Desirable practices and policies for the effective operation of public school transportation services
430 96 14MB
English Pages 331
Polecaj historie
![Analyzing the Operation of Performance-Based Accountability Systems for Public Services : Based Accountability Systems for Public Services [1 ed.]
9780833050847, 9780833050045](https://dokumen.pub/img/200x200/analyzing-the-operation-of-performance-based-accountability-systems-for-public-services-based-accountability-systems-for-public-services-1nbsped-9780833050847-9780833050045.jpg)
![Effective Educational Programs, Practices, and Policies for English Learners [1 ed.]
9781623968595, 9781623968571](https://dokumen.pub/img/200x200/effective-educational-programs-practices-and-policies-for-english-learners-1nbsped-9781623968595-9781623968571.jpg)
![Organ Donation: Supply, Policies and Practices : Supply, Policies and Practices [1 ed.]
9781614704836, 9781606925010](https://dokumen.pub/img/200x200/organ-donation-supply-policies-and-practices-supply-policies-and-practices-1nbsped-9781614704836-9781606925010.jpg)
Citation preview
DESIRABLE PRACTICES AND POLICIES FOR THE EFFECTIVE OPERATION OF PUBLIC SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the School of Education University of Southern California
In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Education
by Norvell R. Dice January 1950
UMI Number: DP25775
All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Dissertation Publishing
UMI DP25775 Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346
O. '$& Q f O This dissertation written under the direction of the Chairman of the candidate*s Guidance Committee and approved by a ll members of the Committee, has been presented to and accepted by the Faculty of the School of Education in partia l fu lfillm e n t of the requirements fo r the degree of Doctor of Education.
,
D a te ...
D ean Guidance Com m ittee
Chairm an
Utiiisi
TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I.
PAGE
THE PROBLEM
.......................
Importance of the problem
1
.............
Statement of the problem
1
................
Scope and l i m i t a t i o n s ...................
6
Organization of the remainder of the dissertation II.
.........................
7
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
..............
9
Analysis of the literature
..............
9
Measurements
.........................
Financing transportation Administration
10
..............
.....................
.
S u m m a r y ................................. III.
THE P R O C E D U R E ............. The general procedure
13 15 17 19
...................
19
A r e a s ...................
20
Literature
...........................
21
State s u r v e y s .........................
21
School district report
................
22
..................
23
................
2h
Selection of experts Selection of districts Visits
...............................
Administrative technique
.
..........
25 26
iv CHAPTER III.
PAGE
THE PROCEDURE (continued) Validity of the selection of eleven southern counties of California Analysis of
...........
27
seventeen selected districts
•
28
Terrain and c l i m a t e ....................
28
Administrative organizational patterns
*tl
.
Assessed valuation per unit of average daily attendance
.............
*fl
State transportation reimbursement per unit of
average daily attendance
...
h2
Total average daily attendance of each district
...........................
b6
Percentage of pupils transported by each district
...........................
*f9
The average daily attendance per square mile of area Number of Summary IV.
.
.......................
square miles per district
...
.............................
**9 52 52
OPERATING CONDITIONS
...................
55
General conditions
.....................
55
...........
55
Pupil-population density
Percentage of average daily attendance t r a n s p o r t e d .........................
61
Relative amount of transportation service o f f e r e d .............................
6*+
CHAPTER IV.
PAGE
OPERATING CONDITIONS (continued) ..........
67
..................
72
Minimum distance policies
..............
72
Maximum distance policies
..............
7^
Shortest one-way riding t i m e .............
77
Longest one-way riding time
............
77
..............
81
Latest pupil delivery t i m e ...............
85
Abnormal operating conditions Transportation policies
Earliest pick-up time
Summary V.
.
.................................
PERSONNEL PRACTICES IN PUBLIC SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION Method of approach
...................
Administrative and supervisory responsibility
88 95 95
97
Practice existing in seventeen Southern California districts
..................
98
.......................
101
Source and selection of bus driver personnel
103
Literary opinion
Practice existing in eleven Southern Counties Literature
of C a l i f o r n i a ..............
10*f
of the field
............
Ill
................
121
Driver training
programs
Practices existing in seventeen Southern California districts Literature
of the field
........... ..............
121 122
vi CHAPTER V,
PAGE
PERSONNEL PRACTICES (continued) Additional improvements in personnel practice Summary and c o n c l u s i o n s ..............
VI.
127 132
THE ESTABLISHMENT AND DESCRIPTION OF PUBLIC SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION ROUTES
............
ikO
Attitudes and practices revealed by the literature
....................
1*K)
Practices observed in eleven Southern California counties
....................
1^7
Pupil spot m a p s ....................
l*+8
Scaled route m a p s ..................
152
Recommended procedure for bus-route description String-and-pin route map construction
.
157
.
Summary and c o n c l u s i o n s .........
I6*f
Literature of the f i e l d ............ Practices observed throughout California VII.
156
16H.
165
ADOPTION OF TRANSPORTATION P O L I C I E S ....
167
Literature of the f i e l d ..............
167 169
Existing policies regulating transportation Policies extant in eleven Southern California counties
..................
171
Policies in seventeen Southern California d i s t r i c t s ........................
173
vii CHAPTER VII.
PAGE
ADOPTION OF TRANSPORTATION POLICIES (continued) Expert opinion concerning regulation of pupil-transportation policies
....
175
Analysis of existing policies
.............
179
Pupil Transportation policies
.............
181
Bus drivers h a n d b o o k ............. Summary and conclusions Summary
182
...............
192
........................
Conclusions
1
............................
Recommendations
..................
195 195
VIII. SCORE CARD FOR MEASURING ADEQUACY OF PUBLIC SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION SERVICES The Ruegsegger score card
............
. . . . . . . .
197 197
Dice score card for measuring the adequacy of public school transportation services Summary and conclusions
.........
IX. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
200 21*f
.
21?
Findings and c o n c l u s i o n s ..................
215
Recommendations
..........................
223
......................................
227
APPENDIX A
........................................
23*+
APPENDIX B
........................................
281
BIBLIOGRAPHY
LIST OF TABLES TABLE I.
PAGE Comparison of the 19b6-k7 and the 19^7-**$ School Year*s Transportation Services Offered by the Responding High School Districts in California
II.
..................
29
Comparison of the 19h6-b7 and the 19^7-W School Years1 Transportation Services Offered by the Responding Elementary School Districts in California
III*
..........
30
Comparison of Sources of Driver Personnel between the Responding High School Districts of Eleven Southern and the other California Counties
IV.
.....................
31
Comparison of Sources of Driver Personnel between the Responding Elementary School Districts of Eleven Southern and Other Counties of California
V.
..................
32
Comparison between the Responding High School Districts of Eleven Southern and the Other California Counties of the Use of Currently Maintained Spot Maps
....................
33
ix TABLE VI.
PAGE Comparison between the Responding Elementary School Districts of Eleven Southern and the Other Counties of the Use of Currently Maintained Spot M a p s ..................
VII.
3^
Comparison between the Responding High School Districts of Eleven Southern and the Other California Counties of the Use of Currently Maintained Scaled Route M a p s ..........
VIII.
35
Comparison between the Responding Elementary School Districts of Eleven Southern and the Other California Counties of the Use of Currently Maintained Scaled Route Maps
IX.
.
36
Assessed Valuation per Unit of Average Daily Attendance for each District Comprising the Stratified Sample Selected from Eleven Southern Counties
X.
....................
*6
Assessed Valuation per Unit of Average Daily Attendance for each Elementary District Comprising the Stratified Sample Selected from Eleven Southern Counties
XI.
........
***+
Assessed Valuation per Unit of Average Daily Attendance for each High School District Comprising the Stratified Sample
....
*f5
X TABLE XII*
PAGE State Transportation Reimbursement per Unit of Average Daily Attendance for Each District Comprising the Stratified Sample Selected from Eleven Southern Counties
XIII.
. . . . . .
b?
Total Average Daily Attendance of Each District Comprising the Stratified Sample Selected from Eleven Southern Counties . .
XIV.
Percentage of Pupils Transported by Each District Comprising the Stratified Sample Selected from Eleven Southern Counties • •
XV.
50
Average Daily Attendance per Square Mile of Area for Each District Comprising the Stratified Sample Selected from Eleven Southern Counties
XVI.
. . . . . . .
........
51
Total Number of Square Miles of Area Occupied by Each District Comprising the Stratified Sample Selected from Eleven Southern Counties
XVII.
Summary of High School Pupil-Population Density for Eleven Southern Counties of California
XVIII.
53
57
High School Pupil-Population Density, Expressed in Average-Daily-Attendanee Units per Square Mile of Area for Eleven Southern Counties of California
...........................
59
xl TABLE XIX*
PAGE Summary of Elementary School Pupil-Population Density for Eleven Southern Counties of California
XX.
.....................
60
Elementary Pupil-Population Density, Expressed in Average-Daily-Attendance Units per Square Mile of Area for Eleven Southern Counties of California
XXI.
...........................
62
Percentage of Average Daily Attendance Transported by High School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California
XXII.
.
63
Percentage of Average Daily Attendance Transported by Elementary School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California
XXIII.
65
Relative Amount of Transportation Service Offered by High School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California for the 19^7-1*8 School Year as Compared with 19b6-b7
XXIV.
66
Relative Amount of Transportation Service Offered by Elementary School Districts of Eleven Southern Co-unties of California for the 19*+7-*+8 School Year as Compared with •
XXV.
68
19^6-1*7.
Abnormal Operating Conditions Affecting Pupil Transportation in High School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California
70
TABLE XXVI.
Abnormal Operating Conditions Affecting Pupil Transportation in Elementary School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California
XXVII.
...........................
Minimum Transportation Distances of Pupils in High School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California ........
XXVIII.
Minimum Transportation Distances of Pupils in Elementary School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California
XXIX.
....
Maximum Transportation Distances of Pupils in High School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California
XXX.
....
Maximum Transportation Distances of Pupils in Elementary School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California
XXXI.
....
Shortest One-Way Hiding Time in High School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California, as Reported January 21, 19*+8
XXXII.
Shortest One-Way Hiding Time in Elementary School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California, as Reported January 21, 19 **8
XXXIII.
Longest One-Way Riding Time in High School School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California, as Reported January 21, 19*+8
xiii TABLE XXXIV.
PAGE Longest One-Way Riding Time in Elementary School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California, as Reported January 21, 19*+8.... .................
XXXV.
83
Earliest Pick-up Time in High School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California, asReported January
XXXVI.
21,19**8
8 *f
Earliest Pick-up Time in Elementary School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California, as ReportedJanuary 21, 19*+8
XXXVII.
86
Latest Pupil-delivery Time in High School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California, as Reported January 21,1 9 ^
XXXVIII.
87
Latest Pupil-delivery Time in Elementary Sehool Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California, as Reported 89
January 21, 19**8 XXXIX.
Officers Directly Responsible for Pupil Transportation Program in Seventeen Southern California Districts
XL.
....
99
Source of Bus-driving Personnel in Elementary School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California, as Reported January 21, 19**8
10?
xiv TABLE XLI.
PAGE Source of Bus-driving Personnel in High School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California, as Reported January 21, 19**-8
XLII.
Source of Bus-driving Personnel in Seventeen Districts of Southern California
XLIII.
107
....
108
Desirable Qualifications for School Bus Drivers as Indicated by Administrators of Seventeen Southern California Districts
XLIV.
110
Current Pupil Spot Maps Maintained by Elementary School Districts in Eleven Southern Counties of California, as Reported January 21, 19**8
XLV.
. . . . . . .
150
Current Pupil Spot Maps Maintained by High School Districts in Eleven Southern Counties ® of California, as Reported January 21, 19**8
XLVI.
151
Scaled Map Routes Maintained by Elementary School Districts in Eleven Southern Counties as Reported January 21, 1 9 * * 8 ..........
XLVII.
15^*
Scaled Map Routes Maintained by High School Districts in Eleven Southern Counties of California, as Reported January 21, 19*+8
XLVIII.
155
Board-adopted Policies Related to Transporta tion in Elementary School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California, as Reported January 21, 1 9 ^
. . . . . .
172
TABLE XLIX.
PAGE Board-adopted Policies Related to Transporta tion in High School Districts of Eleven Southern Counties of California, as Reported January 21, 1 9 * * S ........................
L.
17^
Opinions of Seventeen Selected School Adminis trators Concerning Various Desirable Areas which should be Controlled by Board-adopted Policies
LI.
. ...........................
177
Policies Submitted by Forty-six California School D i s t r i c t s .................
180
LIST OF FORMS FORMS
PAGE ..............................
160
2. Bus Stop S c h e d u l e ............................
163
1. Route Sheet
.
Pupil Transportation Policies
................
183
CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM The need for maximum efficiency in the field of pupil transportation points to the desirability of establishing a pattern of best operational practices.
This study seeks to
achieve that goal. I.
IMPORTANCE OF THE PROBLEM
Of historical significance, in connection with the problem, is the fact that the expenditure of school funds for transportation was legalized by the general court of Massachusetts in the year 1 8 6 9 .^
On that date the State
passed a law which permitted a town to pay the cost of transporting pupils to a neighboring school.
Other states
soon followed this lead; and, in 1900, a total of eighteen states had adopted some such legislation.
It was not,
however, until the development of the automobile as a generally accepted means of transportation that pupil school transportation services became a significant factor in the educational program of the United States. As long as pupil transportation was carried on only with
W. G. Reeder, The Administration of Pupil Transpor tation (Columbus, Ohio: The Educators Press, 1939)? p. 3*
2 horse drawn vehicles it was limited in extent. While we have no authentic figures on the pupils transported to school at public expense in 1 9 0 0 , it is doubtful that there were more than a few thousand. By 1923 and 192*4when motor vehicles were being used for this service in many sections of the country, figures collected by the United States office of Education indicate that approxi mately 837*000 pupils were transported.2 During recent years, transportation services to school children have been expanded to the point where Featherstone could state, in May, 19*4-8, that:
"Each day
during the 19*4-7-*4-8 school year, *f,951 *99*4- pupils will travel 1,867*600 miles in 85,872 school buses to *4*2,939 schools. The 30 b will cost $130,613,250."3 In November of the same year Osborne stated that: Five million American children are transported daily to and from elementary and secondary schools in the United States. They are approximately 20 per cent of all those who attend the nation*s schools.^ In the process of providing this service a significant expenditure of public funds is involved.
But t e r w o r t h ^
reported that, in 1937 -3 8 , four per cent of total current expenditures for public elementary and secondary education
2 E. Glenn Featherstone, "Planning Post War Pupil Transportation, 11 American School Board Journal. 110:21, June, 19*4*5*
3 , "School Bus Transportation Grows Steadily," School Management, *4-:36-37* May, 19*4-8. ^ M. G. Osborne, "Six Boads to Safety in Pupil Trans portation," Nations Schools. *4-2 :29 -3 0 , November, 19**8. ^ J. E. Butterworth, "What About Costs," Nations Schools. 29*39-**!, April, 19*4*2.
in the United States was devoted to amortizing the cost of transportation.
He further stated:
That this percentage will go still higher is to he expected in view of the fact that providing reasonably adequate educational programs for rural children and young people so far as this can be achieved through consolidation is only well begun. ° The task of transporting America*s children, there fore, is one of the mao'or concerns of school administrators and Boards of Education. When faced with the responsibility of administering a service of this magnitude, school executives must continually seek avenues for improving the quality of the service rendered. No final answer to best practice can ever be obtained.
As
changes develop in administrative philosophy, in the quality of equipment, in the organizational pattern for the adminis tering of public schools, and in the quantity of research material available, the pattern of transportation services must change, in order to stay abreast of the changing educa tional scene.
There seems to exist at the present time a
need to bring together from the field of research and from current practice a fund of information which might point the way toward the pattern of most desirable practices and policies for the effective operation of public school trans portation services.
This study was an attempt to meet the
need. 6 Butterworth, loc. cit.
II.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The problem for this study may be stated as a search for desirable practices and policies for the effective operation of public school transportation services.
More
specifically, the purposes of this study may be classified under the following headings: 1.
To search the literature of the field; confer
with available transportation authorities; visit representa tive school districts of a selected area; and to sample, by means of a questionnaire, school transportation policies and practices of a selected area. 2.
To analyze the foregoing information in order to
determine current practice and best practice as evidenced by ' the thinking of authorities and by successful transportation service. 3.
To find a desirable pattern of practices and
policies for the effective operation of public school transportation services. b.
To develop an instrument for the measurement and
evaluation of a system of public school transportation services. The study, as it was organized, attempted specifically to answer the following seven questions: 1.
What related investigations have been made in the
area of desirable practices and policies for the effective operation of public school transportation services and what light do these investigations throw upon the present problem? 2.
What procedure was used in this study and what
are the sources of data? 3.
What are the operating conditions under which
public school transportation services are provided in the State of California? What are current California personnel practices in the field of pupil transportation ?
How do these prac
tices compare with best practice as developed by observation and by a perusal of the literature in the field? 5.
How are public school transportation routes
established and described In the State of California?
How
can this area of the transportation program be improved in light of best practice? 6.
What board rules, regulations, and policies
control the operation of public school transportation services in the State of California?
How adequate are these controls?
How can the control of transportation services by board rules, regulation, and policies be improved? 7.
What device can be used for measuring the
effectiveness of public school transportation services?
6 III.
SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS
The information for this study was collected within the boundaries of the State of California.
Collection of
the material was accomplished during the calendar years 19b? and 191+8.
Analyses made herein are, therefore, intended for
this period only.
