RESEARCH BULLETIN ri RIONICAI RoOUM sete ets OF THE NATIONAL VOL. XIV - No.5 EDUCATION NOVEMBER: 1936 ASSOCIATION Safety in Pupil Transportation Published by the RESEARCH DIVISION of the NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION 1201 Sixteenth Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. RESEARCH BULLETIN o- » Published five times each year in January, March, May, September, and November President, ORVILLE C. PRATT NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION Executive Secretary, WILLARD E. GIVE! Director of Research: William G. Carr; Associate Director: Frank W. Hubbard Assistant Directors: Richard R. Foster, lvan A. Booker, Hazel Davis Research Assistants and Section Heads: Frances G. Bradley, Louise B. Sease, Helen H. Cox Anna Haddow, Madaline K. Remmlein, Jennette R. Tandy, and Bernice Woodbury Executive and Editorial Offices 1201 Sixteenth Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. Copyright, 1936, by the National Education Association Entered as second-class matter February 10, Washington, D. C., under Act of August 24, 1912. 1923, at the Post Office at Acceptance for mailing at special rate of postage provided for in Section 1103, Act of October 3, 1917, authorized February 10, 1923. Subscriptions The payment of the $5 membership fee of the National Education Association entitles one to receive for one year the Research Bulletin, the Journal, the An- nual Volume of Addresses and Proceed- ings, and certain other publications of the Association. One dollar of each $5 mem- bership fee is for a year’s subscription to the Research Bulletin. The Research Bulletin may be received regularly thru a special subscription at $1 per year. Many of the early issues of the Research Bulletin are already out of print. The special subscription at $1 per year offers an opportunity to maintain a complete file of future Research Bulletins. Those entitled to receive the Research Bulletin regularly are asked to report at once any change of residence, giving old as well as new address. Purchasing Copies Additional copies of this issue of the Research Bulletin may be obtained at the following prices, postpaid if remittance accompanies order: Single copies, 25c. 2 to 9 copies—10% reduction. 10 to 99 copies—25% reduction. 100 or more copies—33 14% reduction Orders for Research Bulletins not a companied by remittance are subject transportation charges. Make checks pay able to National Education Association. Reproduction of Material in Research Bulletins Material appearing in the Research Bulletin is copyrighted. However, De partments and regularly affiliated organi- zations of the National Education Asso ciation may reproduce parts of these bulletins for the advancement of education. These departments and organizations need no authority other than this notice previous to such reproduction. In other cases appli- cation for the release of materials is re- quired. Address communications to the Research Division, National Education As- sociation, 1201 Sixteenth Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. CONTENTS Page FOREWORD .......... bs ange etc ; ie om : 200 THE PROBLEM OF SAFE TRANSPORTATION. ; 201 If. THE SELECTION OF COMPETENT DRIVERS 205 II]. SAFE EQUIPMENT ...... a sit teue in bla os 5 pean a cd teas G — 209 IV. SAFE TRANSIT PRACTISES ...... ; 218 VY. THE SELECTION OF SAFE ROUTES 5 VI. Sarety PRoMoTION 29 VII. Business Practises AFFECTING PUPIL SAFETY 2s act 233 VIII. Impxications oF THis Srupy.... ; ee 23 LIST OF TABLES 1. Pupil Transportation Programs in 177 Cities over 30,000 in Population, 1934 204 2. Miscellaneous Standards for School Bus Equipment and the States Having Each Regulation or a Similar One....................0cs0ce- ee 216 3. Regulations Pertaining to the Operation of School Buses and the States in Which These Regulations Apply..... gaan 223 4. Rules for Pupil Conduct and the States in Which Each Rule Applies. . . fa 5. Deficiencies in School Bus Construction in the Case of Certain District Owned and Privately Owned Vehicles. ............. pcke Cae piaaaas 33 LIST OF FIGURES I. Ten-Year Trend in Pupil Transportation (2 Il. Percent of Pupils Transported at Public Expense, 1933-34. 3 [1I. Number of School Buses of Various Sizes Produced by Bus Manufacturers, 1928 ay ae, ee or Srey Sat tare ; 21] IV. ‘Ten Commandments for Safe Driving... si CAG beh Kee P- 221 a a ae soonest 222 Vi. Ehe School Bus Route............... 5 did: whee KORY aoe Be Oa Mala te Bw 22] Wha. Gertrmentes Avanied for Gale DFIVUMR. 2. occ sc cccc cc aceccvccsasvcce 232 VIII. A Checklist of Important Safety Standards and Practises................. 238 [199 ] FOREWORD APID EXPANSION of the system of pupil transportation during the past decade and a mounting toll of automobile fatalities and injuries on the nation’s highways have brought safety in school bus operation into the foreground as a problem of first importance. Moreover, there is every reason to expect that within a few years a much larger number of children will be transported and that certain trafic hazards will continue to exist. This situation calls for increased attention to matters of safety on the part of school authorities and all governmental agencies which share with them the responsibility for the safe operation of school buses. It demands, too, a more widespread public interest and a better informed public opinion than now exist with reference to the problems involved in safe pupil transportation. This issue of the Research Bulletin directs attention to some of the possible causes of pupil injury associated with school bus operation. More important, it suggests numerous safeguards and safety precautions which have proved effective in eliminating school bus accidents. It indicates some of the common qualities which characterize safe drivers. It outlines certain minimum stand- ards for school bus equipment. It calls attention to safe operating practises and to a number of administrative and supervisory procedures having vital safety implications. One of the significant contributions which the study makes is to demonstrate that, in most of the states, adequate information about pupil transportation cannot now be obtained from any central agency. It is to be hoped that in many states steps will soon be taken to obtain more complete and accurate reports. That this result may reasonably be expected, is suggested by the following quotations from correspondence pertaining to the study: 1. We have very little of the transportation data called for in your form of May 1936. I have started action looking toward securing the complete information. 