How Can Tech Help Fight Education Costs? 503
http101 asks: "With the ever-rising costs of fuel, we seem to forget those that are truly having problems affording it. No, not the homeless, but our own kids. 'Kids,' you ask? Yes, because being driven to school on the 'Yellow Dog' or the 'Edu-Express' better known as a school bus, is costing your state more money than ever before. In my neighborhood, we have a plethora of home connected by fiber and at least high-speed internet. So my question is, how can technology be better-implemented to ensure a student's studies and also lower the costs of fuel for the districts?"
Correlation (Score:2, Insightful)
Those costs, however, are education overhead, if you will. Busses do not scale with learning or technology. If every other student stays home the bus is even less efficient. Unless you can convince all of the distant students to learn from home... of course, in
Re:Correlation (Score:4, Insightful)
I have a friend whose wife is a grade school teacher. Spend 15 minutes with a teacher, and you'll realize just how truly ignorant that statement is. Many teachers I've met are far more dedicated to their job than any techie I've ever met. You don't teach to pay the bills- because it doesn't, not well at all. You teach because you love the concept of helping people learn and contributing to society. The standards are high- when it comes to education and training, they don't have a choice. Peer review is ongoing. Certification is required and often also ongoing. The amount of prep work my friend's wife does for teaching gradeschool classes is astounding.
Maybe -your- school is full of teachers who are in 'cruise mode', but most are full of people who have dedicated their lives to teaching your children. Show a little gratitude.
Re:Correlation (Score:3, Interesting)
Certification? It doesn't test anything useful that I can see. Peer review? none of their peers no what tec
Re:Correlation (Score:5, Insightful)
Our schools are on warehouse mode most of the time, and that comes from on high, not in the classroom. Part of the problem is the very idea of education has been severely deprecated. I am a geek, linux, java, yada yada, but I teach history and consider myself an historian first. But, history, nor 99% of anything else in school is going to be worth $1 more in the "real world". But that's not, nor has is ever been the point of an education.
So, we have marginalized an education for practical use, which means that kids don't give two shits about history, just a letter on a piece of paper. It's either "I need it for college, how do I get an A" or "When are we ever gonna need this"?
Don't cry for me Argentina, as I love what I do and have great kids. Really. But, we are in many ways a babysitter, or a caretaker, holding them long enough so they don't rampage the neighborhood while the mommies are out walking the babies. Until there is a penalty (other than personal opportunity squandered) for not graduating and learning, it'll only get worse.
Re:Correlation (Score:4, Insightful)
Fastforward about 10 years...
I developed a great appreciation for history and watch all this shit on the history channel, read books, have discussions with friends, etc. What really matters in the end is whether the person you are teaching is ready for the information. I wasn't in high school but many years later I was. I still remember that teacher though and wish I could sit there and listen to him talk about those battles once again. Cest la vie...
Oh captain, my captain... (Score:2)
When the teacher was cool and informal, we enjoyed much more than with stiff old men wearing suits and dictating - which makes me consider that one of the the problems in teaching is the passive educational model, please refer to the book "Surely you're joking, Mr. Feynman!" [wikipedia.org].
Also, one of the reasons History gets boring is that it becomes bloated with facts you have
Re:Correlation (Score:5, Informative)
I didn't want to be at school, and I was good at it. My daily refrain for about 4 years was, "do I have to go to school today?" (It ended when I got into a private highschool for the last two years, but even then I only tollerated school). The problem was partially the "f*** ups", as you call them, but I was also bored out of my mind. There were so many things I had to do, that I just didn't care about. It was a total waste of time. The local paper printed my letter last year that ended with, "Can I have my 13 years back, please?
One of your fellow teachers resigned his NYC teaching job with a scathing letter to the Wall Street Journal:
Re:Correlation (Score:2)
The teachers I know work hard and do their best. With larger class sizes they just do not have the time to be responsible for ensuring each and every child is challenged to their potential. Parents must be involved in the process by helping their children get the most out of homework, be motivated in their studies, and volunteer in class.
I think the gran
Re:Correlation (Score:2)
I'm not sure that's quite the GP's point either. From the original post
In most states it's not legal to leave elementary age children home alone. If parents are working, they have to provide some type of outside care for these children. The public school system has conveniently evolved to provide this supervision for much of the day.