By observation and statistical analysis
it was determined that the eleven Southern Counties of California constituted an area apparently representative of the practices and operating conditions obtaining throughout the rest of the State.
For purposes of this study, therefore,
the eleven Southern Comities of California were used as the major area from which data relative to current conditions and operative practices were obtained.
The assumption was
made that this area was sufficiently diversified geographi cally to provide a cross-section of the conditions obtaining throughout the State.
To justify this assumption an analysis
of geographic factors x^as made.
The area, containing well
over 50 per cent of the student population of the State, was of sufficient magnitude to justify its use for intensive study.
A group of seventeen school districts was selected
for detailed investigation.
Having chosen these districts
because they seemed to constitute a stratified representative sample, the validity of the choice was tested by applying
7 of criteria.7 This study was limited to a search for the most desirable practices and policies for the effective operation of public school transportation services.
The problem of
financing, and of financial accounting for pupil transporta tion services, was the accepted responsibility of another research currently going forward; hence, these areas were specifically excluded from this study.
Since considerable
research has already been done in the field of transportation equipment and several studies were being currently made, that problem is not a part of this thesis. IV.
ORGANIZATION OF THE REMAINDER OF THE DISSERTATION The remainder of the dissertation is organized as
follows:
Chapter II contains a review of related literature
in the field.
An analysis of the procedure and the sources
of data are contained in Chapter III, together with a justi fication of the selection of the seventeen districts included as a stratified sample.
Conditions tinder which pupil trans
portation systems were operating in California are analyzed in Chapter IV.
Chapter V is devoted to a study of personnel
practices, with special reference to the selection and training of transportation personnel.
^ Infra, pp. 33-^*
In Chapter VI the
establishment and description of public school transportation! routes are discussed.
A technique for the description and
control of these routes is developed.
In considering the
policies and regulations controlling public school transpor tation services, Chapter VII introduces a driver*s handbook and a representative set of rules for school board regula tions and policies, adaptable to the transportation problems: of any district.
Chapter VIII presents the elements of an
ideal instrument for measuring the effectiveness of public school transportation services.
The conclusions and recom
mendations of the study are summarized in the final chapter, which also includes suggestions for additional research. Chapter IX is followed by a bibliography and appendices containing important related materials.
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE In the process of investigating the field of pupil transportation, a great deal of literature was reviewed. This chapter analyzed briefly those which were directly related. I.
ANALYSIS OF THE LITERATURE
Although a tremendous amount of material has been written in the field of pupil transportation, a large majority of the publications dealt with the equalization of transportation costs, the financing of pupil transportation systems, or the construction of and standards for procuring school buses. This study has confined itself to a search for desirable practices and policies for the effective operation of public school transportation services.
Less written
material was available in this field than in the areas mentioned.
The periodical literature of the field was a
fruitful source of information. Reference is made in the •j bibliography^ to applicable articles published during the last twenty-five years.
In addition to the periodicals, the
See Bibliography, pp. 228-30.
1G following publications were of specific value in shedding light on the problem.
They tended to be statistical or
administrative in nature. Measurements*
Several studies dealt with devices for
measuring the needs for pupil transportation.
A dissertation
by Mort,^ in 192*f, represented a pioneer effort to develop a method for predicting the educational needs of a district. It was contended that the predicted need could be used as a basis for the equalization of educational costs and the distribution of state funds.
Mort also contended that the
density of population could be used as a factor in predicting the need for transportation services.
In 1927, Burns^
derived a transportation index to supplement Mort's previous study.
In his work, Burns accepted the basic premises
established by Mort in his measurement of educational need* The index, as developed, used the density of school popula tion as the independent variable and the percentage of pupils transported, multiplied by the square root of square miles per school building, as the measure of transportation need.
^ Paul R. Mort, The Measurement of Educational Need (Teachers College Contributions to Education, No. 150. New Yorks Teachers College, Columbia University, 192b ), 8 *+ pp. 3 R. L. Burns, Measurement of the Need for Transporting Pupils (Teachers College Contributions to Education, No. 2 8 9 . New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1927)? 90 pp.
*
11 Burns concluded that the log of the density of school population was a valid and reliable criterion by which the transportation need of a county could be predicted. This same problem of density of population as a h measure of educational need was pursued by Johns the following year.
He contended that Burns had not developed a
satisfactorily predictable variable and chose the density of school population which he defined as the average daily attendance in each county per square mile of area in that county.
These pioneer studies were statistical in nature
and dealt primarily with the problem of financing transpor tation services.
In essence they were searching for an
equitable means by which the costs of education could be shared by the state and the local districts.
The operation
of transportation programs was not considered. ty Lambert’s study,
completed in 1935? was one of the
most comprehensive in the field of school transportation. Basiely it analyzed and tested the Burns theory that the log
L.
R. L. Burns, State and Local Administration of School Transportation (Teachers College Contributions to Education, No. 330. New Yorks Teachers College, Columbia University, 1928), 95 pp. A. C. Lambert, ”A Study of Some Factors that Effect the Need for the Transportation of Pupils to and from School at Public Expense with Special Reference to Certain Alleged Affects of the Density of Population upon this Need,11 (unpublished Doctor’s dissertation, Stanford University, California, 1935)? 270 pp.
12 of density of school population was a valid and reliable criterion by which transportation needs of a county might be predicted*
Lambert proved to his own satisfaction that
grave errors existed in the theory: The writer holds that the alleged relationship between the density of population and the need for transportation of pupils has not been established as a significant relationship; that the attempts that have been made to predict the needed costs of transportation from the density of population are open to serious question on the basis of logic and of fact; that some of these studies, particularly those of Dr. R, L. Johns, contained demon strable and significant error; that the studies of others; * who have followed the theory in procedure of Dr. Johns, perpetrate error; that the body of theory and practice with respect to the determination of need for transpor tation of pupils at public expense in terms of density of population as built up by Mort, Burns, Johns and those who follow them is indefensible and that it propagates; error and confusion.6 Lambert contended that there were many factors other than the density of population which affected the needed amount of transportation in a given area.
He found these
factors to be: 1. The educational program, as expressed concretely in the school organization. 2. The prevailing distribution over the land surface of towns, villages and other clusters of population.
3.
A given maximum walking distance for pupils.
Numbers of pupils who live beyond a given maximum walking distance. b.
5.
Distances that pupils must travel from the
6 Ibid.. pp. 260-61.
13 dwellings to reach proper schools tinder the controls of existing road systems, the location and patterns of the community themselves, and peculiarities of topography. 6. The time factor as it operates with respect to amounts of time consumed in travel by pupils and parti cularly with reference to the earliest hour in the morning at which transported pupils can be expected to enter the vehicles. The mean running speeds and the capacities of the vehicles had to enter the problem.' A large section of Lamberts study was devoted to the techniques involved in the effective mapping of transporta tion routes.
He also considered walking zone policies and
many other items vital to the establishment of transportation services. Financing transportation. No effort is here made to review the literature concerning the financing of transpor tation, but mention should be made of the following studies: 8 Evans made the pioneer California study in this area. Q * Bryan, using the high schools of Northern California as his source of information, carried out an exhaustive study of the problem of equalizing transportation costs.
The school
7 Ibid., pp. 26^-66. ® Frank 0. Evans, "Factors Affecting the Cost of School Transportation in California,11 (unpublished Doctorfs dissertation, University of California, 1929), 206 pp. 9 Paul C. Bryan, "Equalization of State Aid for Pupil Transportation," (unpublished Doctor!s dissertation, University of California, 19^7)5 23^ pp.
1^ districts of San Diego County were analyzed by Gillis.^® in his search for a formula for an equitable distribution of state and local transportation funds.
The most notable
recent work in the area of the equalization of transporta tion costs was done by Knapps in his research report to the California Cooperative Committee on School Finance.
This
material appeared in the report of the Assembly Interim Committee on Public Education,
12
and was used as the basis
for transportation legislation presented to the Legislature of the State of California during the 1 9 % session. 13 Hallon's study iii the field of pupil accounting and Riley*s work
ih
in the analysis of the Missouri school
^ John William Gilles, riA Suggested Plan for Equaliz ing the Costs of Pupil Transportation in the State of Cali fornia,11 (unpublished Doctor*s dissertation, Stanford University, California, 19%), 125 pp. *i i
Hoy A. Knapp, "Financing Pupil Transportation in California Public School Districts," (unpublished mimeograph report of the Cooperative Committee on School Finance, State Department of Education and California Teachers * Association, January, 19%). 12 _______, "Financing Pupil Transportation in California Public School Districts." Second Henort of Assembly Interim Committee on Public Education Created By House Resolution N o . (Sacramento, California: Assembly of the State of California, 1 9 % session).
n
^ William Eugene Hallon, "School Bus Transportation and Accounting in the Forty-Eight States," (unpublished Doctor*s dissertation, Texas University, 19%), 212 pp. 1L. George A. Riley, "Transportation of School Children in Missouri,” (unpublished Doctor*s dissertation, University of Missouri, 19%;, 276 pp.
15 transportation services were also worthy contributions to the research of the field. Administration.
1*5
In 1939? Reeder ^ released a text
book in which he attempted to indicate principles and practices which should be followed in organizing and adminis tering a system of pupil transportation.
He explained that:
In this effort the chief guide has been the rllamp of experience'1 becatise best practices are usually to be preferred to untried theories. For this experience hundreds of transportation studies which have been made during recent years have been called upon. . . . Since more than nine-tenths of all transportation is found in rural schools, the book emphasizes this area. It is believed though that most of the suggestions will also be found pertinent to the transportation problems of city schools.16 Pertinent to the present study are the chapters on the transportation route and time schedule and the school bus driver. Reeder also published, at the same time, a manual for the school bus driver.
17
Although comprehensive in its
coverage, this manual was not currently abreast of the best practices obtaining at the present time.
The ten inter
vening years resulted in many modifications of best practice
15 Ward G. Reeder, The Administration of Pupil Trans portation (Columbus, Ohio: The Educators Press, 1939)? 200 pp.
Ibid., p. vii. Reeder, A Manual for the School Bus Driver (Columbus, Ohio: The Educators Press, 193977 39 PP*
16 and in the addition of many items of information which should currently be in the hands of each bus driver. handbook, hence, was prepared practice.
18
This type of
to conform to current best
This document should contain all information
needed by the driver who operates a modern transportation vehicle under present circumstances. At Columbia University,
Meadows*^
conducted a study
resulting in the publication of a book on safety and economy in school transportation.
The sections devoted to the
school bus driver, routes, and schedules were found to be significant pioneer contributions in this field.
They are 20 referred to in greater detail in the body of this thesis. Pi No b l e ^ carried on a two-year nation-wide study of pupil transportation which was a part of the program of investigation and research in the field of Rural Education, at Teachers College, Columbia University.
The study was
financed by a special grant from the General Education Board. The results, published in textbook form, contained sections related to methods of operation, school bus drivers, and
18 Infra, pp. 252-80.
-*-9 Austin Ruel Meadows, Safety and Economy in School Bus Transportation (Wetumnka. Alabama: The Wetumpka Printing Company, 19^*0), 287 pp. Infra. pp. 120, 133-31*-. 21-
M. C. S. Noble, Pupil Transportation in the United States (Scranton, Pa.: International Textbook Company, 19**0)
17 school bus routes. In a publication by Butterworth and
Ruegsegger^
are
sections devoted to selecting, training, and supervising the operating personnel, and to evaluating the transportation service.
The score card presented in this textbook was the
outgrowth of an unpublished study carried on by Ruegsegger at an earlier date.
At appropriate points in this disserta
tion, detailed references are made to these contributions. II.
SUMMARY
Much of the literature in the field of pupil trans portation dealt with the equalization of transportation costs, the financing of public transportation systems, or the construction of and standards for procuring school buses.
Less material was available in the field of operational
practices and procedure.
Periodicals were the best source
of information. Mort, Burns, and Johns pioneered in the field of pupil-transportation research.
Mort contended that density
of population could be used as a factor in predicting the need for transportation services.
Burns and Johns followed
this lead in a search for an index by which this need could
22- Julian E. Butterworth and Virgil Ruegsegger,. Administering Pupil Transportation (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Educational Publishers, I n c I 9V 1 ), 197 pp.
18 be predicted.
Lambert*s study was essentially an analysis
and testing of the Burns* theory.
He provedfe his own
satisfaction that grave errors existed in the theory. Reeder contributed a textbook to the field of organi zation and operation of public school transportation. Meadows* contributions lay in the sphere of transportation personnel practices and school bus routing and schedules. As chairman of a two-year study at Columbia University, Noble developed a comprehensive report.
Certain sections
were considered pertinent background material for this study. The section of Butterworth and Ruegsegger publications devoted to evaluating transportation services served as a point of departure for the development of an instrument for measuring the effectiveness of public school transportation services. Chapter III presents a description of the procedure and sources of data for this study.
Also included is the
justification of the selection of seventeen California districts as a stratified sample.
CHAPTER III THE PROCEDURE Whereas Chapters I and II have been devoted to an analysis of the problem and to related major research, this chapter details the procedures, identifies the sources of data, and justifies the selection of seventeen Southern Cali fornia districts as a stratified sample.
In order to facili
tate the narration, a general account of the procedures is given first, followed by specific details concerning the selection of the counties and districts intensively studied. The justification of their choice is statistically validated. I.
THE GENERAL PROCEDURE
Almost at the inception of this study it became apparent that there existed a need for the development of a currently adequate instrument for measuring the effectiveness of public school transportation services.
Such a measurement
was devised, based upon the significant findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the study.
The basis for this was an
exhaustive study of the field of pupil transportation. Eleven Southern California Counties were selected as the geographical scene of this study.
The operational conditions
and practices observed in this geographical area proved to be typical of those obtaining throughout the state.
In order to
further narrow the field for intensive study, seventeen representative districts were chosen.
The validity of nar
rowing the field, first to eleven counties and then to a stratified sample of seventeen districts, was carefully tested. Areas-.
Methods and devices, involving a variety of
techniques, were utilized to adequately sample the public school transportation services in the geographic area of school population chosen as the scene of this study.
Certain
information obtained from state-wide questionnaires and report forms filed with the State Department of Education provided a general picture of existing conditions.
^
These
same sources were analyzed intensively for the area comprising the eleven Southern Counties of California, chosen because they seemed to represent the practices and operating condi tions obtaining throughout the rest of the state.
A careful
geographical analysis was made to substantiate the validity of this assumption.^*
Since the area contained well over
fifty per cent of the student population of the state, its magnitude was considered sufficient to justify its use; however, population alone was not accepted as a sufficient test.
Other comparisons, discussed fully, were made to
further verify their choice.
^ Infra, pp. 27-36.
21 Literature.
The literature of the field of pupil
transportation was carefully searched.
Material pertinent
to this study is listed in the bibliography and referred to throughout the body of the thesis.
More extensive publica
tions in the field were analyzed in Chapter II. State surveys. Under the present laws of California, the State Department of Education shares with the local district any approved cost of transportation over and above the amount which can be financed by a two-cent tax rate at the local level.
For the school year 19^6-^7> districts made
claim for this reimbursement through the Bureau of School Accounts and Records of the State Department of Education, 2 on a form labelled Transportation Report Form No. 1. In addition to requests for information concerning the cost of operation of the local transportation system, the State Department asked for information concerning such items as average daily attendance, average number of pupils transported, percentage of transported pupils, shortest distance pupils traveled, longest distance any pupil was transported, total area of the district, and so forth.
At its inception this
study was endorsed by the State Department of Education, with ensured cooperation.. For this reason, Transportation
2 See APPENDIX E, pp. 285-89.
22 Form No, 1 was made available for examination, analysis, and ( tabulation.
Much additional information was obtained from
other State Department records and reports. School district report.
It soon became apparent that
material on file with the State Department of Education would not be sufficiently comprehensive to complete this study.
As a means of collecting additional information,
therefore, a report'*' on transportation in the various school districts was devised, in cooperation with the officials of the California Department of Education.
This report was
duplicated and distributed by the State through normal chan nels.
The accompanying note was signed by the Superintendent
of Public Instruction.
Three copies were prepared by each
California School District.
The original and one copy were
sent to the County Superintendent of Schools; the third, retained in the District files.
The County Superintendent
then transmitted the original copy to the State Bureau of School Accounts and Records of the State Department of Educa tion.
In order to overcome discrepancies and to guarantee
uniformity, the Districts were asked to use figures obtained from actual count on January 21st, 19*+8, in answering certain sections of the report.
^ Ibid.. p. 290.
Careful preparation for the report
23 on the specified date was solicited. following specific question:
One section asked the
flDo you have an official
Board-adopted school district policy concerning the provision of pupil transportation? b
this report.)t!
(If ^es* please attach a copy of
In response to this request, forty-six
districts submitted examples of Board regulations and policies then in force. Selection of experts.
The replies to the school
district report indicated very little agreement either in the literature of the field or in actual practice concerning the use of board-adopted rules, regulations, and policies governing transportation services.
It was deemed necessary
to seek expert advice concerning the desirability of forming a set of such rules, regulations, and policies, and the items to be included if such a document was formulated.
A
group of seventeen California administrators was selected for this jury.
These men were arbitrarily chosen because it
appeared that their background of training and experience, and their present positions of responsibility in the field of public school transportation, would qualify them as experts in the field.
An official of the State Department of Educa
tion assisted in the selection of these men, listed in the Appendix.^ Accompanied by a letter of transmittal, a brief
^ Ibid., p. 290. ? Ibid.. pp. 295-96.
2k-
questionnaire
was sent to each of the individual experts.