2. In filling out your questionnaire regarding transportation, it becomes very obvious that we do not have sufficient records to give us the information we need. We realize this situation and I hope the state board at its next meeting will appoint an official committee to work with me on records for transportation. Written primarily for local school administrators and schoolboard members, this bulletin is intended as a manual, or practical handbook, which can be used either in evaluating an established system of pupil transportation or in develop- ing plans for safe transportation where a new system is to be introduced. In addition, the bulletin should be particularly helpful to state school officers, legislative committees, and other officials whose duty it is to establish state- wide minimum standards and uniform operating rules. It should be of interest and value also to members of state and local safety councils, to the members ot parent-teacher associations, to teachers concerned with safety education, and to other individuals and groups engaged in safety promotion. Wittarp E. Givens, Executive Secretary, National Education Association. I. The Problem of Safe Transportation hree million boys and girls are transported ‘) and from school daily in conveyances pro- ded by school authorities. Morning and even- ng a fleet of approximately 80,000 school 1yses Moves out upon the highways of the na- ‘ion, to cover routes totaling at least a million ,azards, inclement weather, and all other un- favorable road conditions. If this great pro- sram is to be carried out with safety, every recaution must be taken by those responsible the enterprise. Purpose This bulletin is intended to encourage more widespread adoption of the best safety prac- tises. It reviews important legal provisions and ficial rulings which pertain to pupil safety. It describes actual transportation practises in rious states and localities. It contains safety suggestions and recommendations offered by various organizations and agencies concerned with the promotion of highway safety. Sources and Procedures The study began with a canvass of the litera- ture already available. Search was then made thru the school laws and motor vehicle codes of all the states for legislation affecting safe school bus operation. The regulations of state boards ind departments of education, and the rulings of highway commissions and motor vehicle departments were also analyzed. For the five- year period 1931 thru 1935, the New York Times was consulted for reports of school bus accidents. Information and constructive help were obtained thru correspondence and _per- sonal conferences with many people, especially the representatives of several national organ- izations and certain federal and state officials. Helpful reports on present practises were ob- tained from thirty-six states, the District of Columbia, Alaska, and Puerto Rico in reply to a brief questionnaire submitted in May 1936 to each state and territorial department of education. Thruout the bulletin our in- Vol. 6, No. 3. Lexington: University of Kentucky, 1934. 81 p 2 National Highway Users Conference 1936. 127 p. su. &. D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1934 * National Safety Council. School Buses: 5 Farnsworth, Burton K. ‘‘Basic Principles Must Be Established for Pupil Transportation.” August, 1933. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Public Roads 46 p. (Act V of the Uniform Vehicle Code) Their Safe Design and Operation. Chicago: the Council, 193€. 14 p debtedness to others is acknowledged in foot note references. Particularly helpful were the transportation manuals of state departments of education and the bulletins (1) Regulation of Pupil Transportation in the United States, (2) Equipment Requirements for Motor Ve hicles,?> (3) Uniform Act Regulating Trafhi on Highways,® and (4) School Buses: Their Safe Design and Operation.’ Trends in Pupil Transportation The transportation of school pupils is not a new form of educational service. It began, according to Farnsworth,® in a Massachusetts 1840. There it for twenty-nine years without legal authoriza school district in continued tion, until in 1869 Massachusetts passed the nation’s first school transportation law, pro viding that Any town in this Commonwealth may raise, by taxation or otherwise, and appropriate money to be expended by the school committee in their dis cretion for the conveyance of pupils to and from public schools. Between 1870 and 1890, similar laws were passed in five states and between 1890 and 1910 in twenty-three states the provision of transpo1 1 er Cel twenty-five additional states. In tation facilities is now mandatory unc tain conditions. In Missouri and Nevada it may be made mandatory in any district by vote of the people. In six states the law permits the transportation of pupils living more than a specified minimum distance from school. In fifteen states transportation is legally permis sive at the discretion of school authorities. In Florida and Utah, the only states without specific legislation on the subject, general leg islation authorizing school authorities to pro mote education and do all things needful for the maintenance and success of the schools has been interpreted to include pupil transporta tion. By 1920 pupils were being transported in all the states, whether or not specific legal sanction had yet been given. 1 Eddleman, James C. The Regulation of Pupil Transportation in the United States. Bulletin of the Bureau of School Equipment Requirements for Motor Vehicles. Washington, D..C.: the Conti Uniform Act Regulating Traffic on Highways. Washingtor Nation’s Schools 12 [ 201 ] In spite of the fact that pupil transportation has been provided in certain cases for nearly a century, it is in some respects a new problem. Methods of transportation have changed—and are changing. The number of pupils trans- ported is mounting rapidly. Figure 1, based on the number of pupils transported in the decade since 1924, shows how rapidly the program is expanding. The development in certain states has been remarkable. New York, for example, which in 1927 was transporting only a little more than 10,000 pupils, now trans- ports more than 100,000.° ° Three factors have been especially impor- tant in producing the trend noted above: (1) improvements in our system of public roads, (2) new developments in motor bus construc- tion, and (3) widespread efforts to provide better educational opportunities for children by consolidating small schools. High- rural way improvements have made it possible to transport pupils several miles within a rela- ® Griffin, Francis E 21-22; April, 1936 ‘The Board of Education and Its Child-Transportation Program.”’ I tively short time. With good roads, t better equipment and more schedules. ‘The success of the movem come consolidated schools is readily shown. were 12,674 consolidated schools in 17,248 in 1934. There were 165,417 on schools in 1924; only 138,542 in 1934. Sj, all these factors and others are still op: there is every reason to expect that duri: immediate future pupil transportatio: continue to increase in volume and in | importance. Transportation in the Various States The problem, to be sure, is not of relative importance in all the states. S transport relatively few of the pupils en: others, a substantial percent, depending | on the sparsity of population and the pre attitude toward consolidated schools. Fig indicates the general volume of pupil tra: tation in each state. American School Board FIGURE I TEN-YEAR TREND IN PUPIL TRANSPORTATION Ble ef a. i if Peet Each symbol represents 200,000 pupils transported. Research Division, National Education Ass [ 202 ] FIGURE II Percent of Pupils Transported at Public Expense, 1933-34 E ho-14% ~ ry oY He LOO) »%& Over Research Division, National Education Association Sources: (1) Enrolments—U. S. Office of Education, Statistics of State School Systems, p. 49; (2) Pupils transported—Blose, David T., “Some C lidation Statistics.” School Life 21: 224; April, 1936 Record of Safety Thus Far Established Generally speaking, pupil transportation has een conducted with few accidents. During the five-year period 1931 thru 1935 serious only nine school bus accidents were reported nthe columns of the New York Times. There ire no figures for the nation as a whole,’ but from individual states come such reports as: Alabama—During the year 1934, there was not a single fatal accident in transporting 125,100 pupils more than 10,000,000 bus miles.’ Delaware—During the period 1924-25 to 1934-35, 45,000 school children were transported over ap- proximately 5,000,000 miles without a serious injury resulting from the negligence of a school bus driver.” Illinois—During 1935, there were six accidents in- volving school buses, but these accidents did not result in a single injury or death.” 7 There is at present, no possible source for complete and reliable Florida, Georgia, ldaho, Kansas, Nebraska, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah, and Wisconsin—No pupils are known to have been injured in school bus accidents in 1934-35 Michigan, Mis sourt, South Carolina, To the further credit of those responsible for pupil transportation may be cited the un fine safety records of certain school The Charles Feilbach School for Crippled Children makes the proud boast of usually districts. “no child injured in a million bus rides.” Lake County, Florida, operates 27 buses to carry daily 1000 children, an average distance of 10 miles. The system has been so carefully planned and administered that no single serious injury to any pupil has ever occurred.'* Wasco Union High School in California also has a perfect score—not a single accident, collision, or injury in over 15 years of operation.’* Bar stow Union High School in California claims the same distinction, adding further that there have been but 4 vehicle delays enroute in the last 2 dentally, also claims the longest bus route in the United States, a loop route of 104 miles. Then there is the record of Sioux City, lowa years of operation. This school, inci —1000 pupils a day in 17 buses for 17 years without an accident in which a child was in jured.’® One of the 17 drivers has been on the job the whole of the 17-year period; 2 have served 16 years; another, 14 years. ‘These and other districts are setting safety records worthy of emulation. Yet in spite of the general good record for safety which has been established, preventable accidents occasionally do result in the death or serious injury of school pupils. The need for vigilant attention to safety problems is demonstrated by the following accident reports from 11 states.'7 During the past few years 297 school bus accidents have occurred in the 11 states. not more than 5 years in any case information about accidents to school children associated with pupil transportation. In nine states no report of any kind is required in case of motor vehicle accidents. In most of the states a report to the local police or the sheriff is sufficient In only eleven states must a report be made to some designated state official Five of these eleven states compile statewide summaries but do not report the number of children killed or injured in school bus accidents. State departments of education usually have the best information available, information is incomplete. 8 Blome, H. P. Improving the Safety of School Bus Transportation. Berwyn, Vl.: the Author but a majority of these admit that their Unpublished ms. p. 2. (35 p.) ® Letter from William Ball, supervisor of transportation in the Delaware State Department of Public Instruction, June 8, 1936 10 Letter from H. H. Harrison, traffic engineer, Illinois Division of Highways, June 19, 1936 4 Reports from state departments of education, June 1936, except in the case of Utah and Wisconsin. The report from Utah comes from R. E. Hammond, Utah state tax commissioner, in a letter of June 1, 1936; that for Wisconsin from W. A Burdick director of the Highway Safety Department of the Wisconsin State Highway Commission, in a letter of June 11, 1936 12 National Safety News 29: 36; June, 1934. 18 Moore, D. H. ‘“‘An Economical County Transportation System.’’ American School Board Journal 85: 68: 14 Blome, H. P. op. cit., p. 2. 5 J bid. 16 School Life 21: 246; May, 1936. October, 1932 17 Replies from state departments of education to one of the questions in our inquiry on safe transportation, submitted in May 201. 1936. See “Sources and Procedures,” p Eighteen pupils were killed; 209 were seri- ously injured. According to the reports re- ceived, most of these accidents, with proper precautions, might have been prevented. Furth- ermore, just as there are districts with un- usually fine safety records, there are others with high accident records. For example, be- tween October 18, 1934, and January 24, 1935, there were 10 accidents in one school district.'* Five pupils were struck by passing automobiles after alighting from buses. One accident involved striking a car which stopped suddenly ahead of the bus; another, colliding with a car as the bus was passing a truck and trailer; another, skidding into a parked car on a curve; another, forcing a car off the road and causing it to strike a pole; and the last, collision with a car as the bus entered a main road. It is the occasional accident and the rare case of negligence that seem to justify this bulletin. A single preventable school bus acci- dent is one too many. Scope of This Study The material presented here deals primarily with safe pupil transportation in rural school districts. The problem is more urgent in these districts than in urban centers, not only be- cause more rural children are transported, but because equipment standards tend to be lower and operating regulations less strict than those enforced by city school authorities. A number of city school districts have extensive pupil transportation programs. As early as 1930, 84 percent of the cities over 100,000 in popu- lation were providing transportation for cer- tain handicapped pupils and 58 percent for certain normal children to whom no school was reasonably accessible. Smaller cities, too, have their transportation programs, as Table 1 reveals. This bulletin should prove helpful to city school officials to the extent that common safety problems are found in rural and urban areas. Most of the safety suggestions offered are applicable in city school systems. There is no discussion, however, of the special hazards associated with pupil transportation in urban districts. In the same manner, the bulletin is restricted almost entirely to safe motor bus operation, because buses far outnumber school convey- and Indemnity Company, in a memorandum of July 13, 1936. TABLE 1.