If kids were learning
Re:Correlation (Score:3, Insightful)
"How can technology be better-implemented to ensure a student's studies and also lower the costs of fuel for the districts"
The above statement is a ruse. You really don't care about students studies, what you care about is fuel costs, your tax money, blah blah blah. Your like a most people in this country, you want to find a cheap short cut to education at the expense of raising taxes. If its your money your concerned with, why don't you ask your school district why th
Re:Correlation (Score:5, Interesting)
You get what you pay for. Look at the starting salary for teachers in many states...considering it requires, at minimum, a 4-year degree, are you surprised that Education programs at universities aren't attracting the best and the brightest? Add to that the sheer number of teachers we need, and you end up with large numbers of poor-quality teachers.
Not all teachers are bad, of course...my wife is a teacher, and I'd like to think she's one of the better ones. But I met some of her classmates, and saw her curriculum. I wouldn't trust half the kids in the average university's Education department to watch my house over the weekend, let alone trust them with my kids.
Of course, if teaching paid more, it would attract more qualified people, and in turn Education programs would become more competitive, and quality would increase. If lawyers made what teachers made, do you think that law school would be hard to get into? Would it be very demanding? A large number of graduates from teaching programs across the country are just one notch above those that end up at McDonald's. Some aren't even THAT intelligent or qualified*. So is it any wonder that that is what our schools are preparing kids for?
Again, you get what you pay for. In the US, it seems most people are willing to pay just enough to give them a place to send their kids while they go to work, and if they're lucky teach them to read at a decent level.
Of course, to an extent, that is all many people in the US CAN afford. Which is why school funding is always such an issue. I've seen the difference between schools in a fairly wealthy suburban area and a decidedly poor urban area. It isn't pretty.
* - The average teacher is, of course, much better qualified to teach than the average employee at McDonald's. However, if you were to take many employees of Mickey-D's, pay for them to go through college, I think you'd find that many of them would be as qualified, if not more, to teach as many teachers. Teachers are often smarter than fry cooks because of education, not necessarily intelligence.
Re:Correlation (Score:2)
The other, is why can't kids walk a couple miles or ride their bikes, rather than ride a bus. That has of course secondary consequences of health.
As the parent says- school is babysitting to a lot of people- How many people take the day off from work if schools are closed for a snow day? A lot. With all the single working parents and dual income families, you aren't g
First, get out of public school. Re:Correlation (Score:2)
It is the largest employment sector in the entire country, and I wouldn't be surprised if this were true of other countries. For every teacher there are numerous bureaucrats and fantastic levels of overhead.
But how is success measured in a bureaucracy? Larger staffs and bigger budgets.
By bureaucratic standards, the forced public schools are fantastically successful.
Oh, you child isn't actually learning how to read? That has n
School is babysitting (Score:2)
But that doesn't mean that school isn't babysitting. Most of the way schools are funded are about keeping students in seats for numbers of hours. The beauracracy is designed with that as the primary goal and learning as the secondary - or worse - goal. Frankly, the teachers have no control over this and the administrator of a given district doesn't have that much
Some of it's not feasible yet (Score:2, Insightful)
Now, this might work in the inner city, but at that point you'd have to subsidize the cost of broadband for all those people that can't afford it. And sav
Re:Some of it's not feasible yet (Score:2)
Teacher: "Ok, now, what is five plus eight?"
(students raise hands)
Teacher: (beat) (beat) "Yes, Mary."
Teacher: "What's..."
Mary: "... Twelve
Teacher: "... wrong? Oh,
Mary: "... nothing..."
Teacher: "... sorry for..."
Mary: "... is wrong..."
Re:Some of it's not feasible yet (Score:2)
And I can't tell you how exciting 6 hours of just lecture over my computer sounds...I feel sorry for my children already.
Re:Some of it's not feasible yet (Score:2)
Re:Some of it's not feasible yet (Score:2)
I also thought of something else. If both parents are working, there is no way you can leave an elementary/middle school child alone for that long. And half the high schoolers I grew up with (I can probably include myself in that) were NOT mature enough to handle being alone ALL DAY and have to be doing schoolwork.