This questionnaire sought to determine two opinions:
one,
concerning the desirability of regulating district transpor tation through a comprehensive set of board-adopted rules, regulations, and policies; the other, the areas which should be included in such a set. Selection of districts.
It seemed desirable to focus
intensely the spotlight of research upon selected local areas.
By so doing, it would be possible to check, at the
local level, the validity of the information submitted in report-questionnaire form.
Such procedure would facilitate
studying in greater detail the practices and policies affec ting the operation of public school transportation services at the local level.
In order to accomplish the aforesaid
objective, a group of districts, diverse enough to be clas sified as a stratified sample of the school districts of California, were selected for this study.
Statistically it
has beeniwell established that the size of a sample is no guarantee of its adequacy.
Rather, a sample is considered
adequate if it is truly representative, or if it is properly selected at random from the population.
Under the condi
tions existing in this study, it did not seem wise to select
^ Ibid., pp. 283 -8 *+.
25 a sample by a random-sampling technique.
The purposes of
the study seemed better served by selecting a group of dis tricts which would be sufficiently diversified in terms of a variety of criteria.
The *4-09 reporting districts of the
eleven Southern .Counties of California were considered as a pool from which to draw this stratified sample.
From inti
mate knowledge of the school districts of the area and from the statistics available in the State and County school offices, a general analysis of the various districts was made.
As a result, some forty districts were considered for
inclusion in the sample.
Following further analysis and
consultation with officials of the State Department and the County Superintendent’s office of three counties, the list was narrowed to include seventeen districts.
When analyzed
in terms of various criteria, they seemed to present a suf ficient spread and diversity from any of the various points of consideration. Visits.
During the progress of this study, each of
the seventeen districts was personally visited.
By letter
or telephone, appointments were made with either the chief administrator of the district or with the individual offici ally designated to administer the transportation services of the district.
In several instances both the transportation
and school superintendents gave generously of their time.
26 At least one full day was spent in visiting each district. During that time a definite routine was followed: A two-and-one half hour personal interview was held with the superintendent of the district or of transportation, or with both of them.
In order to standardize the direction ■
of the interview and to facilitate the recording of the desired information, a nineteen-page summary form was con7 strixcted. Information was recorded by the interviewer as the conference progressed.
In each case, a rapid verbal
review, serving as a guarantee of accuracy, was presented to the person interviewed.
The evening following the interview,
the notes were reviewed and transcribed into permanent form. Requests were made for samples of board rules, regulations, and policies, and for forms and documents used in the adminis tration of the transportation program.
Transportation maps
and other administrative devices were observed.
A minimum
of one hour was devoted to automobile travel through each district in order to observe topography, geographical condi tions, and operational hazards that had been referred to in the interview. Administrative technique.
An important outcome of
the study was the development of a technique for administering,
7 Ibid., pp. 297-315.
27 controlling, and describing pupil transportation routes. This technique was put into practice in two districts; by practical application its effectiveness was ascertained. II.
VALIDITY OF THE SELECTION OF ELEVEN SOUTHERN COUNTIES Eleven Southern Counties of California were selected
as representative of the other counties in California. Certain definite comparisons were made to stxbstantiate the validity of their choice.
These comparisons involved condi
tions and practices for the eleven counties and the remaining counties in California, using figures for the year and the preceding year.
school
The high school and elementary
school districts were considered individually in Table I through VIII, which compare transportation services, driver personnel, use of currently maintained spot maps, and use of currently maintained scaled route maps.
Each numerical
comparison was reduced to a percentage; the percentages for the selected areas and for the rest of the state were com pared statistically by obtaining the standard deviation of the differences in percentages. used for this purposes
The following formula was
standard deviation of the differences
equals the square root of P-^ Q-j_ over
plus P 2 Q2 over N 2 .
The critical ratio for the comparison was then obtained by use of the formula:
critical ratio equals the attained
difference over the standard deviation of the differences.
In order to demonstrate a statistically significant difference between a sample and the remainder of the popula tion, it is necessary to obtain a* critical ratio in excess of 1 .9 6 if that difference is to be tested at the five per cent confidence level. sons were made.
In the eight tables some 2b compari
With one exception, the obtained critical
ratio was below I .965 and, in most eases, it was below 1 . Although the one exception did not test successfully at the five-per-cent confidence level, it did test at the one-percent level, which is considered adequate for statistical comparisons. It was conclusively demonstrated by statistical analysis, therefore, that the operating conditions and prac tices observed in eleven southern counties represented a reliable sample of the operating conditions and practices obtaining throughout the remainder of the State of California. III.
ANALYSIS OF SEVENTEEN SELECTED DISTRICTS
From the eleven counties investigated, a search was made for a group of districts which would present a wide range and a gradual succession from low to high in terms of a number of selected factors.
In the following sections the
selected districts are analyzed in terms of these factors. Terrain and climate.
Within the area comprising the
29
TABLE I COMPARISON OF THE 19*f6-^7 AND THE 19*f7-^8 SCHOOL YEARS* TRANSPORTATION SERVICES OFFERED BY THE RESPONDING HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN CALIFORNIA
Increase Per cent No.
Counties
Eleven Southern Counties
66
72.5
Other California Counties
111
65.3
Totals
177
67.8
Critical Ratio*
1 .1
Decrease Per No. cent
1
5 l. 1
Same Per No. cent
Totals Per cent No.
1.1
2b
26.**
91
100
2.b
55
32.3
170
100
1.9
79
30.3
261
100
1.8 -
^Critical ratio for comparison of percentages of eleven Southern Counties and other California counties
30
TABLE II COMPARISON OF THE 19b6-b7 AND THE 1 9 ^ 7 - W SCHOOL YEARS' TRANSPORTATION SERVICES OFFERED BY THE RESPONDING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN CALIFORNIA
Decrease Per No. cent
Counties
Increase Per No. cent
Eleven Southern Counties
222
6 9 .8
7
2 .2
89
Other California Counties Totals
3*fO 562
70.7 70.3
1*+ 21
2 .9 2 .6
127 216
Critical Ratio*
0.*+9
0. 1
Same Per No. cent
Totals Per No. cent
28
318
100
2 6 .*+
**81
27.1
799
100 100
O.b
♦Critical ratio for comparison of percentages of elementary school districts in eleven Southern Counties and those in other California counties
TABLE III COMPARISON OF SOURCES OF DRIVER PERSONNEL BETWEEN THE RESPONDING HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF THE ELEVEN SOUTHERN AND THE OTHER CALIFORNIA COUNTIES
High school districts
Part-time drivers other than teachers and students Per No. cent
Teachers Per No. cent
Students Per No. cent
85
13.1
1*4*2
21.9
261
Other California Counties 180
18.9
255
26.8
16.6
397
2*4*.8
393 6$k
Eleven Southern Counties
Totals Critical Ratio*
265
1. 2
1 .1
0 .2 8
Full-time drivers Per No. cent
Total Per No. cent
*4*0.2
161
2*+.8
6*4*9
100
**1.3
123 28b
12.9
951
100
17.7 1600
100
*40.9
2.6
^Critical ratio for comparison of percentages of high school districts in eleven Southern and the other California counties.
Lo H
TABLE IV COMPARISON OF SOURCES OF DRIVER PERSONNEL BETWEEN THE RESPONDING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF THE ELEVEN SOUTHERN AND THE OTHER CALIFORNIA COUNTIES
Elementary school districts
Eleven Southern Counties Other California counties Totals Critical Ratio*
Teachers Per No. cent
Students Per No. cent
Part-time drivers other than teachers and students Per No. cent
Full-time drivers Per No. cent
Total Per No. cent
*♦9.6
252
35.8
703
100
68
9*7
3^
k.8
138
16.2
23
2.7
k28
50.b
261
30.7
850
100
206
13.27 57
3.67
777
50.03
513
33.03 1553
100
1.3
0.07
0 .2^
1.3
♦Critical ratio for comparison of percentages of elementary school districts of eleven Southern and the other California counties
u> i\>
33
TABLE V COMPARISON BETWEEN THE RESPONDING HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF THE ELEVEN SOUTHERN AND THE OTHER CALIFORNIA COUNTIES OF THE USE OF CURRENTLY MAINTAINED SPOT MAPS
High school districts
Yes No. Per cent
Eleven Southern Counties
20
22
Other California Counties Totals
55
32
112
67
\r \
ON CM
183
71
Critical Ratio
1.0
H
*.2
100
0.3
NOTE: This table should be read as follows: sixtysix, or 21 per cent, of the elementary school districts in the eleven Southern Counties used currently maintained spot maps; two hundred fifty-two, or 79 per cent, did not.
35
TABLE VII COMPARISON BETWEEN THE RESPONDING HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF THE ELEVEN SOUTHERN AND THE OTHER CALIFORNIA COUNTIES OF THE USE OF CURRENTLY MAINTAINED SCALED ROUTE MAPS
High school districts
Yes No. Per cent
No No. Per cent
Eleven Southern Counties
kB
53
**3
^7
91
100
Other California Counties
8?
53
78
^7
165
100
135
53
121
^7
256
100
Totals Critical Ratio
0
Total No. Per cent
0
NOTE: This table should be read as follows: fortyeight, or 53 per cent, of the high school districts in the eleven Southern Counties used currently maintained scaled route maps.
36
TABLE VIII COMPARISON BETWEEN THE RESPONDING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF THE ELEVEN SOUTHERN AND THE OTHER CALIFORNIA COUNTIES OF THE USE OF CURRENTLY MAINTAINED SCALED ROUTE MAPS
Elementary school districts
No. per cent
Eleven Southern Counties
100
Other California Counties Totals Critical Ratio
No
Yes
Total
No.
Per cent
No. Per cent
32
218
68
318
100
151
29
368
71
519
100
251
30
586
70
837
100
0.83
NOTEs This table should be read as follows: one hundred, or 32 per cent, of the elementary school districts in the eleven Southern Counties used currently maintained scaled route maps; two hundred eighteen, or 68 per cent, did not.
seventeen districts were found practically every type of terrain and climate existing within the State of California. Several of the districts were located within the metropolitan, area of Los Angeles County.
Here we find the alluvial
coastal plain and the smaller, though important, San Fernando Valley— also an alluvial plain, separated from the larger coastal plain by the Santa Monica hills. area is also a coastal plain.
The Redondo Beach
The irregularities of its
terrain are due to sand hills which have received a suffi cient amount of alluvial soil to become stationary.
Although
largely coastal plain, the higher elevations in the Pasadena district are steep hills, between which are a series of small creeks during and immediately after heavy rains.
The highest
points in this district are in the lower portion of the San Gabriel Mountains.
La Canada is a small alluvial valley
surrounded by the Flintridge hills on the South and stretching well into the foothills of the San Gabriel mountains on the North.
Alhambra, located completely within the Coastal
plain, is a good example of a densely populated metropolitan area, with a completely level terrain. Located primarily at the southern end of the San Joaquin Valley, Kern County Union High School District extends into the gentle chaparaal slopes of the South and up the gorge of the Kern River. The Antelope Valley area is located on the Western
38 semi-arid fringe of the Mojave Desert, in many ways a plain interrupted by buttes which slope northeastward.
Part of
the high school district extends into Surprise Valley to the west.
This is a small cattle and agricultural valley about
ten miles long and two miles wide.
A very rocky area extend
ing into the eastern foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains comprises another portion of the district. The Lone Pine Bishop area lies in the Owens Valley, a ‘ river valley about eight miles in width, extending north to Bishop.
To the west the Sierra Nevadas tower ten thousand
feet above Lone Pine.
The valley, once mostly green except
when frozen in winter, is ordinarily dry because most of the water has been diverted into the Owens Valley Aqueduct, a major source of Los Angeles water for over twenty years. Over one hundred miles from Lone Pine, the Branch High School at Death Valley Junction is separated from the main school of the Lone Pine High School District by high, rocky, almost formidable dry mountains and arid, sandy, and almost springless valleys from three to ten miles wide.
While students at
Lone Pine live for the most part within a few miles of their school, Death Valley students come chiefly from Death Valley, Tacopa, and Shoshone, each area being at least twenty miles from Death Valley Junction.
Bishop is to the north end of
Owens Valley, one hundred miles long, what Lone Pine is to the south.
Bishop, however, also serves Round Valley, some
twelve miles northwest of Bishop, and at an elevation of about U-500 feet, nearly nine hundred feet above Bishop and Pine Creek, the site of the United States Vanadium plant and its housing units.
Also included in the Bishop District is
the Gorge District of the Los Angeles Water and Power Divi sion.
Although some students live here, the road is too
steep for the school bus; these students are transported to the main highway, a distance of eight miles, by their parents Snow in the mountainous sections renders travel practically impossible during certain portions of the winter months. Needles, the largest school district in the State, lies entirely within the Mojave Desert.
Except for Cadiz, a
summit town, the communities comprising the district lie in, but not quite at, the bottom of wide, sweeping, sometimes sandy north-south trending valleys.
Thousands of miles of
the school district are void of population.
In this section
are to be found mine shafts and Indian pictographs in their original state; that is, showing very little erosion. Averaging about three inches of rain per year, this is pro bably one of the driest areas in North America.
Most of the
rainfall comes in desert thunderstorms which frequently reach cloudburst proportions.
On the other hand, there may be no
rain for more than eighteen months.
The coastal rains
frequently result in slight desert precipitation, from fivehundredths to one-tenth of an inch.
Except at Chubbek Lime
Ho Mine, all students in the district are within walking distance of a paved road.
The Acheson, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railroad
is the life blood of the Needles District. The Imperial Valley communities have sprung up in the last fifty years on the floor of the ancient Cahuilla Lake Bed.
Chief development of the valley came after 190*4— 06,
when the Salton Sea was formed by the overflow of the Colo rado River.
The soil in the area is derived partly from lava
in the mountains east of Imperial and partly from other sources to the south and west.
Here and there the lake bed
is intersected by the deep channels of the New and Alamo Rivers, now dry except where used as irrigation canals.
Rain
fall averages from four to four and one-half inches per year. It is apparent that a wide variety of terrain and climatic conditions exists within the boundaries of the seventeen districts selected.
Desert wind and dust, intense
summer heat, snow, ice, and blizzards of the Sierras, and the balmy coastal climate for which California Is famous:
all
these, with shades and blending of temperature, are to be found here.
The terrain is also correspondingly diverse.
Among the rugged peaks of the Sierras, the flat coastal plain of the Metropolitan area, the sandy hills and valleys of the Mojave Desert, and the flat lake bed area of the Imperial Valley, we find ample diversity of terrain.
V-1 Administrative organizational patterns.
The seventeen
districts selected presented examples of most of the adminis trative organization patterns existing in the State. Los Angeles, Pasadena, and Alhambra are examples of city districts of various sizes, where the elementary and high school districts were controlled by the same boards and administration.
Although this group offers no example of
the unified district, the Pasadena administrative pattern was sufficiently similar in design to justify the omission of the unified district.
With the exception of three small,
outlying, independent districts, the boundaries of thePPasadena High School and Elementary Districts were conterminous. Both were controlled by the same board and administration. This sample contained two large joint union high school districts and several union high school, two elementary, and several single independent elementary school districts. Assessed valuation per unit of average daily atten dance.
One major consideration in the support of any educa
tion service is the relative amount of assessed wealth available to support, at the local level, the educational program of the child.
In the selection of the stratified
sample it was desirable to obtain diversity in the local financial ability to support a program. illustrate the diversity obtained.
Tables IX, X, and XI
Table IX gives the range
b2 in assessed valuation per child for the seventeen districts. This range extended from a low of $3,276 to the phenomenally high of $85,330 assessed valuation per child.
The elementary
districts, tabulated separately in Table X, varied from $3 ,2 7 8 to $85,330 per unit of average daily attendance.
Table XI,
concerning the high school districts, gives a low of $1 1 ,8 7 1 and a high of $3 8 ,*+33•
Included, then, were examples of the
truly distressed and the favored districts, frequently referred to in discussions relative to the equalization of educational opportunity.
Aside from the wide range, the
succession from low to high in each grouping was sufficiently moderate to indicate a true sampling. State transportation reimbursement per unit of average daily attendance. Under existing laws of the State of Cali fornia, the State Department of Education shared with the local district any approved cost of transportation over and above the amount which could be financed by a two-cent tax rate at the local level.
Any amount spent exceeding that
limit is a factor seriously affecting the equality of educa tional opportunity.
Many districts did not apply the full
amount of the revenue from the two-cent tax rate against transportation costs.
It was considered advisable, there
fore, to determine the diversity of local effort directed toward the financing of a transportation program.
Since the
y
*+3 TABLE IX ASSESSED VALUATION PER UNIT OF AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE FOR EACH DISTRICT COMPRISING THE STRATIFIED SAMPLE SELECTED FROM ELEVEN SOUTHERN COUNTIES
1 Brawley E l e m e n t a r y ............................ 7- Redondo Beach City Elementary
.............
$ 3,276
3* *+07
Jasper Elementary
............................
7,136
Needles Elementary
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7,66b
Alhambra City E l e m e n t a r y ...................... Los Angeles City Elementary
............
10,703
. . . . .
10,796
..........
11,871
Pasadena Elementary Central Union High School
.....
9,399
La Canada E l e m e n t a r y ...........
12,525
Westside Union Elementary
....................
12,7*+0
Redondo Union High School
.
15,258
Bonita Union High School
................
..............
Bishop Union Elementary
....
16,370
................
19,85**-
Antelope Valley Joint Union High School
....
25,351
. . . . . .
30,6b7
..................
38,**33
Kern County Joint Union High School Lone Pine Union High School Midway Elementary
..........................