—PUPIL TRANSPORTATIon PROGRAMS IN 177 CITIES OVER 36 99 IN POPULATION, 1934 Number Type of transportation 1 No transportation provided...... Transportation for atypical children only Transportation for certain normal children as well as atypical children...... Source: Hill, Henry H. “City School Transportat Method of Economy.” American School Board Journa August, 1934. ances of all other types. Safety problems to be sure, in cases where children are | ported by means of horse-drawn wa sleighs, boats, taxicabs, special trains, cars, and other vehicles. But the consideration of special problems associated with these f of transportation lies beyond the scope of | study. In connection with motor bus operatio: the bulletin deals with both district owned school buses, and with those privately owned and operated under contract. Altho in som measure the problems of safety are differen: as related to these two types of school trans portation, they are to a considerable degre: the same. Reports from 20 states and District of Columbia indicate that the p: vately owned school buses are the more merous—20,147 to 8,641, respectively—o: these states, a ratio of 2.3 to 1. Each type is so widely used that neither can be ignored this discussion. Organization of the Report The bulletin has eight sections of which this is the first. The second deals with the selection of competent bus drivers; the third with the provision and maintenance of safe equipment. Safe practises on the part of drivers and pupils are then outlined, this being fol- lowed by a section on the selection of safe routes. The discussion then turns to some of the less direct influences on pupil safety, in cluding certain forms of safety promotion and various business practises affecting pupil safety. The final section reviews the salient facts and important implications of the bulletin. 18 This report on an unnamed school district is given by G. B. Butterfield, assistant secretary of the Hartford Aci [ 204 ] II. The Selection of ho No school bus is safer than the driver w perates it. Iwo of the contrasting cases cited in the preceding section of this bulletin illus- trate this fact—one a school district without a pupil injury in seventeen years of operation; the other a district where ten accidents oc- curred within a period of three months. The same conclusion is suggested by the accounts { nine school bus accidents which appeared in the New York Times between 1931 and 1935, inclusive.’ Eight of the nine apparently were due to negligence on the part of the irivers. Neither the finest of equipment, roads emarkably free from traffic hazards, excellent lriving regulations “on paper,” nor all of these ombined, are eftective pupil safeguards if in ompetent drivers are employed. Responsibility for Selecting Capable Drivers Obviously, major responsibility for selecting ompetent school bus drivers must be assumed by local boards of education, even under the best of circumstances. State legislatures, state departments of education, and state highway officials have responsibilities which they should not neglect. General basic qualifications fot school bus drivers ought to be specified in the state’s motor vehicle code and in the official rulings of the state’s education and highway departments. Such laws and rulings make it much easier for local schoolboards to weed out undesirable applicants, to resist local pres- sure, and thus to secure well-qualified drivers. But local schoolboards must interpret and apply these regulations, they must usually adopt other supplementary standards, and they must exercise good judgment in evaluating certain personal traits and qualities which no set of rules can adequately describe. In the absence of appropriate state laws and regulations, schoolboards must assume almost complete responsibility for obtaining competent drivers. How generally this must be done, and the implied need for more rigid 1 Also referred to earlier, see p. 203. 2 The term “regulation” is used here, and thruout the bulletin, to which has the full force and effect of law. It includes requirements established by education or highway departments, but not refer to suggested standards which local boards may ignore % These states are: Arizona, Delaware Texas, Utah, and Virginia. * Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Florida, Kentucky, Michigan Washington. 5 Colorado. Indiana, Massachusetts, Competent Drivers statewide standards, is suggested in lowing paragraphs. Minimum Age ‘The qualification mentioned most frequently in state laws or regulations * is an acceptable minimum age for school bus drivers. In Okla homa, only “‘an adult” may be employed, un- less he is endorsed by at least five patrons. In 12 states, drivers must be at least twenty-one years old.* ‘'welve prescribe eighteen years as a minimum ;* another, seventeen years;’ and 6 specify the minimum age as sixteen.® ‘Thus only 13 states require school bus drivers to be adults; 19 specifically authorize the employ ment of minors; and 16, by the absence of state regulation, permit their employment. In contrast, 33 states have established twenty-one years as the minimum age for drivers of public motor buses. Surely there is no good reason why the driver of a commercial vehicle serving the general public should be more mature than the driver of a school bus. Pupil Drivers allowed to usually high In the states where minors are drive school buses, older pupils school students—are often employed. In no case do these drivers constitute a large percent of the total number of drivers, but there are several states where the practise is not un common, In support of this arrangement it is argued that (1) high-school boys can be employed for considerably less money than adult drivers ; (2) they will always be at school, ready to start promptly at the close of the day’s session ; and (3) they are accustomed to school routine and will cooperate better with school authori ties in carrying out the instructions given to them. In Montgomery County, Ohio, where until recently student drivers were regularly) employed, the authorities were well satisfied with the plan.” mean an official ruling by any duly authorized state ager I does New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oregon, and ®*Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, North Carolina, and South Dakota 7Carson, J. D. ‘‘Why Expensive Transportation of School Children in Pri: 1933 Journal 87: 41; October, ately Owned Buses?” American School Board [ 205 ] Orhe: less satistactory districts, however, find them -for example, the district where one student driver racing with another over- turned his bus, killing one child and injuring others ;* and the one where a student driver started up before the pupils were loaded, breaking the leg of his own younger brother.” Insurance companies, too, have found them poor risks for liability insurance, as is shown by the following testimony: One serious problem we face in the matter of school bus safety is the practise of having student would like to see drivers for school buses be at least twenty-one years of age. We our- selves decline risks when school buses are driven by students.” drivers. We In some cases student drivers may prove quite satisfactory, but their employment should probably be the exception rather than the rule. It is generally conceded that they tend to be less level-headed in emergencies, that they are less able to maintain proper discipline on the bus, and that they are inclined to drive reck- lessly. Maximum Age Altho the age of a safe driver is usually thought of in terms of the minimum age of responsibility, some attention should also be given to maximum age. Advancing years bring changes which definitely affect driving skill. For example, vision is more likely to fail than to improve, and general health is likely to become poorer. Tests made at Massachusetts State College show that brake reaction time grows increasingly slower after twenty-three years of age, changing from an average of .41 seconds at age twenty-three to an average of 47 seconds at age sixty-five.'* Other tests reveal a distinct loss in coordination between eve and hand in steering an automobile after the age of fifty-five years.’