happens in rural areas. Bus picks up all kids, regardless of age. Bus then takes kids to schools. Pretty simple. Not that complicated. Doesn’t maximize diesel costs.
And since RHS and DHS are 1) centrally located and 2) practically next door to one another, that ought to make it easier to figure out a logical route.
Ms. McKain sent her letter to the list of parents who have signed up for such notifications. I got one, and I don’t think I was cherry-picked. If you think a letter from the principal is going to “steamroll” anything in this city school system, you don’t really know the parents and teachers here.
Is there a transcript of the meeting? I’d like to hear Ms Nahmias’s comments in total.
I think she read her comments, so she may be able to email them to you if she’s willing.
So, I’m just curious. Should Valarie Wilson abstain from this vote on the bell schedule since her husband is the head coach for the school system and since athletics plays a big role in the rationale? I mean maybe she isn’t required to do so legally, but it seems that at the very least it is in bad form since she is surely influenced by his position. I know I would be influenced if my husband was in the same situation.
I seem to recall Julie Rhame abstaining from a vote a couple of years ago when she thought she’d be unduly influenced by her job. I don’t think she was legally required to, but she thought it would be unfair. I admired her decision on that.
What do y’all think? I’m interested to hear.
FWIW, Valarie was not at the school board meeting this week.
Dr. Edwards skewing numbers to further her agenda? I’m surprised. That has never happened before: closing elementary schools; creating 4/5 academy; etc…
Someone needs to check her data
That would never happen when you are dealing with a bureaucracy; especially when the bureaucrat is trying to justify his/her position on an issue she has already stated a position on. Never. Ha.
I wonder if we could say “CSD Admin” instead of “Dr. Edwards” unless we really know that it is specifically Dr. Edwards that has sent something, estimated something, or done something else. A lot of times she is probably using data or reporting a policy that was actually developed by her staff, not her personally. I realize that, as Superintendent, she is responsible for everything that goes on within CSD, and she is paid well for that responsibility. Nonetheless, I think she may sometimes take it personally when comments specify her in particular and that’s human nature. That’s one of the reasons many of us post anonymously!
sarahph:
I’m somewhat new to CSD, so forgive my surprise that a member of the BoE is married to the head coach for the school system. Seriously???!!?? Yeah, that sure would seem to be a conflict of interest since athletics appears to be driving this.
[By the way, why does a small system need an athletic director? Does he also teach?]
Well, that would explain a lot. From what I observed at the meeting, the bell schedule was supposed to be approved. A done deal. Period. Now, move along.
Are you also a new JB to Decatur Metro? The “regular” JB is so mellow!
“I’m somewhat new to CSD, so forgive my surprise that a member of the BoE is married to the head coach for the school system. Seriously???!!?? Yeah, that sure would seem to be a conflict of interest since athletics appears to be driving this.”
LOL. JB–have you seen our new athletics facilities at the high school?
We’re actually quite the all-in-the-family system. There’s a ton of family members working in CSD–spouses, parents and offspring, siblings, cousins; probably ex-es as well although I can’t say I know of any. You have to be careful about complaining about a CSD employee–the person in line ahead of you may not only be their spouse, but may also be one of your children’s teachers! For the most part, I’ve loved the connectedness of Decatur and CSD is definitely full of family connections. That’s what happens when you’re essentially a small town–urban but small and cozy. And there’s some good genes being passed down and around in CSD. But every once in a while, eyebrows have been raised….too small, too cozy, not enough fresh air. A little recusing now and then is probably in order.