85,330
M i-
x
table
ASSESSED VALUATION PER UNIT OF AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE FOR EACH ELEMENTARY DISTRICT COMPRISING THE STRATIFIED SAMPLE SELECTED FROM ELEVEN SOUTHERN COQNTIES
School districts Brawley Elementary
Assessed valuation . . . . . . .
........
$ 3,276
........
3,*tO7
........
7,136
........
7,66b
........
9,399
........
10,703
....
........
10,796
..........
........
12,b2b
........
12,7bO
..........
19,85^
Redondo Beach City Elementary Jasper Elementary
..........
Needles Elementary
............
Alhambra City Elementary
....
Los Angeles City Elementary Pasadena City Elementary La Canada Elementary
Westside Union Elementary Bishop Union Elementary Midway Elementary
.
. .
. . . ....
............
V5
TABLE XI ASSESSED VALUATION PER UNIT OF AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE FOR EACH HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT COMPRISING THE STRATIFIED SAMPLE SELECTED FROM ELEVEN SOUTHERN COUNTIES
School district
Assessed valuation
Central Union High School
..........
Redondo Union High Sehool
..........
........
15,258
............
........
16,370
....
25,351
Kern County Joint Union High School
..........
30,6^7
Lone Pine Union High School
........
38,^33
Bonita Union High School
Antelope Valley Joint Union High School
.....
State shared equally with the District the approved cost of transportation beyond the proceeds from the two-cent tax rate, tabulation of the amount received in state reimburse ment would indicate the diversity of the relative amount of transportation services provided at the local level, the diversity of state assistance, and the diversity of local effort to support”its transportation services.
Table XII
indicates that the state transportation reimbursement per unit of average daily attendance for each district comprising the stratified sample ranged from no reimbursement in three of the city districts to a high of $ 2 8 .3 1 in a large, sparsely populated, joint union high school district.
It
must be noted that, in each case, the local district applied to the cost of the transportation program the proceeds from a two-cent tax rate and then matched state reimbursements beyond that point for approved transportation.
Field trips
and extracurricular activities involving transportation were completely financed by the local districts. Total average daily attendance of each district .
One
indication of diversity can be found in the average daily attendance reported by the seventeen districts.
Table XIII
gives this information for the 19**6-4-7 school year.
These
attendance figures ranged from ll*f high school students in one of the larger high school areas to a top of 171,736
TABLE XII STATE TRANSPORTATION REIMBURSEMENT PER UNIT OF AVERAGE DAIL3T ATTENDANCE FOR EACH DISTRICT COMPRISING THE STRATIFIED SAMPLE SELECTED FROM ELEVEN SOUTHERN COUNTIES
School districts
Reimbursement
Los Angeles C i t y .......................
$00.00
Pasadena City
................................
00.00
Alhambra City
................................
00.00
Midway Elementary
...........
Redondo Beach City Elementary
1.18 . . .....
1*33
Brawley E l e m e n t a r y .....................
lA2
Redondo Union High School Needles Elementary
l .*+8
.........
..........................
Kern County Joint Union High School
2.91
..........
2.93
Central Union High School
. . . . . . . . . . .
3*^9
Westside Union Elementary
. . . . . .
3*95
........
La Canada E l e m e n t a r y ................... Bonita Union High S c h o o l ............... Bishop Union Elementary Jasper Elementary
3*95 *f.72
......................
9*26
. . • • . . . . . • • • • • •
17*27
Lone Pine Union High School
..................
26.79
Antelope Valley Joint Union High SCtJ cd s
0
Districtsi resorting
j Sparse 1 population I Double 1 session
j
j|
ABNORMAL OPERATING CONDITIONS AFFECTING PUPIL TRANSPORTATION IN THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF ELEVEN' SOUTHERN COUNTIES OF CALIFORNIA
*■
p
0 & ■p 0
*P O EH
Orange
32
7
2
3
0
1
2
1
0
0
0
1
17
Riverside
19
1
2
1
0
2
1
0
2
1
0
1
11
San Diego
if2
b
5
1
1
9
2
1
if
1
0
0
28
San Luis; Obispo
21
1
2
1
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
7
San Ber nardino
29
3
7
2
0
5
2
0
7
3
0
if 33
Santa Barbara
1?
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
Ventura
2p 2 Total. b7 Per cent 20.7 * See p. 69
column.
1 0 2 0 7 35 15 3*+ 10 i f . * f 3*1 I5*b 6*6 15 1
.
3
0 0 0 1 0 9 if b3 10 3 19 227 18*9 if.if 1.3 8 A | 100
for list of conditions included in this
districts:
major arterials, poor roads, mountainous terrain,
sparse population, and lack of sidewalks.
Other problems
were noted by a small number of districts. III.
TRANSPORTATION POLICIES
In considering the problem of operating conditions, the various policies of districts were investigated:
minimum
and maximum distances pupils were transported, shortest and longest one-way riding time, and earliest pupil-pick-up and latest pupil-delivery times. Minimum distance policies.
The policies of local
districts concerning walking zones and minimum distances which pupils may be transported markedly affect the amount of transportation which a district will need to provide. Tables XXVII and XXVIII reveal these policies for the dis tricts reporting from eleven counties in Southern California. According to Table XXVII, fifty-six, or 65.7 per cent, of the high school districts transported all pupils living more than one and one-half miles from school; thirty-six, or U-1.9 per cent, fixed the minimum distance at one mile from school; and twenty-three, or 2 6 .7 per cent, established a two-mile walking zone.
Only four, of eighty-six high
school districts, required pupils to walk more than two and one-half miles.
73
TABLE XXVII MINIMUM TRANSPORTATION DISTANCES OF PUPILS IN THE HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF ELEVEN SOUTHERN COUNTIES OF CALIFORNIA
Counties
Number of miles of one-way transportation Over 2 2|• • • 6 6 Totals 1 li i- 3 A
Imperial
0
0
3
0
1
0
0
0
¥
Inyo
0
0.
1
2
0
1
0
0
*1*
Kern
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
6
Los Angeles
2
l
6
2
5
0
0
0
16
Orange
1
0
b
3
2
0
0
0
10
Riverside
0
0
6
2
3
0
0
0
11
San Diego San Luis: Obispo
1
0
1
**
2
1
1
0
10
0
0
3
0
1
1
1
1
7
San Bernardino 0
0
1
1
b
1
0
0
7
Santa Bhrbara
1
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
if.
Ventura
0
0
3
2
2
0
0
0
7
2*
1* 1.2
Totals Per cent
5 5.8
b 20 23 1 30 1.2 3^.9 2 3 .3 26.7 **.7
2.3
86 100
*These minimum distances were occasioned by the fact that no pupil in transportable radius lived closer than distance indicated.
Minimum distances elementary pupils were transported are given in Table XX¥III.
Although sixteen, or 5*2 per cent,
of the three hundred nine elementary districts reported walking zones of less than one-half mile, one hundred ninetytwo, or 62.1 per cent, provided transportation beyond a onemile limit.
While thirty-one elementary districts gave
minimum transportation distances in excess of two miles, notations in most cases revealed that there were no pupils residing in the intermediate area.
They lived either immedi
ately adjacent to the school or at distances in excess of two and one-half miles. Maximum distance policies.
In terms of maximum dis
tances, the chief problems confronting high school districts were large areas and sparsity of population, as revealed in Table XXIX.
The problem of maximum distances was not acute
in the metropolitan areas.
With two exceptions, all Los
Angeles County pupils lived within a twelve-mile radius of the schools they attended.
With three exceptions, the same
was true of Orange County students.
In these two counties
no pupil lived over twenty-one miles from his school.
In
the other counties, however, different conditions prevailed. Distance grievously complicated the transportation problems. Thirty-three of the eighty-five responding high school dis tricts reported that they found it necessary to transport a
TABLE XXVIII MINIMUM TRANSPORTATION DISTANCES OF PUPILS IN THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF ELEVEN SOUTHERN COUNTIES OF CALIFORNIA Number of : miles of one-way transportation Counties i
3A
1
n
2
2i
3
5
6
Over 6
Totals
0
0
0
0
15
if
Imperial
0
6
0
if
2
3
0
0
3% 0
Inyo
0
0
0
2
2
0
1.
2
0
0
0
I
1
9
Kern
0
7
2
23
5
6
1
1
0
1
1
0
2
if9
Los Angeles;
5
31
0
15
7
3
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
62
Orange
8
9
6
5
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
29
Riverside
O'
3
0
11
10
if
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
19
San Diego
1
3
11
f
10
1
3
0
0
0
0
1
San Luis Obispo 0
1
0
5
3
3
1
3
2
1
1
0
1
ifl 21
San Bernardino
0
k
3
11
5
3
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
29
Santa Barbara
0
1
1
3
3
if
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
15
Ventura
2
7:
if
if
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
8 if
k7
37
8
309 100
Totals Per cent
16
19 5.2 23.6 6.1 73
27.2 15.3 1 1 9
5 9 1.6 2.9
2 5 0.6 0.6 1.6 0.6 2
2
2.6
76
TABLE XXIX MAXIMUM TRANSPORTATION DISTANCES OF PUPILS IN THE HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF ELEVEN SOUTHERN COUNTIES OF CALIFORNIA
Miles
Imperial
4 5
6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13
Inyo
Kern
Los Angeles
Orange
4 2 1 1 2 1 2
2
1
2
Riverside
1 2
San Diego
San Bernardino
1
Santa Barbara
Ventura
Total
1 1 1
4 3 6 3 3 2
1 1
2
1
1 2 1 1 1
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 29 30 32 34 35 Over Total
San Luis. .Obispo:'. -
1 1
1
1 1 1
1 1
1 1
1
1
1 1
1
1
1 2
2
1 1
2 1
1 1 4
1 16
10
2 11
2 10
7
2 6
4
7
Per cer
2 4 1 1 6 1 2 2
4.7 3.5 7.1 3.5 3.5 5.9 5.9 2.3 4.7 1.2 1.2 7.1 1.2 2.3 2.3
2 2 2 1 2 4 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 12 85
2.3 2.3 2.3 2.2 2.3 4.7 1.2 1.2 1.2 7.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 14.1 100
77 maximum distance of more than twenty-one miles; twelve transported pupils in excess of thirty-five miles.
Thence,
distances of forty-nine, fifty-two, fifty-five, and fiftysix miles, respectively, were reported. The situation, from the standpoint of maximum distance, was similar in the elementary school districts investigated. Table XXX discloses the fact that forty-two out of three hundred eight elementary districts transported pupils more than 15 miles; twenty-six went beyond a twenty-mile radius. Shortest one-way riding time.
Tables XXXI and XXXII
give the shortest one-way riding time reported by the high school and elementary districts investigated.
While 60.5
per cent of the high schools made their first pick-up within a five-minute radius of the school, 9 3 per cent made their first pick-up within not more than ten minutes.
The shortest
one-way riding time for elementary districts, as given in Table XXXII, was less than five minutes from the school building in 27*7 per cent of the districts; 76.1 per cent picked up pupils within a five-minute riding radius; and 92.5 per cent, within ten minutes.
Obviously the majority of the
children were picked up within a very reasonable radius of the school building. Longest one-way riding time.
Investigation of the
longest one-way riding time revealed that 6.6 per cent of
78 TABLE XXX MAXIMUM TRANSPORTATION DISTANCES OP PUPILS IN THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICTS OP ELEVEN SOUTHERN COUNTIES OF CALIFORNIA
Counties
niles of one -way transportation Number Of 1 1
2
Imperial'
0
0
Inyo
0
Kern
14 ”15
16
17 18
2
1
'2
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
2
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
1
2
1
6
0
3
1
4
1
1
2
3
3
1
2
1
3
1
0
3
1
4
3
33
29
33
32
4
5
6
0
0
4
1
0
l
1
0
0
0
l
4
Los Angeles
1
11
12
Orange
1
2
Riverside
0
San Diego
19
21
22
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
2
3
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
5
0
0
2
0
0
0
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
13
14
20
5
9
10
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
4
6
2
3
7
0
9
8
3
3
1
2
4
7
6
1
5
3
0
2
0
0
2
2
1
2
1
0
1
3
3
6
4
3
San Luis Obispo
0
0
0
3
2
3
San Bernardino
0
1
2
2
3
Santa Barbara
0
1
0
0
Ventura
0
0
2
2
16
28
TOTALS Per cent
Over 2o
11 T 2 “ 13
8
Totals
2.5
28
29
30
32
35
35
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
14
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
2
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
48
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
62
0
"0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
30
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
19
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
41
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
21
0
2
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
28
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
15
0
2
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
13
7
7
12
7
7
5
1
6
1
2
4
1
2
2
1
1
4
307
0 .6 5* 2 9.1• 10 .7 9.4 10.7 10.4 4. 2 4. 5 6 .5 1 .6 4. 2 2 .3 2 •3 3. 9 2.3 2.3 1 .6 0 .3 1. 9 o.3 0 .6 1 .3 o. 3 o. 6 0 .6 0 .3 o .3 1. 3 loo
79
TABLE XXXI SHORTEST ONE-WAY RIDING TIME IN THE HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF ELEVEN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COUNTIES, AS REPORTED JANUARY 21, 1 9 ^
Minutes 10 15
30
Total districts; responding;
Counties
-5
5
Imperial
0
2
3
1
0
6
Inyo
0
2
2’
0
0
if
Kern
0
2
2
3L
0
5
Los Angeles
if
9
8
1
0
22
Orange
1
6
3
1
0
11
Riverside
1
if
if
1
0
10
San Diego
0
8
1
0
0
9
San Luis Obispo
3
2
2
0
0
7
San Bernardino
0
5
1
0
1
7
Santa Barbara
1
1
2
0
0
if
Ventura
1
3 ifif
1
1
0
6
6 6.6
1 1.0
Totals Per cent
11 12.1
kQ.k-
,
29 31.9
91 100
80
TABLE XXXII SHORTEST ONE WAX RIDING TIME IN THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF ELEVEN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COUNTIES, AS REPORTED JANUARY 21, 19^8
Minutes Counties -5
5
10
15
20
Over 30
Total districts responding
3
b
1
0
0
I**-
Inyo
2
2
2
1
1
1
9
Kern
10
26
5
2
0
1
bit II
Los Angeles
32
35
7
1
2
1
78
Orange
9
20
*f
0
1
0
31*-
Riverside
1
17
6
1
1
0
26
San Diego
7
15
7
2
2
0
33
San Luis Obispo
3
3
8
1
0
0
15
16
7
2
2
0
31
3
9
1
0
0
1
1^
11
8
1
0
0
0
20
9 2.
b
318
San Bernardino Santa Barbara Ventura Totals Per cent
l$b 11 52 3.6 27.7 kS.b l6.b
88
• 1 —1
6
00
Imperial
1
100
81 the high school districts enrolled students who spent more than three hours and twenty minutes per day on the bus. than two hours were necessary in Ho .6 per cent.
n
More
Almost one-
half reported the longest one-way riding time to be in excess of one hour.
Complete details are given in Table XXXIII.
The one-way riding time for the elementary districts was somewhat shorter than the high schools, as can be seen in Table XXXIV.
Nevertheless, about one-half of them required 7
their longest riders to spend more than forty minutes each
2r
way, or a period of more than one hour and twenty minutes per day.
Pupils riding in excess of sixty minutes were
reported by 16 per eent of the elementary districts. Earliest pick-up time.
In the literature of the
pupil-transportation field, it is generally conceded that elementary pupils should not be picked up earlier than one hour before the opening of school.
This is also a desirable
practice on the high school level; however, it is not stressed as forcefully.
There seems general agreement that
no high school pupil should ever be required to board a bus earlier than one and one-half hours before the opening of the school program.
In California, the general practice is1
to open both high school and elementary programs at approxi mately nine o ’clock in the morning. According to Table XXXV, it may be observed that, in
°
TABLE XXXIII LONGEST ONE-WAY RIDING TIME IN THE HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF ELEVEN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COUNTIES, AS REPORTED ON JANUARY 21, l$bS Minutes Counties •20
20-29 30-39 W- 4 9 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-100
Total Over responding 100 districts
Imperial
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
1
2
0
6
Inyo
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
b
Los Angeles
2
2
7
8
1
1
0
0
0.
1
22
Kern
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
2
5
Orange
0
1
3
3
3
1
0
0
0
0
11
Riverside
0
0
1
0
2
2
1
0
0
10
San Diego San Luis Obispo
0
1
1
2
0
1
1
2
1
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
2
b
0
1
0
7
San Bernardino
0
2
0
0
2
0
1
1
0
1
7
Santa Barbara
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
b
Ventura
1
0
2
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
6
15 16,5
20 21.9
10 11.0
10 11.0
5 5.5
b
6 6.6
Totals Per cent
3 3.3
6 6.5
12 1 3 .2
b.3
91 100
TABLE XXXIV LONGEST ONE-WAY RIDING TIME IN THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICTS OP ELEVEN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COUNTIES, AS REPORTED ON JANUARY 21, 19M5. _______________________ Minutes_____________________________ Total Counties Over districts ___________ -2 0 20-29 30-39 50-59 60-69 70-79 8 0 -89 90-100 100 responding Imperial
0
1
3
b
3
0
3
0
0
0
lb
Inyo
0
2
2
3
0
1
0
0
1
0
9
Kern
1
b
7
lb
7
7
3
0
1
1
10
21
16
13
*+
8
3
l
2
0
78
Orange
1
11
11
9
1
1
0
0
0
0
3^
Riverside
1
7
9
8
0
1
0
0
0
0
26
San Diego
2
7
6
8
5
5
0
0
0
0
33
San Luis Obispo
2
2
b
5
0
1
1
0
0
0
15
San Bernardino
1
6
3
9
5
2
3
0
0
2
31
Santa Barbara
0
2
3
6
0
3
0
0
0
0
i1 *
Ventura
0
10
5
3
2
0
0
0
0
0
20
69
82
27
29
21.7
25.8
13 b.i
1 0.1
3 1 .0
3 1 .0
Los Angeles
Totals Per cent
18 5.7
73 23.0
8.5
9.1
318 100
TABLE XXXV EARLIEST PICK-UP TIME IN THE HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF ELEVEN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. COUNTIES, AS REPORTED JANUARY 21, 1 9 W
Counties
Number of Hours^ a. m. •7:15 7:15 7:20 7:25 7:30 7:35 7:H0 7 ^ 5 7 :5 0 7:55 8100
Imperial
2
3L
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
Inyo
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
k
Kern
2
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
11
2
2
2
2
1
0
0
1
0
1
22
Orange
k
2
1
2
1.