* It is significant, too, that 97.8 percent of the drivers of public buses and 96.4 percent of the drivers of com- mercial trucks are between the ages of t one and forty-five. No statewide regulation with respec: maximum age for school bus drivers is k; to be in use; neither is it possible at th to suggest an optimum age limit. Loca! lations vary, some fixing the limit at years, others at sixty-five or seventy. B recommends that no school bus driver | ployed or retained beyond sixty-five of age.'* The Kentucky and Nebraska departments of education suggest that boards employ no driver more than fifty of age. License Requirements There are eighteen states in which school bus driver must have either a sp: bus driver’s license or chauffeur’s license. most cases this special license is in additio; some ordinary form of driver's license twenty-one other states no special license j quired, but a system of ordinary drivers’ censing is in use and school bus drivers n have the regular license.'® Nine states no license.'? The states requiring drivers’ licenses chauffeurs’ licenses follow different standard and procedures in issuing them. In some the application for license is a mere form and little or nothing is done to exclude unfi drivers. Other states enforce certain age quirements and give whatever tests are sidered necessary if the applicant has any vious mental or physical handicap. Stil! others exercise considerable care in issuing licenses giving rather thoro driving tests to all ap plicants. In three states, Montana, Ohio, and Rhode Island, a certificate issued by the | or county schoolboard is required in addition to other necessary licenses. Experience Requirements About one-third of the state laws and regu lations specify that school bus drivers shall b« *’ Reported by G. B. Butterfield in a memorandum on school bus accidents, June, 1936. * An accident which occurred a few years ago in a consolidated school district in Webster County, Nebraska 1 Letter under date of June 13, 1936, from G. B Butterfield. 1 This refers to simple brake reaction time as distinguished from complex, reflex, and discriminatory reactions. 12 Massachusetts State College Psychological Laboratory Amherst, Mass.: the College, 1935. p. 7-8. 13 [hid., p. 9-11. ™% Blome, H. P., of. cit., p. 4. Research on Driving Skill. Report of FERA Project XS-F2-! % Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesot Missouri, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Utah, and West Virginia. 1® Arizona, Connecticut, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire \ Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin 1? Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Wyoming [ 206 ] .perienced. In the states having some regu lation of this kind,’* either one or two years exp rience; sometimes, only the general provision that the driver be the usual requirement is “expel ienced.”’ Physical Fitness Except as freedom trom physical handicaps a prerequisite to obtaining the necessary chaufteur’s or driver’s license, few states have regulations with respect to the physical fitness of drivers. Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Ken tucky, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and the Territory of Alaska are excep tions to this rule, the requirements rangin from Florida’s “good health, physically sound ind alert” to a health certificate issued on the basis of a thoro physical examination. Indiana, New Jersey, Ohio, and Rhode Island require annual health examinations. For example, in New Jersey, ‘‘the medical examination shall bx made annually within ten days before the open ing of school in September, and reported on the prescribed form.” The need for such requirements was strik ingly illustrated in a survey made in Florida just before the adoption of the present school transportation code. Among 1000 drivers ex amined, two were deaf, two were blind in one eye, three had had one leg amputated, and six were more than sixty years old. A number of others were considered physically unfit for their jobs by the examining physicians.’® The Committee on Safety of the National Association of Motor Bus Operators has rec ommended : That all bus drivers must undergo physical ex amination before being employed and twice each year after employment and that only men who are in physical condition that will enable them to drive safely be employed or retained in employment as bus drivers. Such physical examination clude vision and hearing tests.” must in Character The character and habits of a school bus driver should be considered almost as carefully as those of a teacher. More than a fourth of 8 Fourteen states having some type of experience regulat Maryland, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Utah, Vir requirement 1° Public Safety 8: 16; March, 1934 *” National Association of Motor Bus Operators D. C.: the Association, 1932. p. 4-5 “1 States which have certain character requirements Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, New York, Ohio, Rh« 22 The standards proposed age and \ with respect ofhcial regulations, that drivers shall be of good mor character and shall have good habits the states specify, either in their laws o1 Other Qualifications Occasionally certain personal traits qualities are listed in the state regulations such is, “neat, pleasant appearance’”’; the management of children”; “be able read and write the English language” ; capable of maintaining order on the bus with 1 degree ot efficiency in the use of first aid treatment.” out friction’; and ‘a reasonable One state requires the driver to be of the same race as the pupils riding in the bus. Sample Requirements As examples of rather thorogoing regula tions with respect to the qualifications of drivers, the standards recently adopted in Ken tucky may be cited: 1ge"—No one should be employed to drive a school bus who is less than eighteen or more than fifty vears of age. Health certificate—No one should be employe drive d to a bus who is not able-bodied or who has a communicable disease. He must be strong enough physically to handle the bus with ease. He have normal use of his body, as use of both hands, both feet, both eyes, and both ears. He must present a certificate from a reputable physician, after a care must ful examination, annually. ‘"—He must present a reputable oculist as to his vision. Vision certificate from a Morals—No person shall be employed or kept in service as a driver of a school bus who uses in toxicating liquors; he must not use tobacco while in the bus or on the school grounds; and he must refrain from the use of profane and indecent language. Character—He repute; a thoroly reliable, and of whom the must be childre n will result in good person respect, and whose actions should con- structive influence over the pupils. He must be capable of maintaining order. Experience—He shall satisfy the employing au thority of his ability to drive a school bus by citing driving experience and by giving reliable references. License—He must hold a driver’s license should be employed as a school bus »r who has No one had a driver’s license revoked. Arkansa Connecticut, Indiana, Kent Virginia. and Wisconsin. Alaska al Sixth Annual Contract—He must sign the driver’s contract fur- nished by the schoolboard, which contract covers “Regulations for Driver’ furnished by school au- thorities. Personal appearance—Drivers should be required to keep clean and neat while operating a school bus. First aid—Bus drivers should be expected to at- tain a reasonable degree of efficiency in the use of first aid treatment. They should be regularly in- structed concerning the best way to render first aid by someone thoroly qualified to give instruction.