Easy (Score:5, Insightful)
Just home school. Through this mircale of modern technology, kids can be better taught than through any other method known to man! Not to mention that your child will receive his very own "teacher unit" who just happens to also be related to the child! A Win-Win situation for all!
Joking aside, Home Schooling is a very good option, especially in rural areas where familys can better afford to only have one parent working. The results of various studies show that the home schoolers easily outperform their publically educated peers, and that the social aspect isn't as big of an issue as was once feared.
From Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] (which actually links to quite a few more sources):
"The academic effectiveness of homeschooling is largely a settled issue. Numerous studies have confirmed the academic integrity of home education programs, demonstrating that average homeschoolers outperform their public school peers by 30 to 37 percentile points across all subjects. Moreover, the performance gaps between minorities and gender that plague public schools are virtually non-existent amongst homeschooled students. Source [hslda.org]"
---
"According to the findings, children who were schooled at home 'gained the necessary skills, knowledge, and attitudes needed to function in society...at a rate similar to that of conventionally schooled children.'
"The researcher found no difference in the self concept of children in the two groups. Stough maintains that 'insofar as self concept is a reflector of socialization, it would appear that few home-schooled children are socially deprived, and that there may be sufficient evidence to indicate that some home-schooled children have a higher self concept than conventionally schooled children.'" Source [ericdigests.org]
Technology only bolsters the abilities of home schoolers. Where as a home schooler of my generation had to be satified with the curriculum, materials the parents could afford, and the local library (an excellent source itself), modern school children can find information on virtually ANY issue simply by checking the Internet. Also, whereas labs done by my generation had to be performed by video tape, the modern generation is capable of actually video conferencing with a lab instructor for more precise education.
Isn't modern technology wonderful?
Only problem... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Only problem... (Score:2)
Re:Only problem... (Score:2)
Re:Only problem... (Score:4, Interesting)
Also: often homeschoolers will do classes together with other homeschoolers for subjects like art and music - say you don't know anything about music, but another homeschooling parent you know is a musician. You make an arrangement to take your kids to the mucician's place for music classes and they bring their kids to your place for Ruby Programming classes. These types of arrangements are fairly common among homeschoolers thus negating the 'lack of socialization' arguments.
Re:Only problem... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Only problem... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Easy (Score:2)
Oh, right, move out to the sticks and home-school, that's the way to economize on fuel....
(Sorry, but if the goal is energy efficiency, we're waaay better off with people living in the big city and taking the bus to school.)
Re:Easy (Score:2)
How so? If you live in the country the way people did 100 or even 50 years ago, you can live very cheaply. Only come to town once a week or so, homeschool your kids, grow your own food, about the only fuel source you would need would be for heat.
Big city life may be more economical in some areas (New York, Chicago, Boston), but in others there is little advantage (LA,
Home school now!!! (Score:2)
Anyone who dooms their children to twelve* years in government schools is guilty of gross negligence, bordering on purposeful, intended cruelty - maybe even sadism.
I wouldn't put a dog in a government school, much less an innocent, defenseless human child.
And, quite frankly, the so-called "private" schools aren't much better: The only way to be absolutely certain what it is that your child is being taught is to teach your child yourself.
*And it's up to 13 years for the children of most absentee paren
Re:Home school now!!! (Score:2)
That sort of exageration for effect is exactly the sort of language the flamebait moderation was invented for.
--Bruce Fields (spent 12 years in "government schools", got a pretty good education out of it, don't consider my parents guilty of gross negligence--quite the opposite)
That's all fine and good, but... (Score:5, Informative)
The parents that DO home school their kids probably do so because they know that they are qualified (and probably have some actual classroom teaching experience in the past).
A parent that home schools their child simply for financial reasons, in order to save taxpayer money, may not be giving their child a decent education.
Plus, the school bus will still have to run the same route anyway, using essentially the same fuel, regardless of whether the child is on the bus or not.
Re:That's all fine and good, but... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:That's all fine and good, but... (Score:5, Informative)
Nothing. That's why you have to pick a good curriculum. The Beka system I used is often referred to as "Self-Teaching", because most of the teaching is contained within the books, not the parent's head. And if a child cannot understand something (even at a high school level), the explanation is usually more than sufficient for an adult.