1
0
0
0
0
0
11
Riverside
6
0
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
San Diego
y
1
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
San Luis Obispo
i
0
0
1
3
I.
0
0
0
1
0
7
San Bernardino
k
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
C
7
Santa Barbara
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
b
Ventura
3
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
6
39
8
12
8
13
If
2
2
1
1
1
91
*f2.9
8.8 1 3 .2
2.2
1.1
1.1
l.h
Los Angeles
Totals Per cent
8.8 1**.3
*f.*t■ 2.2
100
85 sixty-seven of the ninety-one reporting high school districts, some pupils found it necessary to board the bus before 7 :30 , a. m.
This number constitutes about three-fourths of the
districts.
When the fact that many of these pupils walked
one or two miles to catch the bus is taken into consideration, it becomes apparent that a majority of this group will have been actively expending energy for three or four hours before the beginning of the school day.
The school and its
teachers, therefore, were placed in serious competition with the transportation program for the attention and energies of the pupils. Although only 8.5 pe** cent of the elementary pupils were scheduled for pick-up before 7 :15 ? a. m., almost threefourths of the districts reported pick-ups before 8:00 a. m.; this despite the fact that no earlier than one hour before school is recommended procedure.
Complete data are given
in Table XXXVI. Latest pupil delivery time.
In California, the
school must assume complete responsibility for the welfare of the child until he is discharged from the school bus at the proper place; thence he shares the responsibility with the parent.
Of interest to educators, then, is the latest
time at which pupils are discharged from school buses in the various districts.
As shown in Table XXXVII, thirteen,
TABLE XXXVI EARLIEST PICK-UP TIME IN THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF ELEVEN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COUNTIES, AS REPORTED JANUARY 21, 1 9 W
Hours, a. m. Counties •7:20
7 s20
7:30
7 :*fO 7:50
8:00
8:10
8:20
Number of After. districts 8:20 responding
Imperial
2
3
2
3
3
0
1
0
0
lif
Inyo
0
0
1
2
3
2
1
0
0
9
Kern
3
2
5
8
8
9
6
1
2
Mf
Los Angeles
6
7
10
19
16
11
5
2
2
78
Orange
0
2
2
2
10
9
5
if
0
3I4.
Riverside
3
5
if
3
5
0
1
1
26
San Diego
if
6
5
if
5
6
2
0
1
33
San Luis Obispo
0
0
3
1
5
2
2
0
2
15
San Bernardino
8
3
5
3
8
3
1
1
0
31
Santa Barbara
0
0
1
0
7
if
2
0
1
lif
Ventura
1
0
l
3
3
5
2
1
2
20
39 12.2
If8
11
318 100
Totals 27 Per cent 8.5
28 8.8
15.1
72 22.6
56 17.6
27 8.5
10 3.2
3.5
TABLE XXXVTI LATEST PUPIL-DELIVERY TIME IN THE HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF ELEVEN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COUNTIES, AS REPORTED JANUARY 21, 19^8
Counties: -*f:30
‘t o o to ^:39
to If.lf9
Hours, p.m. V .50 5:00 to to *f:59 5:09
5:10
5:20
to 5:19
to 5:29
5:30 or later
Number of districts responding
Imperial
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
6
Inyo
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
if
Kern
0
0
1
1
0
1
1
1
5
Los Angeles
6
3
b
0
2
2
0
5
22
Orange
b
0
I
0
1
0
1
Riverside
6
2
I
0
1
0
0
0
10
San Diego
5
2
0
1
1
0,
0
0
9
San Luis Obispo
l
0
1
0
2
3
0
0
7
San Bernardino
2
0
2
0
2
0
0
1
7
Santa Barbara
1
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
if
Ventura
2
1
0
2
1
0
0
0
6
29
9
lif
5
11
8
2
13
31.9
9.9
15.b
5.5
12U
8.8
2.2
i M
91 100
Totals % Per cent
11
or l1*.3 per cent of the ninety-one responding high school districts, reported regularly scheduled pupil deliveries at 5*30 p. m* or later 5 thirty-three, or 37 -^ P©** cent, at five o*clock or later.
This was another indication of the
length of school day required by many of the high school districts. The latest pupil delivery times in the responding three hundred eighteen elementary school districts of the eleven Southern California counties are shown in Table XXXVIII.
Twenty-one, or approximately 8 per cent of the
total group, scheduled pupil deliveries after five o*clock. One hundred six, or 31*3 P®3? cent, delivered after *f:30 p.m. Since most of the elementary schools closed school by 3*30 p.m., it must be assumed that almost one-third of the districts were scheduling pupil delivery times in excess of one hour after the close of the upper-grade school day. IV.
SUMMARY
Investigation of the prevailing operating conditions in the public school transportation programs of eleven Southern California counties revealed much data of interest to school administrators. General conditions.
Under the heading of general
conditions were density of pupil population, percentage of
TABLE XXXVIII LATEST PUPIL-DELIVERY TIME IN THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF ELEVEN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COUNTIES, AS REPORTED JANUARY 21, 19k%
••
-3
o o
Counties'
3*00 to 3*29
3*30 to 3*59
Hours p.m.. *f:00 5:00 ^:30 to to to bi29 ^*59 5*29
5*30 to 5*59
6:00 or later
** Number of districts; responding
Imperial
0
3
2
8
1
0
0
0
lb
Inyo
0
0
1.
5
3
0
0
0
9
Kern
0
0
0
2*f
1?
1
2
0
bb
Los.Angeles
1
If
12
26
22
10
3
0
78
Orange
1-
3
l*f
12
b
0
0
0
3^
Riverside
0
3
b
13
6
0
0
0
26
San Diego
0
3
5
16
5
2
2
0
33
San Luis Obispo
0
1
1
8
5
0
0
0
15
San Bernardino
0
0
6
12
7
5
1
0
31
Santa Barbara
0
1
2
5
b
l
0
1
lb
Ventura
0
0
8
9
2
l
0
0
20
20
8
1.
2.5
0.35
Totals Per cent
2 0.65
17
5*b
55 17.3
138 ^3.*+
2b.1
6.3
318 100
school population transported, and relative amount of trans portation services offered.
It was concluded that the
problem of pupil transportation was confused and compounded by a wide diversity in pupil-population density for the various districts.
The diversity prevailed when the districts
of any one county were analyzed.
A district with a pupil-
population density of fifteen-thousandths pupils per square mile has an entirely different transportation problem than does one with 7 ^ . 3 pupils for each square mile.
Any con
sideration for financing transportation programs or any suggestions made for the efficient operation of a pupil transportation system must recognize the pupil-population density factor obtaining in the specific district under consideration. Analysis of the percentages of pupils transported by the various districts, either high school or elementary, revealed a wide-spread difference in practice between dis tricts of any one county or between counties taken as a whole.
It was apparent that the relative number of pupils
transported by various districts tended to complicate the transportation problem for local areas. The transportation problems of the high school and elementary districts of Southern California were further complicated by the necessity for providing an increased amount of transportation.
An increase of more than ten per
91 cent was required in 72*5 per cent of the responding high school and 69.8 per cent of the elementary school districts. These increases were estimated for the years 19*+7-*+8 over 191+6 -1+7 .
Abnormal operating conditions.
A wide variety of
abnormal operating conditions were reported by the high school and elementary school districts.
In the high school,
sparse population, mountainous terrain, poor roads, and severe weather seemed to play a major part in complicating the transportation programs.
On the elementary level, trans
portation services were most generally affected by major arterials, sparsity of population, mountainous terrain, and poor roads.
Any of the factors listed in this section could
be proved to have a marked affedt upon the amount of service necessary, the type of equipment needed, and the total cost of transportation services within a given district. Transportation policies. An attempt was made to analyze specific pupil-transportation policies, namely: minimum and maximum distance pupils were transported, shortest and longest one-way riding times, and earliest pick up and latest delivery times. Of the reporting high school districts, 65.2 per cent provided transportation beyond a distance of one and one-half miles; in the elementary, 62.1 per cent, beyond a one-mile
walking zone.
Many districts were providing transportation
within a much shorter distance of school plants.
A majority
of the districts were not requiring pupils to walk an un reasonable distance.
Many individual districts, however,
were placing an undue burden upon pupils and parents by establishing unreasonable large walking zones around the schools.
It was apparent that distance played a definite
part in complicating the transportation program.
Those dis
tricts which found it necessary to transport pupils excessive distances found that an undue share of the current budget had to be allocated to transportation.
They also found that
results of the educational program were affected by the fact that the school had to compete with the transportation system for the energies of the child. One-way riding time varied from less than five minutes for elementary and ten minutes for high school districts to one hour and twenty minutes for high school and more than one hour for elementary school districts.
It was concluded,
therefore, that, although services were provided within a very reasonable riding range of the school building, the length of time spent on a school bus was excessive in many cases. It seemed to be the concensus of opinion among the experts in the field of pupil transportation that no child in the elementary school should be required to leave home
93 earlier than one hour before school convened; one and onehalf hours was the maximum for high sdhool students.
The
actual prevailing practices, however, were far from this ideal.
Inasmuch as 73*7 per cent of the high and 72.? per
cent of the elementary school districts picked up children before 7 s30 a.m. and 8 a.m., respectively, this practice of early morning pick-ups was regrettable.
Although there were
many cases where long shoestring routes and excessive dis tances made it.necessary for pupils to board the bus at an early hour, it was observed that the extremely early pick up times were generally scheduled because the bus was assigned three, four, or five routes before the opening of school. ation.
Additional equipment would have obviated this situ Unfortunately, economy of operation was allowed to
take precedence over pupil welfare. Solution to the problem of late pupil-delivery time was considered similar to that of the early pick-up; namely, the purchase of additional equipment to cut down the multiple route of a single bus.
In those cases where multiple routing
was absolutely essential, it was felt that the school dis trict should be responsible for careful supervision and provision for rest periods or quiet activities for the children waiting between dismissal and time to board the bus. In conclusion, although transportation was usually provided at reasonable distances from school buildings, the
/
time pupils were required to spend on the bus or waiting for , the bus was reprehensible.
CHAPTER V PERSONNEL PRACTICES IN PUBLIC SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION Whereas Chapter I¥ presented an analysis of conditions under which pupil transportation services were operating in the State of California, this chapter is devoted to a study of personnel practices, with special reference to the selection. I.
METHOD OP APPROACH
The importance of the personnel who manage and operate public school transportation services cannot be overft
emphasized.
"The most important single factor in achieving
safety in transportation is the school bus d r i v e r . T h e committee on the selection of school bus drivers, at the National Conference on School Bus Standards, released the following statement:
f,The School bus driver should be
selected with as great care as teachers and in accordance with defensible s t a n d a r d s . A c c o r d i n g to another authority: One of the most important persons connected with the whole school system is the school bus driver because he
■** E. Glenn Feather stone, "Can’t We Stop Killing Every Third Child?11 Safety Education. 26:12, November, 19^6. ^ Minimum Standards for School Buses (Developed and approved by representatives of the M states education departments. Scranton, Pennsylvania: International Text Book Company, 1939)) P* ^*3*
96 is necessarily a teacher by example. His should be care fully selected for his integrity, trustworthiness and character and he should be carefully trained for his task. He is the most important single factor in achiev ing safety, economy and efficiency in the transportation of school children and as we have pointed out, he is the only one who supervises them en route to and from school. We should not knowingly entrust our children to an unre liable or incompetent bus, nor should we entrust them to an unreliable or incompetent bus d r i v e r . 3 Administrators have come to accept transportation as a definite part of their program; also, rlA most important administrative function is the selection, training and com pensation of drivers.”1** As Reece asserts: Realizing that the most important element in a program of safe pupil transportation is the school bus driver, every effort is made to select these men with the same care with which teachers are chosen.5 *
The literature of the field is replete with references to the importance of the personnel who operate our school trans portation systems.
It may be well therefore to examine
current practice in the State of California and to measure that practice against established standards developed from the literature of the field.
In this chapter an attempt
was made to survey current personnel practice from a variety
3 Clement T. Malan, "School Bus Driver fs Role in the Transportation System,” Research Bulletin N o . 17 (State of Indiana: Department of Public Instruction, 19*+7) 5 P* !• Julian E. Butterworth, "Sound Policy in the Adminis tration of Pupil Transportation,” American School Board Journal, 102:27, June, 19^1. K
J. E. Reece, "Qualifications for Drivers,” Nations Schools. 25:*A, May, 19*+0.
97 of viewpoints, to establish standards of agreement from the literature of the field, and to make recommendations for best practice in terms of the standards developed from the litera ture of the field.
The problem was approached through a
search for answers to the following questions: 1.
How did current practice in the delegation of
administrative and supervisory responsibility for transpor tation services compare with the recommended practices of the literature? 2.
How did personnel selection practices compare
with best practices as developed in the literature of the field? 3.
How did current practices in driver training
compare with best practice as developed in the literature of the field?
b.
What additional improvements in personnel prac
tice were suggested by the literature of the field? II.
ADMINISTRATIVE AND SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITY
This phase of the study sought to answer the question:How does current practice in the delegation of administrative and supervisory responsibility for transportation services compare with the recommended practices of the literature of the field?
98 Practices existing in seventeen Southern California districts. 'A survey of the officers designated to assume direct responsibility for pupil transportation programs in seventeen Southern California districts revealed a wide I
1
diversity of practice, as evidenced in Table XXXIX.
-V
Only
^
three of the seventeen districts employed a full-time trans-, portation supervisor.
These three men were well qualified
by their background of training and experience to handle the delegated responsibility.
The transportation systems of
these districts reflected the fine leadership available.^} Each operated an efficient, well organized transportation system, at a moderate bus-mile cost. In three other districts, the responsibility for the management of the transportation system was assigned to the business manager. well managed.
-%
These districts appeared to be moderately^
Those systems under the direct supervision of
the business manager tended to be well organized in terms of accounting, purchasing, and financial controls.
The practice
of employing driver personnel on a full-time twelve-months basis and assigning, for the time not spent in driving, duties commensurate with the qualifications of the drivers was observed in these districts.
An effort was apparently
made to employ men having mechanical aptitude in addition to their skill in bus operation.
In many of the districts, the
practice of full-time twelve-months driver employment seemed
99
TABLE XXXIX OFFICERS DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR PUPIL TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM IN SEVENTEEN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA DISTRICTS*
Officers of leers___________________________________________ Number districts Superintendent
..................................
7
................................
3
Business manager
Full-time transportation supervisor
............
3
Full-time district employee, working the remainder of his time as: .......................... teacher
......................................
construction foreman
..........................
construction superintendent "
”
Jj*
'r_I-r*' “
"
"
2
""
............
1
. ■ “H
1 -----
-
-■
Responsible district agent determined even though transportation was contracted in several districts.
(I
to be impeded by a division of administrative authority.
In
one large district, for example, a majority of the transpor tation services were contracted, one given reason being the difficulty of offering full-time employment to the number of drivers that would be involved under complete district opera tion of a transportation system.
In this instance the
department responsible for transportation was in no way coordinated with the operation and maintenance departments. Schedules being set up independently, no effort was made to coordinate job assignments.
In another district in which
transportation services were directly under the supervision of the business manager, the extra time of the bus drivers was utilized through their assignment to special jobs by work order.
Charge for their time was made against the
proper budgetary classification.
Inter-departmental jeal
ousies and the administrative organizational patterns were considered a potential hindrance to the efficient operation of transportation services. Responsibility for direct supervision of the trans portation program was assigned to the superintendent by seven of the seventeen districts.
In these instances the
transportation seemed not so efficiently operated as in those in which the services were under the direction of a full-time transportation supervisor or the business manager. It is not reasonable to assume that the superintendent would
101 be an expert in all fields of administration.
When a super
intendent must assume responsibility for all phases of the transportation program, he either becomes an expert in this field at the expense of the other areas of the educational program, or neglects the transportation services.
The
latter is usually the case. One district assigned the direction of the transpor tation program to the district construction foreman; another, to the construction superintendent.
This type of combination
assignment can be most effective provided the individual is _ well trained and qualified in both areas.
In the two cases
here cited, it was apparent, unfortunately, that the general maintenance and construction phase of the assignment was the first interest of the individual; the administration of the transportation program was of secondary importance.
The
chief administrators of these two districts should have insisted that the individuals responsible for the transpor tation program expend the time and effort necessary to become experts in that field, or their responsibilities should have been reassigned. Literary opinion.
The literature *of the field seemed
to be in harmony concerning the following principles:
first,
that the chief administrator should be directly responsible to the board of education for operation of the transportation
102 program operated under the supervision of the superintendent of schools or his authorized representative. Although many other examples could be cited, the following quotations reflect the thinking of writers in the field.
