Let the bus aides rule!

As predicted, the FTT vote was 4-1 in favor of hiring bus aides....or rather have Kobussen hire bus aides and charge us $17.00 per hour. The school board on Monday December 3, then voted unanimously (Diedrich and Boylen absent) to seal the deal.

It's so easy to say, "It's for the kid's safety", and therefore who could possibly argue with the decision. Of course, that's the prevailing tactic of our school board and administration. They toss out feel-good buzz phrases to support their decisions in a manner designed to make people think that to disagree would mean that you don't care about the welfare of our children. It's a great tactic, actually. They are to be lauded for their ingenuity.

Our problems with this whole situation is that this is yet another knee-jerk reaction to solve a problem by throwing money at it instead of holding people accountable for their actions. We were told that it's not a good idea to suspend bus privileges of offending students because "if they're not on the bus, they're not in school". True. But there's a word for that. It's called truancy, and it's a legal issue. The school administration cannot serve as surrogate parents, and the taxpayers cannot--should not--bear the fiscal responsibility of the district administration doing so. Parents have an obligation to get their children to school. And if they're suspended from riding the bus, maybe the parents need to spend some quality time with their children pursuing behavior modification techniques.

Another problem is that the school board talks a good game about setting policy, but then they frequently disregard their own policies....unless of course sticking to their policies serves their purpose. Now we have a policy that simply states that the Administration can hire bus aides as needed. This leaves a lot of unanswered questions:

• Why wasn't some other solution considered such as using volunteers--perhaps senior citizens or at-home parents--- and providing property tax breaks in return?
• Since all bus routes have an assigned driver, and the behavior problems affected only 3 of 28 bus routes, did we consider switching bus drivers? Could it be that there are a few bus drivers that have better sills in the discipline management area?
• Who monitors the decisions that bus aides are needed?
• How will we even know if the bus aides are being effective?
• What if we decide that the problem is temporary? Who will make sure that we stop using bus aides when they are not necessary?
• Is one bus aide enough for a bus of 70 kids? Jim Carrel noted that when traveling with the HS band, there are often 3 or more chaperons per bus. Does this open the door for more than one bus aide per bus?
• How soon will it be that, in the name of safety, a bus aide is placed on all 28 routes (at a cost to the taxpayer of $3,000 per route per trip)
• When will this school board as a whole consider the taxpayer?

Bus aides?

At a special meeting on Monday November 19, the School Board's FTT Committee will discuss Administration's desire to change policy to allow the use of bus aides and then approve an addendum to the Kobussen contract to allow for Kobussen to hire bus aides for selected routes and charge the District.

The history of "bus aides" goes back to at least to this past September when Human Resources worked out an agreement with Local 60 to create a position entitled "Bus Aide" and a salary schedule. The issue was discussed at the October 1 HR meeting and then again at the November 5 HR meeting. At that meeting, the item was tabled pending review by the FTT.

Why bus aides? The District has been quiet about the issue, but WISC-TV picked up on it and posted an item on their Channel3000.com website on November 14.

www.channel3000.com/education/14589344/detail.html

That item indicated that both District Business Manager Phil Frei and Horizon elementary principal Kathi Klaas were both interviewed and reported that bus aides would be hired for at least 3 routes.

Again, why bus aides? Phil Frei was quoted as saying,

"We've had some issues of horsing around. Sometimes that horsing around gets more serious where kids are bringing a paper clip and threatening kids with a paper clip. So, mostly it's horsing around, but we wouldn't allow that behavior in a classroom, and we don't allow that on a bus."

So all this relates to 6-12 year olds wielding paper-clips? That reminds us of the old Monty Python sketch about teaching self defense against attackers wielding different varieties of fruit.

Instead of just throwing money at an issue, this District needs to settle back and look at what policy, procedures, and the bus contract offer to resolve the situation.

According to the bus contract, the bus driver has complete responsibility for discipline on the bus. He can stop the bus and call Administration or even the police if kids get unduly unruly. By contract, these buses are supposed to have video recorders on board, so we should know who the offenders are and deal with them appropriately. Bus drivers are also required to report any discipline problems to the school principle via a District form. Our policies clearly provide multiple steps, both pro-active and reactive to maintaining discipline on buses. Let's use them!

The big concern here is that this issue has all the earmarks of being a back-door done deal. WISC-TV reported that they received calls from parents who received a letter indicating that bus aides WOULD be placed on buses. Human Resources has been working to hiring bus aides for the district since early September. Phil Frei was quoted on Channel 3000 as saying bus aides WILL be hired. That was later edited to say "MAY" be hired (but only after SP-EYE complained about this FTT meeting being a sham and the decision had already been made.) Both Kathi Klaas and Phil Frei refuted quotes attributed to them by WISC-TV. So the bottom line here is that someone's not telling the whole truth: is it the parents who reported the issue to WISC-TV and "the letter sent home" or is it administration? We don't like to ask these kind of questions, but it seems that the question needs to be asked.

The media may not always get it right...but they never get it all wrong either. Usually the truth lies somewhere in between.

With all apologies to Elizabeth Barrett Browning, "How do I hate this proposal? Let me count the ways."

1. This issue reeks of closed door decision making and done deals.
2. If one reads the bus company contract and our own school district policies, the bus driver is responsbile for discipline on buses...much like the captain of an airplane has authority over discipline of its passengers. Why are we paying extra for responsibilities that the bus company is already contractually obligated to provide?
3. Bus aides' will cost the District over $3000 per school year per route ($6000 for both morning and afternoon trips)...which brings us to ...
4. All the information points to using bus aides "to ensure a safe ride home"...okay...so the kids are only exhibiting bad behavior in the afternoon?
5. It's clear that already a "maximum" of 3 routes have been identified out of 28 total routes. That's a pretty isolated issue.
6. At least one of the routes of "bad behaved students" is elementary school kids (6-12 years old!). Are these kids really behaving badly to THIS degree? Whatever happened to those good old days when a bus driver shot you a look in his mirror and you instantly folded your hands in your lap and zipped your lip???
7. Sure paper clips can be a weapon...but so can anything these kids have: pencils, pens, rulers, backpacks. Come on! Let's stop sensationalizing the issue and hiding behind student safety. What's next....metal detectors before boarding a bus?
8. What is the purpose of video recorders that are by contract supposed to be on each bus? Or are they really there? If they are, then what purpose do the serve?
9. Who's to say these kids will behave just because a bus company provided "aide" is present? If they won't behave for the bus driver, why are we so sure this will work?
10. The school district outlined 14 responses to disciplinary problems on buses last February. Are you telling us that all 14 steps have been tried without succcess and now this "last resort" is necessary?
11. Current policy already provides for suspending bus privileges for bad bus behavior both short and long term. Have we even tried that? When fighting was an issue at the high school, all it took was for Administration to crack done and expel a few offenders to resolve that issue.
12. Why are two separate Administrators talking to the media about this issue and then claiming they were misquoted? Didn't we hire a "Communications Specialist" for this very role? Didn't we just increase this position from 0.5 to 1.0 FTE? Shouldn't all media inquiries have been directed to that person?
13. Why aren't FTT Committee members provided with ALL the information to make an informed decision at their meeting? There's a lot of information that is out there but was not made available to them.