That being said, it's always up to the parents to decide if home schooling will work for them. It generally seems to work well for a lot of families, but if you don't feel up to it, check the alternatives. At the very least, there are quite a few private schools that are very affordable. Especially (dare I say it on Slashdot?) schools run by local Churches. Not all of them are so great (I've seen a few I wouldn't be caught dead sending my child to), but there are enough to where you can get your child a good education on a budget.
Plus, the school bus will still have to run the same route anyway, using essentially the same fuel, regardless of whether the child is on the bus or not.
You're forgetting that the route is determined by which children need to be picked up. If the child is near other school children, then your point holds. If the bus actually has to add to its route to pick up the child, then fuel can be saved through each child who home schools.
Then you are the problem (Score:5, Insightful)
> qualified to be teachers? In all subjects?
The fact that most parents have finished high school and supposedly have a diploma signifying that they know all the stuff they are supposed to know. If you don't then how can you justify keeping your diploma? If you do, then you should be able to explain it to your kids. If you can't, then you know you don't know it, and should probably refresh your knowledge.
Re:Then you are the problem (Score:4, Insightful)
A homeschool teacher would very rarely have more than two or three students, and what with the living together constantly thing, it's likely that the kid would adapt to nearly any teaching style. Kids are like that. And, even if the kid can't adapt, a teacher with so few students can spent a lot more time adapting his or her style to suit.
Teaching is not some deep mystery that only the Privileged Few are able to do. At one time in this country, nearly everyone was homeschooled.... the idea of regimented public school was bitterly, bitterly fought in some places.
Parents have been teaching their children since the Stone Age. Now, I'm not saying modern parents should be doing it without outside help. I'd strongly suggest reviewing a professional curriculum to at least familiarize oneself with what's being taught in public schools. But, overall, I see no reason to doubt that most parents could do a fine job of educating their kids.
And, let me tell you, they sure couldn't do a lot worse than a lot of the public schools. You just would not believe how ignorant these supposedly 'educated' children often are. Stone Age all over again.
Re:Easy (Score:3, Insightful)
And that "teacher unit" will in the majority of cases not be competent to teach every subject at the high school level. And in addition to overestimating their own competence, homeschooling parents also have a tendency to overe
Re:Easy (Score:2)
Not sure where you went to school, but I sure as hell had teachers in my high school clases that were not competent to teach the subjects they were teaching. My high school physics teacher had never taught physics before. He sat in on the class before ours, took notes, and taught the same lesson to us. Nice guy, but hardly competent in that subject.
I'm no proponent of homeschoolin
Re:Easy (Score:5, Insightful)
That's why it's very important to pick the proper curriculum. Public school books expect the teacher to provide most of the information verbally. In many of the curriculums designed for home schoolers, the books provide sufficient information to teach the child and allow the parent to understand and help the child if needed.
homeschooling parents also have a tendency to overestimate their child's desire to spend time with them.
I actually didn't see my mother very much. Most of our work was done in the morning, and she'd correct the work and perform one-on-one sessions in the afternoon. If all went well, we could actually be done with our schoolwork within five hours of work.
Finally, you should at least recognize that a large majority of homeschooling is done for religious reasons.
Irrelevant. If it produces better results as a whole, it doesn't matter what the reasons behind the practice are.
No, the studies may imply that ON AVERAGE home schoolers outperform publicly educated peers, but that's different than the absolute terms you're phrasing it in.
Your source is so biased as to completely invalidate any assertion they make.
Alright, let's try what you refer to as "[A] source [that] is definitely better.":
MAJOR FINDINGS - ACHIEVEMENT
Almost 25% of home school students were enrolled one or more grades above their age-level peers in public and private schools.
Home school student achievement test scores were exceptionally high. The median scores for every subtest at every grade (typically in the 70th to 80th percentile) were well above those of public and Catholic/Private school students.
On average, home school students in grades 1 to 4 performed one grade level above their age-level public/private school peers on achievement tests.
Students who had been home schooled their entire academic life had higher scholastic achievement test scores than students who had also attended other educational programs.
There were no meaningful differences in achievement by gender, whether the student was enrolled in a full-service curriculum, or whether a parent held a state issued teaching certificate.