Concerning the superintendents responsibility in
transportation safety, Gucky states, "The school adminis trator has seven specific responsibilities to the board of education.
He should supply the initiative in the form of
a definite plan of procedure for the program."^
Further,
A board of education that disregards the recommendations of the school administrator for political or biased reasons would render a true bill of indictment against the youth of America.7 A. logical division of authority has been suggested: The basic division of labor principle discovered through the experience of those boards and superintendents working together most effectively in the past is that legislative powers and functions shall belong to the board, and executive powers and functions to the super intendent.® In defense of the recommendation that a full-time transportation supervisor be employed, Butterworth contends: In the larger enterprises a full-time superintendent of
^ J. B. Gucky, Superintendent Looks at Safety in Transportation, " American School Board Journal« 105*39? September, 19^2. ^ Loc. cit. ® "School Boards in Action,11 2^-th Year Book (Washington, D. C.: American Association of School Adminis trators, 19^*6), p. kQ.
103 transportation may be employed. He functions as the immediate superior of the drivers. . . . In the small enterprises the vice-principal or a teacher may be desig nated as superintendent of transportation with a special responsibility for supervising that program. When this is done such a person may need to be relieved of teaching responsibilities during the first and last periods of the day. He will probably need to delegate to a head mech anic responsibility for directing the upkeep and repair of vehicles while he handles the transportation records and reports and in some instances may assume a;.share of the responsibility for cost accounting. The duties of a superintendent of transportation, if one is to be em ployed, either full time or part time, should be care fully worked out by the local administration.9 Others also advocate this plan: All the work of upkeep and repair of the equipment as well as the mapping out of bus routes, the supervision of the drivers and other matters having to do with transportation is directed by a superintendent of transportation. To conclude, "All phases of the transportation pro gram should be directed by one employee who has the ability and who is given adequate time to supervise all operations.rt III.
SOURCE AND SELECTION OF BUS DRIVER PERSONNEL
In an attempt to answer the question as to how personnel selection practices compared with best practices
9 Julian E. Butterworth and Virgil Ruegsegger, Administering Pupil Transportation (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Educational Publishers, Inc., 19^1), pp. 35-36. T. L. Nelson, "Safety at Fair Cost,*1 Nations Schools, 29:^2, April, 19^2. 11 jrvj_ng Melbo and Staff, Report of the Survey of the San Gabriel Elementary School District (San Gabriel, California: Published by the District, 19^9).
lO^f-
developed in the literature of the field, the elementary and high school districts of eleven counties in Southern California were surveyed and the literature thoroughly reviewed. Practices existing in eleven counties of Southern California.
Information filed with the State Department of
Education on Supplementary Transportation Form No. 1 indi cated that bus drivers could be divided into four classifica tions:
teachers who drove bus in addition to their other
duties, students who served as bus drivers before and after school hours, part-time drivers other than teachers and students, and full-time drivers.
Table XL classified the
replies of the elementary school districts in eleven Southern California counties under these four groups.
Of the 703
people driving school buses, sixty-eight, or 9•? per cent, were teachers; and thirty-four, or *f.8 per cent, students. Bus driving was a part-time activity for three hundred fortynine, or by. 6 per cent, and full-time for two hundred fiftytwo, or 35.8 per cent.
No information was obtained concerning
the other occupational activities of the part-time group; however, observation in the field would indicate an extremely wide variety of occupational pursuits, ranging from housewife to full-time school employee spending part of his time driving the bus. The source of bus-driving personnel in the high school
10?
TABLE XL SOURCE OF BUS DRIVING PERSONNEL IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF ELEVEN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COUNTIES, AS REPORTED JANUARY: 21, 19 W
Counties
Part- time drivers .Full-time Number of Teaehers Students Other drivers drivers
Imperial.
9
0
13
8
30
Inyo
1
2
10
8
21
Kern
20
3
63
kb-
130
Los Angeles
12
12
87
7b
185
Orange
10
0
37
19
66
Riverside
6
7
27
11
51
San Diego
1
0
37
22
60
San Luis Obispo
3
b
9
6
22
San Bernardino
1
6
35
51
93
Santa Barbara
5
0
12
5
22
0 68
0
252
23 703
Ventura Totals Per cent
9.7
31*-
b.Q
19 3^9 **■9.6
35*8
100
106 districts of the area is reported in Table XLI.
A distri
bution essentially different from that obtaining in the elementary districts is here observed.
Of the 6^9 employees,
eighty-five, or 13.1 per cent, were teachers; one hundred forty-two, or 21*9 per cent, students.
In addition to these
two groups were two hundred sixty-one, or *+0.2 per cent, other part-time drivers.
Because of the greater proportionate
use of teachers and students as bus drivers, the percentage of full-time and combination mechanic or custodian drivers was less at the high school than at the elementary level. Because it tended to show the high degree of correla tion between questionnaire results from the Southern area and the State as a whole, this comparison was included in Chapter III, as a justification of the stratified sample.-*-2 The two tables reporting the comparison revealed a suffi ciently high similarity in practice to justify the assumption that school districts throughout the state were operating their transportation systems with personnel obtained from the same sources and in approximately the same ratio as obtained in the eleven Southern California counties intensively surveyed. Table XLII lists the various sources of bus-driving personnel for the seventeen Southern California districts
Supra, pp. 31-32
107
TABLE XLI SOURCE OF BUS-DRIVING PERSONNEL IN HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF ELEVEN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COUNTIES, AS REPORTED JANUARY 21, 191*8
Counties
Part- time drivera Teachers Students Other
Full-time Number of drivers drivers
12
l*t
6
if
36
Inyo
3
6
8
7
26
Kern
5
30
16
Ilf
65
Los Angeles
7
26
52
8lf
169
Orange
12
9
2*f
13
58
Riverside
12
27
17
3
59
San Diego
8
7
28
3
if6
San Luis Obispo
7
6
lif
3
30
13
3
68
26
110
Imperial
San Bernardino Santa Barbara
if
12
9
3
28
Ventura
2
2
17
1
22
85
1^2
Totals Per cent
13.1
21.9
261 * 161 *+0*2 2*k 8
61f9
100
108
TABLE XLII SOURCE OF BUS DRIVING PERSONNEL IN SEVENTEEN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA DISTRICTS
1
X
X
2
X
X
Driver employed by contractor
Students
Adults
•H
Part- time
Other
— they apply to each bus 2-gb. Accurate tire mileage records kept 2-gc. Accurate records of inlieu of transportation pay ments kept, but not charged 2-gagainst buses d. "Abatements on account of services rendered other school districts" shown, but not included in "cost-per-mile" figure for operating buses 2-g10
6 . Costs of general supervision, bookkeeping, administration, shop supplies, district retirement contribu tions, etc., pro-rated among buses monthly
10
^ This section was prepared by Carl Boswell, graduate student at the University of Southern California, whose doctoral study is going forward In the field of pupil trans portation financing and accounting. Permission to make the accounting evaluation a part of this scoring procedure is hereby gratefully acknowledged.
211
SUB TOTALS Maximum 7* Accurate records of ”other than home-to-schoolft transportation kept, including driver*s waiting time on a trip basis
10
8. Records of pupils transported kept on a trip basis
10
9. Accurate equipment records kept with complete descriptive information on each bus, including date of purchase, cost, date placed in operation, etc.
10
10. The accounting system allows for accurate computation of f,cost-permile ’1 figure to operate each bus, and the cost per day per bus
10
TOTALS
Score aSsigned
100
intsV^ Convenience of Service (100 points Elapsed time (in minutes) between dismissal and last delivery k-$ 60 73 90 10? 120 Over 120 Points 30 2b 18 12 6 3 0 Score each bus and divide by number of vehicles for composite district score
30
Elapsed time (in minutes) between earliest pickup and sdhool opening Over ^
b5 60 Points 30
2b
75 90 18 12
105 6
120 3
120 0
30
____
Score each bus and divide by number of vehicles for composite district score. 5 Where unusually early pick-up and late delivery times are not caused by excessive loops but are straight line opera tions appropriate credit may be given. The penalties as-signed should be for poor routing and lack of equipment rather than excessive district size.
212 SUB TOTALS Maximum Score _________assigned Walking zones Kindergarten, £ mi.; Elem., 3/V mi.; Jr. and Sr. High, 1 mi. =
pts.
Kindergarten, 3/*+ mi.; Elem., 1 mi.; Jr. and Sr. High, l£ mi. =20 pts. Kindergarten, 1 mi.; Elem*,l£ mi.; Jr. and Sr. High, 2 mi. s10 pts. Greater walking distances
s
0
(Use nearest combination of distances) TOTALS V.
*+0 100
Additional Items 1. Adequate insurance provided for the protection of the district (if permitted by state law. Where state law absolves district from legal responsibility, full credit HO may be given in this section) Adequate liability insurance carried by district to cover Board members individually and collectively and to cover all school employees who might be involved in school vehicle accidents
10
2.
10
All bus drivers in uniform
3. Odometer or tachograph used for visual record of rate and distance traveled by each bus in relation to time *
10
Adequate insurance for district protection con sidered by experts to be fifty thousand dollars liability for one person, four hundred thousand dollars liability for one accident and twenty-five thousand dollars property damage.
213 SUB TOTALS Maximum Score ________ assigned *+. Sufficient substitute bus drivers licensed and available— preferably non certificated district employees
10
5. Utility bus available in case of emergency, or for special field trips
10
6.
Repair and maintenance work done in district by its own shops
10
7* Adequate repair equipment provided in district shop
10
8.
Standardization of buses to point that adequate supply of commonly used parts may be kept in stock
10
Gasoline and oil purchased by bid in conformity with district specifications, stored in safe, fire-proof containers
10
10*
10
9.
Liberal use of buses for field trips
11. Loading and unloading effected at each school in an established safe loading zone 12. Certificated supervision provided at loading zones during times pupils are loading and unloading 13.
10
10
Use of public address system in each bus 10
1U-. Administrative and teacher co-opera tion apparent through such devices as (a) name and address tags for all kindergar ten-primary children during first week (b) Kindergarten teachers available to ride bus during first two days.
10
15. Adequate garages available to house buses
10
16. Sheltered school loading zones available forrainy day loading
10
TOTALS
200
_____
21^ III.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Ruegsegger, in 19^*1 > developed a score card for measuring the effectiveness and quality of bus service, routes, and transportation systems.
Based on a maximum of
one thousand two hundred points, credit was given for regularity of service, convenience, comfort, security, conveyance and operating personnel.
Although this card
constituted an initial step in the right direction for evaluation of transportation systems, the findings, conclu sions, and recommendations of the present study formed a basis of criticism for the system, as follows:
It was too
cumbersome to score; values were improperly distributed because of changing standards; insufficient attention was given to many important items; undue attention was given various insignificant items; and the scale of driver compen sation was fixed, rather than flexible. As a result of the detailed study in the field of pupil transportation, a score card for measuring the adequacy of public school transportation services was devised.
The remainder of this chapter consisted of this
score card.
CHAPTER IX FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS The problem of well defined and executed policies is generally conceded by the experts to be one of paramount importance in the field of public school transportation. The need for maximum efficiency and best operational prac tices is great.
The fact that approximately 20 per cent of
the American school children were transported to and from school in 19^6 is proof of this vital need. I.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
This study yielded many important findings and led to certain definite conclusions. Operating conditions.
Density of pupil population,
percentage of school population transported, and relative amount of transportation services offered were among the problems affecting the general operating conditions.
No
uniformity of population density existed in any one county5 hence, the problems of transportation were multiplied in proportion to the diversity of the density. Consideration of the problem of percentage of popula tion transported indicated that over one-half of the reporting districts were transporting over ?0 per cent of their
216 enrollment*
The relative amount of service offered had
increased more than 10 per cent between the 19b6-b7 and the I9 l4.7 -.lf8 school years*
This increase is in keeping with the
general increase in the total school population* Numerous unusual operating conditions complicated the problem of pupil transportation.
The high school
districts mentioned specifically sparse population, moun tainous terrain, poor roads, and severe weather.
Most
frequently reported by the elementary districts were major arterials, sparse population, mountainous terrain, and poor roads.
Obviously, any one of these factors would affect the
amount of service and equipment required, and the total transportation cost for a given district* Certain specific policies were analyzed, namely: minimum and maximum transportation distances, shortest and longest one-way riding times, and earliest and latest pick ups and deliveries, respectively.
Approximately 6? per cent
of the high school districts provided transportation beyond a distance of one and one-half miles; about 62 per cent of the elementary, beyond a one-mile walking zone. walking distances were reasonable.
In general,
The affect upon the
energies of the child with respect to length of time spent on school buses could not be ignored.
One-way riding time
varied from less than five minutes for elementary and ten for secondary to one hour and twenty minutes for the latter
217 and more than one hour for the former.
Prevailing practice
showed that almost three-fourths of the districts in both levels were scheduling the first pick-up before 8 a.m. Obviously this same proportion of children was required to remain at school an excessive time after dismissal.
Multiple
routing of buses was responsible, in most instances, for these practices.
In general, although transportation was
provided at reasonable distances from school buildings, the time pupils were required to spend on or waiting for the bus was unreasonable. Personnel practices.
Under the heading of personnel
practices were considered the following problems:
respon
sibility for administering the transportation system; source and selection of bus-driver personnel; methods of training drivers; and possible improvements in general practices. Concerning responsibility for the administration of a public school transportation system, both expert opinion and practice supported the contention that the most efficiently operated programs were under the supervision of an expertly trained director.
Although about ko per cent of the seven
teen districts delegated the responsibility to the superin tendent, experience has not condoned the practice.
Business
managers tended to do a reasonably better job of management. Four major sources of bus drivers were reported:
218 teachers, students, part-time drivers, and full-time drivers. Between *+0 and 50 per cent of all the districts employed part-time drivers.
A high degree of correlation existed
between the figures for the seventeen districts and for the state as a whole.
That the bus drivers have a good moral
character seemed to be the only general qualification required by the districts reporting. however, were much more specific.
Experts in the field,
They expressed a pre
ference for male drivers, between the ages of thirty-one and fifty-five years.
Previous experience and training were
considered important. consideration:
Many personal factors were taken into
promptness, grooming and attire, clean speech,
sobriety, courtesy and cleanliness, ability to maintain discipline, interest in children, loyalty, moral uprightness, and a good disposition. Practice in the field of driver training was at variance with recommended practice.
Only one of the seven
teen districts conducted a thorough training course.
In the
opinion of the experts, however, definite, well organized training programs were essential. Recommended practices which would, in the opinion of authorities, tend to improve personnel practices were: 1.
Written contracts with carefully specified duties
for each driver 5 2.
Adequate compensation;
219 3.
Regulation uniforms supplied by the district,
and accessories by individual drivers; Integration of driving personnel into that of the
b.
whole school; 5.
Standardization of proper attitudes toward conduct
and safety on the bus through democratic development; 6.
Effort to retain able personnel;
7.
Adequate equipment, maintained in perfect con
8.
Established bus-loading zone, supervised by certi-
dition; e*
ficated employees; and 9.
Provision for certificated employee to ride each
bus carrying primary pupils during the opening days of each^ school year. Transportation routes.
In an effort to determine the
most effective means of establishing and describing public school transportation routes in a school district of average size, the attitude of writers in the field was determined. In addition, prevailing practices in eleven Southern Cali fornia counties were reviewed for the purpose of revealing those practices which seemed to yield the most satisfactory results.
Finally, a complete bus route description was
devised for an average sized school district. Review of the literature in the field of routes
220 showed a need for visual information concerning the problem; accurate description in sufficient quantity for distribution to personnel concerned; currently up-to-date information; and flexibility, so that alterations could be made without invalidating the complete route-description material. The most effective route description practices pre vailing in California seemed to involve maintenance of an accurate pupil-residence file, construction of pupil spot map, maintenance of string-and-eolored-tack route map, detailed bus route sheets, and small overlay maps indicating individual routes and stops. The inherent value of pupil-residence spot maps was generally overlooked in the school districts.
Where they
were employed, widely divergent practices prevailed. Currently maintained pupil spot maps enabled the administra tors of the district to meet such problems as rate of growth, degree of saturation, pupil housing, and existing transpor tation needs as evidenced by the visual record. A complete bus route description was devised, based upon string-and-colored-tack route map, detailed route sheet, and overlay route and stop-designation map, with detailed written description. Formulation and adoption of transportation policies. While recognizing the advisability of regulating transporta tion services by local board-adopted rules, regulations, and
221 policies, the literature of the field was devoid of actual suggestions as to content and techniques for formulating said policies. When individual districts were surveyed to determine the extent to which local boards adopted policies for governing their transportation systems, only 12 per cent of the elementary and about 3 0 per cent of the high school districts responded affirmatively*
Practically no unifor
mity existed in type or completeness of existing policies in these groups. Information gleaned from the seventeen Southern California school districts in eleven Southern California counties tended to show only a small percentage of school districts operating under board-adopted policies.
The
remainder relied, apparently, upon the provisions of the State Code, State Vehicle Code, and regulations of the California State Board of Education. A group of California educators, recognized as experts in the field of pupil transportation, agreed upon the desirability of regulating the systems by means of comprehensive board-adopted rules or policies.
In general,
they would incorporate the following areas into such a sets 1.
Establishment of a line of authority and respon
sibility for the administration of transportation; 2.
Relationship existing among state rules, legal
222 provisions of the state code, and board-adopted rules or policies; 3.
Extent of transportation offered to and from
school; Description of bus routes, with methods for their
b.
modification; and 5.