* Rhode Island is a state in which consider- able success has been achieved in selecting safe school bus drivers. The State Board of Public Roads requires that every applicant present a certificate from the schoolboard certifying that he is twenty-one years of age, in good health, and of good moral character. He must also have a chaufteur’s license dated at least a year previous to application for a position as school bus driver. Meeting these prerequisites, the applicant is interviewed by an official of the Board of Public Roads who discusses with him the responsibilities and obligations of school transportation. Emphasis is laid on the need for unusual care in operating a school bus. The system has never become perfunctory. Drivers on the job frequently bring back to the Board problems and experiences which lead to improvements in regulations and prac- tises. Salary Competent school bus drivers are not tained by selecting those who are willin accept the lowest wages. In this matter, most other instances, school districts usu get the kind of service for which they pa One of the common reasons for the emp! ment of poorly qualified school bus drivers that no competent drivers can be had for : wages offered. Salary levels which vary wid: from one community to another are to expected, but in every school district, the sa! range should be high enough so that com; tency may be the criterion for selection. Driving Practises, the Ultimate Test Careful selection of bus drivers accordin, to standards such as those enumerated al should do much to achieve the goal of “‘a driver on every school bus.” More rigid quirements than now exist might wel! adopted by many of the responsible agencies; and in the absence of state regu tions, local schoolboards should set up thy own local standards. However, a driver mi conceivably meet the letter of every requi ment listed here and still prove incompeten: because of indifference, carelessness, or uns driving practises. Hence the driver’s safe! record and an intimate knowledge of his cu tomary driving practises should be regard as the ultimate test of his fitness for conti ance in service or reemployment. *3 Kentucky State Board of Education. Manual on Pupil Transportation. Educational Bulletin, Vol. 4, No. 2. Frankfort, K the Board, 1936. p. 36-37. [ 208 ] III. Safe Equipment The used in selecting well- yualified drivers should be taken in providing same care safe equipment. Accidents are invited when the school buses used are poorly constructed, lacking in essential equipment, or badly in need of repair. About 15 percent of all the motor vehicle accidents that occur are caused, it least in part, by mechanical defects.’ In the ase of school bus accidents, an even larger percent should probably be attributed to this cause. The director of public safety of the National Safety Council describes the situation s follows: All too frequently the school bus consists of a hassis, which has outworn its usefulness for haul- ing farm produce, on which has been hammered together a wooden body at the lowest possible cost, and representing, in toto, unsafe and unhygienic ind also uneconomical equipment. If children are to be transported safely, this kind of equipment must ve relegated to the junk yard, and at once.” School buses of the type just described are less common now than when school transpor- tation was in its infancy. The general advance made in automotive engineering, the rapid in- crease in the number of children to be carried, ind a public opinion awakened to the problem of pupil safety have led to marked improve- ments in mechanical standards. Yet there is much room for improvement and many wholly unsuitable buses are still in use. Reports from three comparatively recent state inspection pro- grams suggest the seriousness of the problem: 1. Last winter we had one very serious accident in which three children lost their lives. The body of the bus was wood constructed and was in the neigh- borhood of 12 to 15 years old. Had it been of steel construction, there is no doubt in my mind but that the lives of these three children could have been saved. The bus body was crushed similar to a match box. After this accident we were prompted to make a survey relative to our school buses. . I Of the 168 buses inspected, 46, or approximately 29 percent, were equipped with bodies that were unfit for the transportation of children. Several bodies were found to be complete wrecks, unfit to be driven, let alone used in transporting children. . . . Ninety per- cent of the chassis were not in good shape.* 1 National Safety Council *Statement by Sidney J. 3 Letter of June 3, 1936, from the director of motor vehicle * News release of September 2, Accident Facts. Chicago: the Coun > Williams quoted by Curtis Billings in an article in Motor Transportation 8: 11; A = ins] 1934, from the Department of Motor Vehicles of Connecticut. , 2. Of the 500 school buses inspected, the depa ment’s representatives approved 75 vehicles. Tenta tive approval was given for 362 other buses on condition that certain minor repairs would be made immediately. The remaining 63 either were declared totally unfit for service or were required to return for reinspection after extensive rebuilding or repair.” 3. Of a little more than 4,000 buses inspected 2,656 had front exits only; 887 had rear exits only. Forty- four vehicles had quite inadequate or defective brakes; 529 had questionable brakes or brakes of only medium quality.® In 1933, antiquated, wooden bus bodies were held largely responsible for the deaths of fifteen Florida children killed in school bus accidents. Aroused to the importance of sate equipment, the state department of education then ruled that after July 1, 1935, all school buses should be equipped with steel bodies.® Until 1934, it was a common practise for school bus owners to purchase from franchised operators in New York City the buses which had been condemned by the New York ‘Transit Commission as unsafe for use on the regular lines! One instance will illustrate the hazards involved. A condemned bus purchased for school purposes was disbarred as a school bus because the emergency door was inoperative. Several times the driver tried to have this bus passed without correcting the defect. Finally he had the door repaired and put the bus into Three months later, in December 1934, it caught fire from the back-fire of the engine while carrying a load of forty children. service. Had it not been for the now usable emergency door, escape would have been impossible, for flames enveloped the front portion of the bus, cutting off access to the service door. A few experiences of this type have led New York to ban such equipment.’ An insurance company official reports that: As a class, school buses are inferior to those used for transporting the public; in fact, we have run across some wretched specimens. One bus was a canopy top truck with canvas side covers, which when let down kept the children in darkness and gave the driver no side vision. 1936. p in the state highway department of Oklal i pection 5 Moffitt, M. E., and Calhoun, J. T. Transportation Survey, Public Schools of Mississippi. Bulletin No. 78. Jack M the State Department of Education, 1934. ® Bus Transportation 13: 300; August 15, 1934. 