---
Even with a conservative analysis of the data, the achievement levels of the home school students in the study were exceptional. Within each grade level and each skill area, the median scores for home school students fell between the 70th and 80th percentile of students nationwide and between the 60th and 70th percentile of Catholic/Private school students. For younger students, this is a one year lead. By the time home school students are in 8th grade, they are four years ahead of their public/private school counterparts.
The results are consistent with previous studies of the achievement of home school students. Source [ericdigests.org]
I dare you to find a study that contradicts these results.
This source is definitely better, but still a little suspect, considering education studies as an academic field is notorious for it's shoddy research methodology.
Arguable, perhaps, but I'd be very interested if you could produce studies showing the opposite. I think you'll find that *all* studies done (no matter by whom) show that Home Schooling has shown superior performance in all areas of children's lives.
Re:Easy (Score:2)
Oh, now you've done it. This is Slashdot. I think you meant "Lin-Lin situation".
So, in short, how can tech help homeschool? (Score:2)
(If not, what are they doing talking about transportation costs?)
Re:So, in short, how can tech help homeschool? (Score:4, Insightful)
And the answer is, "Just home school the child. The result will be that your child will do *better* acedemically and socially."
The downside is that home schooling isn't for everyone. I was home schooled, but my wife doesn't feel up to the challenge. So we send our kids to a private school. Even then, it was VERY difficult finding a school that was both affordable and met the needs of our child.
Re:So, in short, how can tech help homeschool? (Score:2)
Kudos to you and your family for analyzing the time commitment required and deciding that, since you didn't have the time to commit to the project, to outsource the job to people who would do a good job of it.
The problem is -- if you
Re:So, in short, how can tech help homeschool? (Score:2)
It's not so simple to "fake" home schooling. According to the laws in many states, you MUST report the attendence and cirriculum of your children to the State. And if anyone reports you for any reason, you may find a truancy officer knocking on your door, wanting to check on your records and teaching
Don't forget the social aspect (Score:2, Insightful)
How does/would home schooling deal with this aspect?
Re:Don't forget the social aspect (Score:2)
Re:Don't forget the social aspect (Score:2)
And the "Real World" isn't like that?
Might as well get kids used to it while they're young.
Re:Don't forget the social aspect (Score:2)
How does/would home schooling deal with this aspect?
When I went to school, we 7 in-between class periods of 5 minutes each. There was one 10 minute break and 20 minutes for lunch. That is a total of 65 minutes. Sending a home-schooled child to the park for an hour after school should easily accomplish the task - unless you are referring to the mistreatment of the smarter children that is a requirement in most (if not
Socialization? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll leave up to the other replies to discuss whether or not the socialization aspect of public school is otherwise a good thing.
Re:Interoperability (Score:2)
Distance education (Score:3, Insightful)
Secondly, there are some social implications. Distance education means that kids would not be interacting with other kids in the physical sense. They would be in front of a screen. That may or may not socially impact them. On another note, distance education could mean the end of school shootings as we know it. Kids would have the Internet to provide some protection from being made fun of because there is no visual contact with other students.
A third issue with distance education is the obesity epidemic. As far as I know, there are no gym classes with distanced education. That also means no playground. And if children become attached to the computer, they will less likely to be physically active. This also adds the question of how distance education would impact extra curricular activities.
A definite advantage of distance education is that it would teach children to use proper netiquette. It can also teach them ethical computer usage. Another advantage of distance education is that school buildings wouldn't bee needed which means lower costs. That includes janitorial work as well as electricity, property maintenance, etc. There would be a building, but none that has the requirements of a school building.
Re:Distance education (Score:3, Funny)
Because as every gibbering fuckwit knows, the lack of visual contact between people has always ensured a high degree of civility in any new communications medium.
And now that we've ended school shootings as we've known them, and because class ends in only five minutes, will you
Carpooling (Score:2)
Re:Carpooling (Score:2)
Re:Carpooling (Score:2)
Yes, the best way to deal with teenagers is to force them to do something they don't want to do.
As if that could be achieved anyway -- depending on how it's written, a law banning high-school-age students from driving their own cars on public roads to and from school could well be unconstitutional.