Regulation of selection, qualifications, and
training of bus drivers* Unanimous agreement was expressed concerning the advisability of adopting an official comprehensive bus drivers handbook, available to drivers and other officials concerned.
A negligible uniformity of opinion was expressed
upon the items which should be included in a framework of board-adopted policies. In conclusion, a set of documents, adaptable to the needs of the various districts, was deemed essential for the administrators who would probably welcome them. Score card for measuring adequacy of transportation services.
Culmination of the entire study of the problem of
school transportation was the development of a score card which should adequately measure the effectiveness of a transportation system of average size.
Although Ruegsegger
pioneered the field with a score card in 1 9 ^ 1 ? experience and current trends tend to show its inadequacy for the
223 following reasons;
cumbersome to score, improperly distri
buted values, insufficient attention to important and undue attention to unimportant items; and a fixed rather than flexible scale of driver compensation. II.
RECOMMENDATIONS
As a result of this investigation into transportation practices, both recommended and extant, certain recommenda tions were inevitable.
They cover the fields of equipment,
personnel, description of routes, and policies. Equipment.
It is recommended that school boards
purchase additional equipment to relieve long hauls and early and late pick-ups and deliveries, respectively.
The
fatigue, mental, physical, and emotional, which follows long hours spent on and awaiting a school bus is not compensated for by economy in the number of school buses purchased. Personnel.
It is recommended that any school district
using three or more buses for transporting pupils hire a well qualified and expertly trained director who shall work under the supervision of and be responsible to the superin tendent or his authorized representative. Well trained bus drivers are considered essential. It is recommended that;
22b
1.
The State Department of Education formulate a
driver-training program, adaptable to local needs, and supplementary to the requirements of the California Highway Patrol; 2.
The State Education Departments assist local
administrators in adequate orientation and training programs; 3.
Training programs be made available to all driver
personnel; b•
Driver-training programs be taught by instructors
expert in the field of pupil transportation; 5.
Programs be financed by the County Service Fund
or the Adult Education classes; and 6.
The State Department of Education recruit for this
type of instruction a corps of properly trained experts. Description of routes.
As a result of the intensive
study into the means of establishing and describing bus routes, the following devices are recommended; 1.
String-and->colored-taek route map, either
superimposed upon a pupil-residence spot map, or used in conjunction with the latter; 2.
Detailed written descriptions, listing each trip
in detail, of the daily route for each bus; and 3.
Construction of an overlay route and stop-designa-
tion map from which duplicated copies can be produced and used in conjunction with the detailed written descriptions.
22? Policies,
Because of the general agreement as to the
advisability of operating a local pupil transportation system by a framework of school board-adopted policies, it is recommended that local school boards: 1.
Adopt a comprehensive set of rules, regulations,
and policies to govern their transportation services; and 2,
Adopt a comprehensive bus drivers handbook as a
part of said rules and regulations, and provide each driver or employee concerned with transportation with this handbook. In order to facilitate the formation of local dis trict rules, regulations, and policies, a framework set*^was developed in this study, which also includes a bus drivers handbook.
p
It is recommended that local school boards use
these as patterns for the formulation of their own. It is recommended that any district, realizing the need for evaluating its transportation system, make use of the type of score card herein d e s c r i b e d , 3
Any expenditure
of money for this evaluation would be repaid in a more efficiently, safely, and economically regulated transporta tion program. In fairness to the many districts whose replies might
1 Supra. pp. 183-91. 2 See APPENDIX A, pp. 252-80. 3 Supra, pp. 202-13.
226 have indicated carelessness or penuriousness in the purchase of adequate equipment, let it be said that abnormal operating conditions of a natural character, such as excessive dis tances for transporting pupils and tortuous roads, placed an unnatural burden upon the local budgets which must allocate an undue share to transportation; hence, factors which appear undesirable are controlled by limited resources.
This
condition could be remedied in the individual districts by having the state assume a major share of the excess cost of transportation occasioned by abnormal operating conditions. Equalization of transportation costs is now an accepted procedure in the State of California. should be expanded.
The current practice
BIBLIOGRAPHY
228 A.
BOOKS
Butterworth, Julian E . , and Virgil Ruegsegger, Administaring Pupil Transportation. Guide to Action Series; Minnea polis: Educational Publishers, Inc., 19^1# 197 PP* Lambert, Asael C., School Transportation. Palo Alto, Cali fornia : Stanford University Press, 1938* 12*+ PP*
Lindsey, Morton C., A Study of Bus Transportation in Con solidated Schools^ with Specific Re commendations for the Established Consolidated School at Monsey. New York."" New York:
New York University Press, 1929*
127 pp.
Meadows, Austin Ruel, Safety and Economy in School Bus Transportation. Wetumpka, Alabama: The Wetumpka Printing Company, 19**0. 287 pp. Noble, M. C. S . , Pupil Transportation in the United States. Scranton, Pa.: National Textbook Company, 191+0. 39^ pp.
Punke, Harold H., Law and Liability in Pupil Transportation. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 19^3* 291 pp. Reeder, Ward G ., The Administration of Pupil Transportation. Columbus, Ohio: The Educators* Press, 1939. 200 pp. _______, A Manual for the School Bus Driver. Columbus, Ohio: The Educators1 Press, 1939* 39 pp. B.
PERIODICALS
Booker, 1; A., ifSchool Bus Caution,” American School Board Journal. 97*56, July, 193$. Butterworth, J. E . , “Sound Policy in the Administration of fupil Transportation,” American School Board Journal. 102:27-28, June, 19^1. _______ , “What About Costs,” Nations Schools. 29*39-l*-l> April, 19^2. Cook, Haro-ld H. , “D o n ’t Neglect the Bus Driver,” Nations Schools.\2*f:27-28 . November, 1939.
229 Farley, B. M . , "To School in Safety,11 Nations Schools. 19*25-27, April, 1937. Farnsworth, Burton K . , "Basic Principles Must Be Established for Pupil Transportation," Nations Schools. 12:1933* Featherstone, E. Glenn, "Can't We Stop Killing Every Third Child?” Safety Education, 26:12-13, November, 19**6. _______ , "Planning Postwar Pupil Transportation," American School Board Journal. 11:21-23, June, 19^5* Gucky, J. B., "Superintendent Looks at Safety in Transporta tion," American School Board Journal. 105*39) September,
19^2. Juckett, E. A., "School Bus Routing, Now and After," American School B o a r d U o u r n a l . 106:37-39? May, 19^3 * Lambert, A. C., "How Far Should They Walk?" 20:25-7? August, 1937.
Nations Schools.
"Rules for Bus Drivers," Ifrations Schools. 20:56, September, 1937. ______"Structure of School Attendance Areas," American School Board J ournal. 9*+*35-3, June, 1937* -. "Trends in the Transportation of School Children in the United States," American School Board Journal. 9***39, June, 1937. Maske, Robin J., "Adult Versus Pupil Drivers," Nations Schools. 25*^6, May, 19*+0. II
- . "Safety in School Transportation," Nations Schools, 25723-24-, December, 1939.
Meadows, A. R,, "Conservation Through Proper Routing, Operation and Use of School Buses," American School Board Journal, 106:M+-1f5? March, 1953. Mitchell, J. C . , "Element of Safety in School Transportation," American School Board J ournal. 93:55-6, May, 1939* Moore, C. C., "System in Bus Service," Nations Schools. 19:51-3? January, 1937.
230 Morphet, E. L., 11Influence of Roads on Transportation and Consolidation,” American School Board Journal* 85:6*f, August, 1932. _______ , "Keep Those Buses Rolling,” Nations Schools. 307l6-17) December, 19*+2. ______ ”Transportation Costs Create Inequalities,11 Nations Schools* 37:*+8, January, 19^6. National Commission of Safety Education, ”School Bus Safety,” National Education Association Journal. 35*333* September, 19**6. Neyhart, A. E . , “Five Million Lives in His Hands,” Safety Education, 27**+-6, May, 19*+8. Osborne, M. G., "Six Roads to Safety in Pupil Transportation,” Nations Schools. M-2:29-30, November, 1 9 W . Pattineton. M. G.. ”Bus Loading Made Easy.” Nations Schools. 36*^7, July, i9i*5. . “Keeping Transportation Records,” Nations Schools. 37*31-32, May, 191*6 . Punke, H. H., "How to Avoid Bus Accidents,” Nations Schools. 27:68-70, 72, March, 19*fl. . "The Law Governing the Transportation of Pupils To and From School," Elementary School Journal. 29:1, September, 1928. Reece, J. T., "Qualifications for Drivers,” Nations Schools. 2*>:lf, May, 19*40. Robinson, R. W . , "Laying Out of Bus Routes," School Executive. 66:56-58, February, 19*4*7. Tape, H. A.. "Transportation Safe for All," Nations Schools. 26:60, August, 19*40. Vanden Belt, B. H., "Students Can Make Buses Safe," School Executive. 6**:45-^6, December, l^M*.
231 C.
PUBLICATIONS OF LEARNED SOCIETIES
American Association of School Administration, Seventeenth Yearbook. “Schools in Small Communities.11 Washington, D. C.: The Association, 1939* 608 pp. Burns, Robert Leo., Measurement of the Need for Transporting Pupils. Columbia Contributions to Education No. 2 8 9 . New Yorks Teachers College, Columbia University, 1927* 61 pp. _______ , State and Local Administration of School Transpor tation. Columbia Contributions to Education No. 330. N ew York: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1928. 95 pp. Carter, R. L., School Centralization and Pupil Transporta tion with Special Reference to the State of Florida. Abstract of Contributions to Education N o . 162 . Nashville, Tennessee: George Peabody College for Teachers, 1935* 12 pp. Jensen, G. N . , A Study of Transportation in the Schools of Utah. Salt Lake City, Utah: State Department of Public Instruction, 192?. 35 PP* Johns, R. L., State and Local Administration of School Transportation. Columbia Contributions to Education No. 330. New York: Teachers College, Columbia Univer sity, 1928. 13** pp. Mort, Paul R., The Measurement of Educational N e e d . Columbia Contributions to Education, No. l^O. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, 192**-. 8^ pp. _______ , State Support for Public Schools. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1926. 10*+ pp. Strayer, George D., Jr., Centralizing Tendencies in the Administration of Public Education. Columbia ^■'ontributions to Education No. 6lBT New York: Bureau of Publi cations, Teachers College, Columbia University, 193 123 pp.
232 D.
UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS
Bryan, Paul C., "Equalization of State Aid for Pupil Trans portation." Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, University of California, 19^7* 23^ pp. Evans, Frank 0, "Factors Affecting the Cost of School Transportation in California." Unpublished Doctor’s dissertation, University of California, 1929206 pp. Ford, Luther, "Pupil Transportation in a Sparsely Populated Minnesota School District." Unpublished Masters thesis, The University of Southern California, Los Angeles, 1937* 115 PP/
Gilles, John William, "A Suggested Plan for Equalizing the Costs of Pupil Transportation in the State of California." Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, Stanford University, California, 19^7. 125 pp.
Hallon, William Eugene, "School Bus Transportation and Accounting in the Forty-eight States^" Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, Texas University, 19*+2. 212 pp. Harper, H. K . , "A Survey of Pupil Transportation in the Los Angeles City School Districts." Unpublished Masters thesis, The University of Southern California, Los Angeles, 193^* 130 pp/ i
Knapp, Roy A., "Financing Pupil Transportation in California Public School Districts." Unpublished mimeograph report of the Cooperative Committee on School Finance, State Department of Education and California Teachers' Associ ation, January, 19^9.
Riley, George A., "Transportation of School Children in Missouri." Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, University of Missouri, 19^-6. 276 pp* Sidener, John T., "Methods and Procedures for the Purchase of School Buses in California.11 Unpublished Masters thesis, The University of Southern California, Los Angeles, 19^1. 193 pp. i Upton, Roland H . , "A Study of Policies and Costs Relating to Pupil Transportation in Orange County." Unpublished Masters thesis, The University of Southern California, Los Angeles, 1937* 100 pp.
233 Lambert, A. C., “A Study of Some Factors that Effect the Need for the Transportation of Pupils To and From School at Public Expense with Special Reference to Certain Alleged Affects of the Density of Population upon this N e e d .11 Unpublished Doctor*s dissertation, Stanford University, California, 1935* 270 pp. E.
BULLETINS
Bulletin N o . £, Volume a . Sacramento, California: State Supervisor of Documents, December, 1 9 ^ . 50 pp. California State Department of Education, “Pupil Transporta tion, 11 Rules and Regulations of the California State Department of Education, Part III. Knapp, Roy A., “Financing Pupil Transportation in California Public School Districts,*1 Second Report of Assembly ' Interim Committee on Public Education Created House Resolution N o .n . “ "Sacramento, California: Assembly of the State of California, 19*+9 session. National Commission on Safety Education, “Standards and Training Programs for School Bus Drivers,11 Bulletin. Washington, D. C.: National Education Association, 19^9* 2b pp. State of California Education Code. of Documents, 19^8. 823 PP*
Sacramento:
Supervisor
APPENDIX A
MAP
C O M PILED
FROM
RECORDS
&
SURVEYS
lLLimB'-
/Rl^ToftlA
E-ACi£rMTE rq;
I
I
/wok/rg X i/£ yo# 40*I / X
C?ILPJQ
\
ci\
ALBERT
o\ --\ T/7 T/f ^ £ 0
C A P O l i n E \ 46
T
Zi\ T
•« 4y£ • I i 1 1 i i
i 1 i 1 1 | !
w• | tt 1 l
r~ ar
• k\
i M *|
U0 s|
1 1 Vlt>TA
1 ^>1
cl Gil d -* -4
! i
45
qI o, Ql 31
2 al
°*
y//
R O U T t
~Z.DtN
*601
«•
1 (BELLA
^
4.\ 9\
rjol^
Bus#
aunTta6Ton
.(,
\
i
K1A P * I li g i n p
-----------------------
6TRfctTS b U 6 5 fe6 T & M L L O T M L f c VTfcLtT*
• Dtbf^nMtD 6i t r i p
bTOPb
num&fcR
----------------------D I V T f c l ^ T
i___ -—
✓40r\ 4
bDUno^RY
Trip#
Tine School Leave
T i m e School Arrive
10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
40 a 42 43 44 45 46 47 43 49 50
7:50 8:17 8:30 8:42 1:50 2:05 2:23 3:23 3:35 3:40 3:53
Garage Holly Holly Holly F. A. Holly Holly Holly F. A. Holly Holly
8:15 8:28 8:40 8:52 1:55 2:20 2:40 3:30 3:40 3:50 4:15
Holly Holly Holly F. A. Holly Holly Holly F. A. Holly Holly Garage
15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
60 61 62 63 63 A 64 65 66 67 68 69
8:00 8:17 8:32 8:46 1:50 2:05 2:17 3:22 3:35 3:48 4:02
Garage Holly Holly Holly F. A. Holly Holly Holly Holly Holly Holly
8:15 8:30 8:44 8:51 2:03 2:15 2:45 3:30 3:45 4:00 4:25
Holly Holly Holly F. A. Holly Holly Holly f .a . Holly Holly Garage
Bus #
Leave Arrive Trip #_______Time_______School_______ Time_________ School
11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 29 A
7:45 8:10 8:35 8:41 8:50 1:55 2:05 2:20 3:30 3:45 4:00
Garage S. A. S. A. F. A. S. A. F. A. S. A. S. A. S. A. S. A. S. A.
8:08 8:32 8:40 8:49 9:40 2:00 2:15 2:50 3:40 3:55 4:25
S. A. S. A. F. A. S. A. S. A* S. A. S. A. S. A. S. A. S. A. Garage
9 9 9 9 9
71 72 73 74 75
8:05 8:27 8:42 1:50 3:35
Garage S. A. S. A. F. A. F. A.
8:25 8:40 8:50 2:30 3:45
S. A. S. A. F. A. F. A. Garage
eto
WOODR UFF
PAim
LonGOta
LAfe PLOEEls V 167ARIA bATHA
ic U O ADtTA O L
le
mon
L E M O fl
nOEMAD
noBMAn c
in o
PftfPELft
fu cTVTi •
C U e ^ T in A
6T.
2*N r * —
l
ave. 6CUOOL
noeTU
LE E O Y
Bus#
Trio#
Time
School
Time
School
12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12
10 11 11 A 12 13 14 15 16
7:55 8:22 8:37 8:49 2:10 2:24 3:38 3:50
Garage H. Oaks H. Oaks FA -Holly F. A. H. Oaks F. A. H. Oaks
8:20 8:35 8:45 9:00 2:22 2:47 3:46 4:15
H. Oaks H. Oaks F. A. Ret.F.A H, Oaks F. A* H. Oaks Garage
6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
50 51 52 53 53 A 54 55 56 57 58
7:55 8:15 8:25 8:40 8:52 2:10 2:30 3:25 3:45 4:02
Garage H. Oaks F. A. F. A. F. A. F. A. H. Oaks H. Oaks F. A. F. A.
8:12 8:23 8:35 8:50 9:05 2:28 2:45 3:45 4:00 4:25
i
\ r
\ I I
V
I j£
i« l
DEXTE2.
IS fr T*
H. Oaks F. A. F. A. F. A. F. A. H. Oaks H. Oaks F. A. F. A. Garage
\%
te
lo 1° •
I.
UTT)A
V.
---------------
| _ B A L D V i n AVE.
l
i
o^y
}
g1X210 .
^ooy_i
an accident was due to
defective brakes or other mechanical units, this infor mation must be shown on your Daily Condition of Bus Report form, and the same information must be telephoned to the transportation office immediately so that a 21.