7 Fullen, William G. “Insuring Safe Transportation to the Public.” Proceedings, Ninth Annual Meet » 1 ion of Motor Bus Operators. Washington, D. C.: the Association, 1935. p. 83-84 [ 209 ] Minimum Standards for School Bus Equipment Safe equipment, like other important safety measures, can be assured only by the cooperative eftorts of various state and local agencies. Certain minimum standards should be estab- lished on a statewide basis, either thru state laws or by means of authoritative rulings. Appropriate state agencies should be clothed with certain regulatory powers—with what- ever authority over school transportation is consistent with their respective governmental functions. More often than at present, school bus equipment should conform to the general safety standards required of other comparable vehicles. Now school buses usually are exempt from the regulations of highway and public service commissions and from the provisions of state laws regulating “common carriers.” For the most part, the passengers of common carriers are adults. They enter the bus recog- nizing the element of risk; they can insure themselves against accidents if they so desire; in case of accident they should be able, in some measure, to help themselves. School children, on the contrary, are required to ride in the bus provided. They seldom recognize the risks in- volved and in emergencies are less able to care for themselves. In a great many instances they have little or no protection in the form of liability insurance. This being true, equipment standards for school buses should be higher, if anything, than standards for other motor vehicles. State legislatures, state education de- partments, state highway commissions, motor vehicle departments, the state highway police, and perhaps other state agencies should join forces in keeping dangerous buses out of school Local school authorities too must shoulder large responsibilities, sometimes for the interpretation and enforcement of state- wide regulations, more often for the develop- ment of their own equipment standards in the absence of adequate state regulation. State and local agencies interested in this problem can turn to two sources for sug- gestions with respect to suitable equipment standards: (1) to the actual laws and regula- tions of the several states, and (2) to the ideal equipment standards proposed by recognized leaders in the field of highway safety. Using these sources, the discussion now turns to a summary of existing practises and proposed standards. service. Size of the School Bus A majority of the school buses now in especially those just going into service, considerably larger than those in use a years ago. The spread of the school con dation movement, resulting in more pupil be transported, has created a demand larger buses. Engineering improvements bus manufacturers and improved highw: have made the use of larger conveyances f ible. The general trend is apparent f; Figure III, which shows the number of la: medium, and small school buses produced a: distributed by bus manufacturers from 19 to 1935. Buses having a capacity of 40 pu or less constituted 86 percent of all those pr: duced in 1928 and 78 percent in 1929. Begi: ning in 1930, however, these began to outnumbered by the larger buses with thy result that in 1935 they constituted less than 3 percent of the new buses produced. The medium-sized bus, carrying 40 to 59 pupils has become the most popular type, taking th: lead in 1930 and accounting in 1935 for 8 percent of all school bus construction. Almost no school buses for more than 60 pupils were produced in 1928, but since 1931 a consistent gain has been registered until in 1935 mor than a thousand vehicles of this kind wer placed on the market. Reports from othe: sources tell of the use in certain localities of buses intended for 100 or even 125 pupils. This trend has a definite bearing on the problem of pupil safety. Even under the most ideal circumstances in other particulars, the mere size of a bus may constitute a hazard A traffic engineer makes the following com ment with reference to the matter: The school authorities should restrict the maxi mum capacity of the buses to a reasonable amount consistent with the motor, chassis, brakes, tires, etc and with the possibilities of proper control in the bus. Some school buses are being constructed with capacities of upward of 100. Any such capacity seems entirely inappropriate for a school bus for such reasons as the following: (a) In general, there is no one in the bus with authority to maintain discipline except the driver. It is quite impossible for anyone to expect the driver to maintain discipline among such a large number: of children and operate the bus properly. Even if the bus patrol members are available, it is not deemed wise to attempt to maintain discipline with their aid over any such numbers. (b) Buses which are constructed by untrained persons would be likely to be especially dangerous [ 210} the capacity is too large. They often would e necessary knowledge to insure proper venti- heating, braking capacity, power for hills, etc. Any very large er of casualties with buses of excess capacity. i very one accident could involve a from the humanitarian aspect, it is a tical question as to whether insurance coverage { be adequate for any such number and still a price that could be paid by the operator of such a bus. d) Buses of excess capacity must be large and ecially where not made by manu- facturers would be generally hard to maneuver. (e) There would be a distinct problem in loading { unloading in safety any unduly large group of competent hildren! Believing that large school buses are haz- irdous, Connecticut limits the size of school buses to a capacity of 55 and forbids the car- rying of more than a capacity load. Indemnity companies hesitate to write insurance for buses with a capacity over 55, and would favor legal restrictions limiting school buses to 40 or 45 pupils.® 8 Memorandum on School Bus Safety (dated May 7 Department of the American Automobile A itior +Statement made in correspondence by an official « FIGURE no single limit can be estab maximum for all commun driver’s skill, age of ae snould Probably is the proper Road conditions, the pupils, and other related factors considered. In one instance a bus designed fi 60 pupils may be operated more safel ] | , inotner in accommodate only SU, B ; which « chasing any equipment or letti however, school authorities w aise the question: Is this bus too +} iven safely on the route for w is intended ? The National Safety Council off lowing advice: A school bus should never carry a load exceedin that which is prescribed by the manufactu \ on ton chassis (designed to carry a “pay load” of one ton in addition to the body) is recommended fo: buses with a seating capacity 1 one and one-half ton chassis for a from 25 to 35 children; and a two ton chassis for bus seating 35 to 50 children. No more than 60 dren should be carried ina school bus except in up to 25 children; bus seatl! very Marsh, director, Safety from Burton W tford Accident and Indemnity Company II! 1928-1935 | NUMBER OF SCHOOL BUSES | OF VARIOUS SIZES PRODUCED BY BUS MANUFACTURERS 1931 In this chart 2 “smal Source Annual reports in the February 1934 . or 40-60 pupils + more than 60 pupils The inside