Could schools discourage students from driving themselves to school by
Re:Carpooling (Score:2)
Re:Carpooling (Score:2)
The education boards are so insistent on this, that they even have inspectors who go out and measure the exact distance to the nearest metre.
They could (Score:4, Insightful)
- Stop buying computers for primary schools that provide little educational value compared to cheap books and good teachers. The savings could pay for school bus
- Replace old school bus with efficient new ones. Perhaps even a hybrid concept or something similar. Very high cost upfront, but gas savings.
- Raise taxes. Gap! yes! raise *YOUR* taxes so that *YOUR* children may go to school and have a chance at a good education and a good future, a concept America as a whole has completely forgotten for some reason.
Re:They could (Score:2)
Or more accurately, raise *MY* taxes so *YOUR* child can go to school.
Not all of us are parents.
Re:They could (Score:3, Insightful)
The sad thing is, a good education system just doesn't help
Re:They could (Score:2)
Re:They could (Score:2)
Well, if every thing that was in the interest of society caused more taxation, we'd all be pretty screwed -- and I live in Canada and pay quite a bit of tax. I am happy to pay it for the most part, for exactly the reasons you mention.
However, when I hear about the sheer number
Re:They could (Score:2)
We are all part of society, and kids need to be able to function in the society that we're all part of.
Re:They could (Score:2)
Unfortnuately, considering how poorly educated the average US student seems to be when it comes to history as well as current political events, I think we're getting a pretty low return on our investment right now.
Not that this is entirey the school's fault. You cannot force kids to learn. Though you can fail them if they choose not to do so, and then they
Re:They could (Score:2)
Re:They could (Score:2)
School taxes have been rising steadily for decades, and what do we have to show for it?
Re:They could (Score:2)
Fuel efficient technology/What are you getting at? (Score:3, Insightful)
With the mention of fiber connected homes and broadband connectivity, I cannot help but think perhaps the poster has some sort of idea like: "well we don't need schools anymore, let's have all the kids learn at home!" That's a beast of a discussion in and of itself.
As for the main question of how technology in general can help save money now being spent on fuel for school buses, the immediate choices are more obvious. They include things like hybridization of the vehicles, natural-gas burning buses, and other forms of making the fleet more fuel-efficient. It's only a matter of time before some of the efficiency improvements we're starting to see in the family car show up in school buses.
Visit the oldest currently running "webcam" on the internet [mitwebcam.com]
Is the implication here..... (Score:2)
I assume all the above goes on in America just as it does in schools across the world.
I think the school bus or just getting kids to walk to school is about as good as it gets. Perhaps a more efficient HFC or EV bus could help with long-term costs?
distance learning doesn't - for me anyway (Score:2)
And do you want your teachers acting like local news clones? Ick.
Put the powerpoint away, hand out books instead. Actual learning may be involved.
Not much (Score:2)
The implication here is that somehow IT will make it so that kids won't have to leave home, and right now in US society that's not realistic. Children need to go somewhere else to be taught and monitored until society shifts back to a model where only one parent is a breadwinner.
You might think this
It cannot (Score:2)
There is no substitute for personal attention from a real teacher.
How are buses inefficient? (Score:2)
Re:How are buses inefficient? (Score:2)
the worst case for efficiency) at 2km
Biodiesel (Score:2)
Highest Ever? (Score:2)
I don't recall them complaining about school buses back then, but then again I was only 11 and didn't pay much attention.
Pedal Buses! (Score:2)
Re:Pedal Buses! (Score:2)
Brilliant. You solve the whole obesity epidemic/PE thing, cut costs, *and* cut your emissions.
I'm fairly sure that would probably contravene a couple of child-welfare laws though.
Walk (Score:2)
We walked 1 mile to school in the morning.
We walked 1 mile home for lunch.
We walked 1 mile to school for afternoon session
We walked 1 mile home at the finish of the day.
We not only had no busses, we did not have
a cafeteria.
It felt great! I always looked forward to those
walks!
Nobody even suggested we take a bus.
The only time mom ever drove me is if she had
to take me to the doctor's on the way to school
or some other errond.