277 mechanical inspection of the defective unit can be made before the bus is moved from the scene, k3.
ACCIDENTS TO UNATTENDED VEHICLES The driver of any bus which collides with any vehicle which is unattended should immediately locate and notify the owner or operator of such vehicle and give him the name and address of the school district owning the bus, or leave in a conspicuous place on the ■unattended vehicle, a written notice giving the names and addresses of the driver and the school district owning the bus. The accident should then be reported to the proper law enforcement agency and a duplicate report filed in the transportation office of the district.
P. k±h.
DISCIPLINE
RELATIONSHIP WITH PUPILS Drivers must not become unduly familiar with pupils or allow pupils to become unduly familiar with them. Discipline on your bus depends largely upon the observance of this rule*
22.
278 1+-5.
STANDARDS OF PUPILS' BEHAVIOR “The Regulations of Pupil Transportation,11 published by the State Board of Education provides as follows in Chapter IX, Pupils, Section 1: “Pupils transported in a school bus shall be under the authority of and responsible directly to the driver of the bus.
Continued disorderly conduct
or persistent refusal to submit to the authority of the driver shall be sufficient reason for refusing transportation to any pupil and for such other punishment as the law may provide.
The driver of
any school bus shall be held responsible for the orderly conduct of the pupils transported.11 Specifically, the following rules are to be observed by pupils at all times on busses operated by the School District: (1)
Remain seated
(2)
Refrain from loud conversation
(3)
No singing
0
No boisterous conduct
(5)
Keep all part of body inside bus
(6)
No unnecessary noises
(7)
No profanity
279 (8)
No eating on bus
(9)
Pupils not permitted on busses with athletic footwear equipped with cleats or spikes
(10)
Teacher or coach must accompany each group of pupils making a curricular or extracurricular trip.
b6.
UNSATISFACTORY CONDUCT All cases of unsatisfactory conduct are to be referred to the proper authority at the pupilfs school of attendance.
Reports will be made by thebus driver
on forms to be provided, and given directly to the principal or other designated person at the
school. A
duplicate copy is retained by the driver for future /
/reference, and a third copy is turned in to the trans portation office.
Under no circumstances will a driver
put a pupil off the bus en route.
Drivers may not leave
pupils at school, but will take them home and there notify them that they may not ride again until the matter is settled.
G. by,
REPORTS
Bus drivers are expected to be conscientious in filling out the report forms provided by the transportation 2b.
office.
Instructions concerning these forms will come
directly from the Bus Supervisor.
They must be kept
accurately and legibly and filed on the due date.
APPENDIX B
LA CANADA SCHOOL DISTRICT 1231 Foothill Boulevard La Canada, California August 9, 19**S
Dear Sir: A general study of transportation in California seems to reveal an absence of Board-adopted transportation policies in the majority of the districts considered. The policies examined seem to reveal the possibility of the accompanying pattern of policy organization. The question now arises - is the general absence of policies due to the lack of a basic pattern of policy organization, or to the lack of a felt need of such policies? It is in the answering of this question that an opportunity arises for you to make a contribution. As a selected member of a number of California administrators qualified by your experience to speak with authority upon this question, you can be helpful by spending the three minutes (or less) necessary to react to this questionnaire. Please return it in the stamped, addressed envelope provided. I will be glad to provide you with a copy of the general policy framework which will develop, if the reaction of experts in the field indicates a need for such an instrument. "X’1 the proper square if you want one. Sincerely, Norveil R. Dice District Superintendent NRD RM Encs
QUESTIONNAIRE Do you consider the regulation of district transportation services through a comprehensive set of Board-adopted policies to be a desirable practice?
Yes
_____
No
If the answer is "Yes,” which of the following would you like to see included in such a set of policies? Please ,fX tf the section you would propose, and add any not included here. I.
GENERAL POLICIES A)
Line of Authority and Responsibility
B)
Relationship of State Board Rules and Regulations, Legal Provisions, etc., to District Policies
C)
Transportation from Home to Sehool Distance Policies - Walking Zones, Pupils entitled to Transportation, Payment in Lieu of Transportation, etc.
D)
Transportation of Private School Pupils
E)
Bus Routes - How Established, How Described, Who Changes, etc.
F)
Bus Drivers - Recruitment, 'Qualifications, Training, etc.
G)
Faculty OrientAtion
H)
Public Orientation
II. III. IV.
BUS DRIVERS HANDBOOK - Board-adopted and made a Part of Official District Policies PUPIL ORIENTATION - Pupil Handbook, etc. OTHER
(Please list)
Is a copy of the suggested policy framework desired? Yes
No (signed)
_____________________
District
Transportation Form No. 1 State Department of Education 6-l-*f7 ANNUAL REPORT OF TRANSPORTATION COSTS SCHOOL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 19k? CALIFORNIA STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION SACRAMENTO l*f, CALIFORNIA School District,_____________
County_________________
Average Daily Attendance Elementary _____
High School
Instructions: This report is required in harmony with Sections 7011 to 701H- inclusive of the Education Code. Districts will prepare five copies of this report, transmit ting the original and three copies to the County Superintendent of Schools, retaining the fifth copy for the district file. The County Superintendent of Schools will examine the report and. if he approves it, will transmit the original and two copies to the Bureau of School Accounts and Records, State Department of Education, Sacramento l1*, California, retaining the fourth copy for his file. In preparing the report, refer to the instructions which appear in nTransportation Bulletin No. I . 11 Roy E. Simpson, Superintendent of Public Instruction A - Total Current Expenses of Transportation Charged under 5a Transportation of Pupils in accordance with California School Accounting Manual July 1, 19^6, to June 30, 19**7 1.
Salaries of bus drivers, mechanics, and helpers
2.
Supplies, repairs, storage and other costs
ft
Payments to transportation contractors
ft
Payments to parents and public carriers
ft
3.
ft
286 Transportation Form No. 1 5*
Payments made to other districts for pupil transportation
6*
Replacements
7.
Payments in lieu of transportation
8.
Total
Page 2 of 5 pages
$___ _____
B - Deductions 1.
Supplies not used for transporting pupils from home to school (Refer to paragraph 1, Bulletin No. 1)
•
2.
Labor not used for transpor ting pupils from home to school (Refer to paragraph 2, Bulletin No. 1)
3.
Accessories classified as Capital Outlay (Refer to paragraph 3 5 Bulletin N o • 1)
h*
Non-reimbursable expense in connection with "contracts11 30$ of (A-3) (Refer to paragraph 8 , Bulletin No. 1)
5.
All amounts paid "in lieu of transportation11 to parents for food & lodging (Refer to paragraph 12, Bulletin No. 1)
6.
Abatements on account of services rendered other districts, and other miscellaneous abatements (Refer to paragraph 3 j Bulletin No. 1)
287 Transportation Form No. 1 7*
Page 3 of 5 pages
Transportation other than between school and home________ft_________ (Refer to paragraph l*f, Bulletin No. 1)
8. Total deductions
$______ __
9. Cost less deductions
$mm________
C - Additions 1. Net replacement of bus (form 2 attached) only if incorrectly charged to Capital Outlay
ft________
2. Cost for other personnel services_______________________ ft_______ 3 • Insurance Fire and theft, etc. Liability and property damage (Refer to paragraph 3? Bulletin N o . 1 b.
ft________
Total additions
$ ________
5. Total cost plus additions and less deductions
ft
6. Cost on account of junior college transportation (Refer to paragraph 7 5 Bulletin No. 1)
ft
7. Total less junior college cost D - 1. Total Assessed Valuation of District 2.
ft
ft________
90% of valuation times $*02 tax rate (use 19b6-b7 valuation)
3*
Reimbursable transportation costs (C-7 less (D-2)
288 Transportation Form No. 1 *f.
Page b of 5 pages
One-half of reimbursable costs (D-3) (MaKelnosentry unless C-7 is larger than total cost D-2)
E - 1.
$
Approximate number of square miles in district
__
2.
Shortest distance any pupil transported one way
3«
Average number transported one way
b0
Longest distance any pupil transported one way Average number pupils transported daily one way ($) District owned bus (b) Contract to others
6,
Number of busses owned and operated by the district, including those under lease contract
7*
Per cent of A.D.A. transported (Be brief, but concise.)
8.
Unusual operation conditions
________
__
289 Transportation Form No. 1
Page 5 of 5 pages;
Certification by Governing Board I hereby certify that the above statement of cost of transportation for the year 19 U-6 -U-7 is true and correct, that it has been compiled in accordance with Transportation Bulletin No. 1 and the California School Accounting Manual and that only such costs are included as are provided by the Education Code of California. Governing Board of
School District
By __ Title
Certification by County Superintendent of Schools I have examined the above request for reimbursement from State Funds for the above-named district for Pupil Trans portation and, to the best of my knowledge, and belief, the statements are true and correct. I further certify that transportation for the district has been approved in harmony with Sections 16251 and 162^2 in the Education Code of California. County Superintendent of Schools of Date
19^7
__________________________ County
Amount Approved for Apportionment (Section 7012) Amount Apportionment Reduced (Section 701^)
$,
Net Balance Approved for Apportionment Roy E. Simpson Superintendent of Public Instruction By __ Date
19^7
Title
California State Department of Education Bureau of School Accounts and Records Supplement, Transportation Report Form No. 1 SCHOOL DISTRICT REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION AS OF JANUARY 31, 19*f8 COUNTY 0 F _ ______________ INSTRUCTIONS This report is requested as a supplement to Transportation Form No. 1 submitted by school districts in July, 19^*7* Districts will prepare three copies of this repofc$, trans mitting the original and one copy to the county superinten dent of schools and retaining the third copy in the district files• The county superintendent will transmit the original copy to the Bureau of School Accounts and Records, State Department of Education, Sacramento lU-, California, retaining the second copy for the county files. ONLY FIGURES OBTAINED FROM ACTUAL COUNT ON JANUARY 21st, 19 ^ , SHOULD BE USED IN ANSWERING SECTIONS B, C AND G OF THIS REPORT. In the interests of accuracy districts are requested to make careful preparation for the count on the specified date.
NAME OF SCHOOL DISTRICT
Roy E. SIMPSON, Superintendent of Public Instruction IMPORTANT IF ANY UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD MAKE JANUARY 21st OTHER THAN A NORMAL DAY FOR SUCH PURPOSES AS THIS REPORT, PLEASE MAKE THE COUNT ON THE NEAREST DATE WHEN NORMAL CONDITIONS ARE OBTAINED. A.
DISTRICT TRANSPORTATION POLICIES: 1. Do you have an official Board-adopted school district policy concerning the provision of pupil transportation? (If “yes,11 please attach a copy to this report. ) ________________________ yes___no,
B.
OPERATING FACTORS: 1. What is the earliest pick-up time in the morning for any pupil? . . . . . 2.
What is the latest time any pupil is discharged from a bus in the afternoon? ..................
________
‘
291 3.
What is the longest one-way riding time for any pupils? (minutes) ............
*K
What is the shortest one-way riding time for any pupil? (minutes) ..............
C.
MILEAGE DATA: 1. What was the total number of miles traveled by all school busses in transporting pupils to and from school on January 21st, 19**8? ................ 2. What was the actual number of pupils trans ported to SCHOOL on January 21st, 19*1-8? 3* What was the total number of busses in operation transporting pupils to and from school on January 21st, 19*+8? ..........
D.
TOTAL BUS MILEAGE 19^6-*f7* 1. If the figures are available, please give your total bus mileage for the school year 19*+6-*f7, excluding all mileage for trips other than between home and school. . . .
E.
OPERATIONAL PRACTICES: 1. Do you maintain a current spot map indicating residence locations of each pupil transported to and from school? . . 2. Do you maintain a route map laid out to scale upon which route schedules and stops are indicated? ...................
F.
OPERATING PERSONNEL: 1. How many bus drivers are teachers in .................. the school district? 2. How many bus drivers are students? . . . 3. How many bus drivers are part-time employees (exclude teachers and pupils). . *f. How many bus drivers are employed full time for that purpose? ................
G.
SERVICE ESTIMATE: 1. In your estimation have the pupil transportation services offered in your district increased or decreased BY MORE THAN 10$ over that of the school year 19**6-**7? Increased more than 10$ (check) Decreased more than 10$ (check)
'
292 H.
EQUIPMENT INVENTORY* 1. List the requested information on each DISTRICT OWNED BUS under the following classifications: Bus 1 Bus 2 Bus 3 Bus *fr Bus 5
a.
Make of ehassis
b.
Make of body
c•
Type of body (Transit or Conventional)
d*
Capacity of body
e.
Year made
f.
Purchase date
g*
Approximate price
Bus 6
LIST OTHER BUSSES ON A SUPPLEMENTARY SHEET 2. 3. b.
Does your district have sheltered storage for the busses? Does your district own these storage facilities? . . . Does your district do its own bus repair and maintenance?
-
n
o
- no. no Cheek one
b,
Major only
........
e.
Minor only
........
d.
Servicing only
e.
No repairs or service
This report submitted by (name)
. . *
_____
Title _________
.
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL DISTRICTS SELECTED FOR USE AS A STRATIFIED SAMPLE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF THE STATE
DISTRICT
SUPERINTENDENT
ADMINISTRATOR INTERVIEWED
TITLE
1.
Alhambra City Elementary
George Bettinger
George Yelland
Business Manager
2.
Antelope Valley Joint Union High School
Roy Knapp
Roy Knapp
District Superintendent Transportation Supt.
John Bevins 3.
Bishop Union Elementary
Clifford Byers
Clifford Byers
District Superintendent
k.
Bonita Union High School
Edward Walker
Edward Walker
District Supt.
5.
Brawley Elementary
George Anderson
George Anderson
District Supt.
6.
Central Union High School
Guy Weakly
Guy Weakly
District Supt.
7.
Jasper Elementary
Charles Hicks
Charles Hicks
District Supt.
8.
Kern County Union High School
Theron McICuen
Theron McKuen J. H. Pauley
District Supt. Transportation Supt.
9.
La Canada Elementary
Norvell Dice
Norvell Dice
District Supt.
10.
Lone Pine Union High School and Elementary
William Bauer
William Bauer
District Supt.
11.
Los Angeles City Elementary
Vierling Kersey
Randall Davis Schuyler Joiner
Transportation Agent Asst. Bus. Manager
12.
Midway Elementary
Howard McKibben
Howard McKibben
District Supt. u>
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL DISTRICTS SELECTED FOR USE AS A STRATIFIED SAMPLE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF THE STATE (continued) ADMINISTRATOR DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT INTERVIEWED TITLE 13.
Needles Union High School
George Kibby
George Kibby
District Superintendent
lb♦
Pasadena City School
John Sexson
Jack Sparr
Director of Transportation
15.
Redondo Beach City Elementary
Harry McCandless Carl Boswell
Assistant Superintendent and Business Manager
16.
Redondo Beach Union High School
Kirk Cobb
Myron Hesse J. T. Dodds
Business Manager Transportation Foreman
17.
Westside Union Elementary
Lyman Dietrick
Lyman Dietrick
District Superintendent
295 JURY OF EXPERTS WHOSE OPINION WAS SOUGHT REGARDING LOCAL BOARD RULES, REGULATIONS AND POLICIES FOR THE REGULATION OF TRANSPORTATION SERVICES 1.
Mr, Randall Davis, Transportation Agent Los Angeles City School District 1**25 South San Pedro, Los Angeles 15
2.
Dr, Schuyler Joiner, Assistant Business Manager Los Angeles City School District 1^25 South San Pedro, Los Angeles 15
3*
Mr. Roy A. Knapp, District Superintendent Antelope Valley Joint Union High School District P.O. Box 1262, Lancaster Mr* Lyman A. Dietrick, District Superintendent West Side Union School District, R.F.D. 2, Box 33^, Lancaster
5. Mr. Bruce Hawk, Special Services Coordinator Office of Los Angeles County Superintendent of Schools 808 North Spring Street, Los Angeles 12 6. Dr. C. C. Carpenter, Assistant Superintendent Los Angeles County Schools 808 North Spring Street, Los Angeles 12 7.
Mr. Jack Sparr, Transportation Director Pasadena City School District 351 South Hudson, Pasadena 5
8.
Mr. Robert E. Walker, District Superintendent Bonita Union High School District P.O. Box 188, LaVerne
9.
Mr. John Heinrich Hull, Superintendent Torrance City School District 2093 Torrance Boulevard, Torrance
10.
Mr. Frank M. Wright, Associate Superintendent California State Department of Education Library and Courts Building Sacramento
11.
Mr. Guy Weakley, District Superintendent Central Union High School District El Centro
296 12*
Mr. Bruce Miller Superintendent of Elementary Schools Ontario
13*
Mr. Hilton Bell Superintendent Visalia Union High School and Elementary District Visalia
l*f.
Mr. Theron L. McKuen, District Superintendent Kern County Joint Union High School District Bakersfield
15.
Mr. Ralph Rait, Business Manager Ventura Union High School and Junior College Districts Ventura
16.
Dr Paul Bryan Superintendent of Schools Albany
17.
Mr. Roy Moore, Business Manager Victor Valley Union High School District Victorville, California
297 SCHOOL DISTRICT INFORMATION SUPPLIED BY TRANSPORTATION STUDY INTERVIEW RECORD AND SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION SHEET FOR USE IN SELECTED DISTRICTS SECTION II. A.
Policies.—
OPERATIONAL
Indicate by a check those policies
which are in operation by virtue of administrative practice and those which are a matter
o
h
o
P
o
of Board record.
Leave blank those sections
B
OH* t2. wS' f H* pi O CO w P
£*
pj
ft