How I long for those innocent, peacefull,
Scrap Buses (Score:2)
Quite a poorly written question (Score:2)
Then the questio
All Or Nothing (Score:2)
Reason for kids not being able to be schooled at home are endless. Biggest one being THERE IS NO ONE THERE
No it can't (Score:2)
"Tech" can lower cost of education for a few years, then evereyone gets to the same "cost" level and "expensive" again becomes a relative term.
What's the cost difference between two schools that use open source for everything?
Dick.
A gallon of milk costs more than a gallon of fuel (Score:2)
In the mean time, just don't pick up kids who live within 1 mile of school. They can walk.
Uh, Not at all? (Score:2)
The article mentions 12 million gallons of fuel a year? To bus what, several million students, several hundred thousand at least? Any amount of "Tech" that results in keeping kids at home and still getting educated is going to cost the state and/or the parents probably hundreds of dollars in start-up costs and possibly multiple hundreds of dollars a year in service and mainte
save technology costs, use money on gas (Score:2)
Age is critical (Score:2)
E-Charter School (Score:2, Interesting)
Is it worth it? That depends on your focus. (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm not against home schooling or schooling via the Internet, but there is something to be said about the social aspect of the schoolyard. I learned a lot about social settings and how to play with others, sharing, and even whom to avoid from having to "go" to school. I think that if we all start homeschooling our children or having them learn via the Interenet to save money on the bus driver's fuel bill there will be some aspects of growing up and things that don't develop properly.
I live in a relatively
Easy Solution (Score:2)
Force federal regulations on the school buses (Score:2)
Re:Force federal regulations on the school buses (Score:2)
one simple fix to schoolbus gas costs (Score:2)
Back in in the olden days when I went to school we walked to our bus stop. For grade school the bus stop was only about 1/10 to 2/10 of a mile frm my house. But for jr. high and high school there were fewer routes and stops and my bus stop was about a mile from my house. This is the north where there was often significant snow to walk through, and some icy hills to climb. Now I live in the mid-so
Time in class (Score:2)
Colleges do it.
If they really want to make it cool, half the class goes to school on Monday/wednesday/friday. The other half goes on tuesday/thursday.
The part of the class that goes three days a week goes for shorter periods (maybe 5 hours/day) while the other guys go 7 hours/day. This helps bring smaller class sizes. Students can learn from home.
Missing the bigger picture (Score:3, Insightful)
If we want to reduce our fuel cost for schools, let's look at mass transportation. We need to consider doing like the MTA's (Mass Transit Authorities) and switch to cleaner, more efficient fuels for schools buses (CNG, etc). In metro areas we need to encourage having kids ride the metro bus system instead of maintaining two bus systems (school and general transit). We could place a "school official" (a.k.a- the current bus driver) on each MTA bus that picks up kids, and then they would be responsible for safety and counting fares. This would reduce fuel and maintenance cost for both the school system and the MTA, it would also introduce social change in our society by removing the stigma of riding public transportation. Over all it would be a benefit to many, and in rural areas the application of alternative fuels and more efficient modern buses would most likely be a better solution than attempting to build out some expensive county wide internet/ multimedia network infrastructure.
Trying to solve a social/ infrastructure problem in life by throwing more technology at it generally does nothing but complicate the situation. Social & infrastructure problems require a social or infrastructure solution. Technology is not the end all be all solution- the tech bubble should have taught us that.
Just my thoughts....
De-Socialize schools? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:It can't (Score:2)
Re:French Fry Bus (Score:2)
Clark County, Nevada (Score:2)
French Fries to Fuel
Clark County School District, Nevada
The Clark County School District operates almost all its 1,186 buses on B20, which is a cost-effective way to improve the safety of its 246,000 students, according to district vehicle maintenance coordinator Frank Giordano. "It was our obligation to explore alternatives that would help clean up the exhaust from our diesel engines," says Giordano. "We worked with the engine manufacturer to include its new gener
Re:Bus (Score:2)
(Yep, I know, I'm going to hell because I was a kid.)
Re:Maybe we could hire Honda (Score:2)
Look at how many semi's are on the road. Those Diesels are incredibly more efficient than the one in your car, your car weighs a few thousand pounds. Semi's capacity is measured in tons.. Semi's Drive, all day, every day. That is what they do. That means that truc