height of bus bodies not less than 60 inches. ... The bus chassis should be especially built for the transporta- tion of people—that is, a motor coach rather than a truck chassis. This will give the chassis sufficient strength; it will provide for a lower center of gravity making it less liable to tip than a truck; it will provide for greater comfort than a truck; and will prove equally or more economical in the long run." cases.” should be unusual Type of Construction ‘lwo states, Florida and Utah, now require all school buses to be equipped with steel bodies. The State Highway Commission in Oklahoma reports that an effort to secure leg- islation requiring steel construction will be made in the 1937 legislature of that state. In several other states the purchase of buses with all steel bodies is strongly urged by state edu- cation departments and other authorities. An- other common recommendation is that bus bodies be purchased from reliable bus body manufacturers rather than from relatively in- experienced, independent workmen. A_ few states wisely prohibit the use of welded frame extensions or other improvised modifications of frame or chassis. Brakes With the exception of Wyoming, the gen- eral motor vehicle laws or official rulings of all the states contain some more or less definite regulation as to kind of brakes that may be used on vehicles operating therein. Such laws, of course, apply to school buses. Twenty-two states and the District of Columbia specify stopping distances at given speeds; for exam- ple, a stopping distance of 30 feet for vehicles moving at the rate of 20 miles per hour.” More than half the states require two separate means of applying the brakes. In Alaska, Cali- fornia, Colorado, and New York official rul- ings require all school buses to be equipped with four-wheel brakes. The brake regulation gen- erally regarded as a proper model for state legislation, or official rulings, is that which ap- pears in Section 124 of the Uniform Vehicle Code: (a) Brake equipment required. Every motor vehicle . . . when operated highway shall be equipped with brakes adeg control the movement of and to stop and ho! vehicle, including two separate means of a the brakes, each of which means shall be effex apply the brakes to at least two wheels. If thes separate means of applying the brakes are cor in any way, they shall be so constructed that fa of the operating mechanism shall not leave th: vehicle without brakes on at least two wheels (b) Performance ability of brakes. 1. The service brakes upon any motor . Shall be adequate to stop such vehic! when traveling 20 miles per hour within a dista: of 30 feet when upon dry asphalt or concrete ment surface free from loose material whe: grade does not exceed 1 percent. 2. Under the above conditions the hand shall be adequate to stop such vehicle .. . wit a distance of 55 feet and... to hold such v: . stationary on any grade upon which ope: re 4. All braking distances specified in this s shall apply ... whether such vehicles ar loaded or are loaded to maximum capacity. 5. All brakes shall be maintained in good ing order and shall be .o adjusted as to operat equally as practicable with respect to the wh on opposite sides of the vehicle.” Unlike the foregoing regulations, many those now in effect are too indefinite to serv their intended purpose. Especially in the case of school buses some clearer specification is needed than that the brakes must be “ad quate,” “sufficient to control,” “efficient, “Serviceable,” or “in good order.” Tires Worn or inferior tires are hazardous on any motor vehicle, particularly on a schoo! bus. When a tire blows out, it has the effect of applying a brake on that wheel. The vehicle is almost certain to sway before the driver can offset the unexpected resistance, and in the case of a heavy conveyance especially, may be thrown entirely out of control. Moreover, frequent tire trouble is a source of delay and annoyance that can and should be eliminated Good tires, properly inflated, are absolute; essential to safe pupil transportation. 1° Italics are ours. A maximum capacity of 60 is recommended also by H. P. Blome, o#. cit., p. 7. 1 National Safety Council. School Buses: Their Safe Design and Operation. Chicago: the Council, 1935. p. 3-4. 12 The states in which stopping distances are specified are: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Louisiana Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rh« Island, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin. 18 U, S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Public Roads. Uniform Act Regulating Trafic on Highways. Washington. D. C Government Printing Office, 1934. p. 30-31. (Act V of the Uniform Vehicle Code) [ 212 ] i Safety Glass Alaska, the District of Columbia, and ist twenty-eight of the states, si oo be equipped with safety hool bus« Ss ‘In e some ses this requirement hinges on a general law plicable to all vehicles. In ial laws or special rulings for school buses glass. motor others, been adopted. No equipment standard school buses is in more general use. A tisfactory regulation covering this point is as Ws: 2) On and after ———_—— date) no person shall sell any new motor vehicle nor shall any new tor vehicle be registered thereafter which is de- signed or used... as a school bus unless such vehicle is equipped with safety glass wherever glass s used in doors, windows, and windshields The term “safety glass” shall mean any prod- f ibricated, ind treated as substantially to prevent shattering ind flying of the glass when struck or broken or such ther or similar product as may be approved by the commissioner [of motor vehicles] ict composed of glass, so manufactured, 1) The commissioner shall compile and publish i list of types of glass by name approved by him as meeting the requirements of this section Identification: Color of School Buses is quite generally agreed that a distinc tive, uniform color for school buses is a de- This passing motorist to recognize a school bus at nce and sirable safety precaution. enables the to drive with unusual care when near it. Yellow or orange with black trim and lack lettering are colors widely used and recommended by the National Safety Coun- cil?® and the American Automobile Associa- tion.’? The following regulation is typical: [The body of the bus should be painted golden orange color. The inside of the bus should be painted gray. Michigan also requires school buses to be painted uniformly but uses a different color scheme: 14 California, Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, | Nebraska, New Hampshire 4% U.S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Publix 16 National Safety Council, op. cit., p. 6. 17 Memorandum from the American Automobile Associat 18 Kentucky State Board of Education Board, 1936, p. 9. § Regulations sin Oklahoma, Utah, and West Virginia. 49 Extracts from Ch. V, Part II, Act 319, P. A. 1927 The Order of United Commercial Travelers of America June 18, 1936, from the Supreme Counselor of the organ Road Manual on Put ilar to this are in effect diana, Iowa, Ker \ New Jersey, New York, North Carolir South Carolina, Utah, Vermont. Virginia, West Virginia, and Wis« itucky, Louisiana, a. N nsin boards; pa desig bus enforcement. ec ry school owned after repainted shall be painted hereafter purchased as follows: 1 icture or top of } the bus constituting tw the body area shall be painted blue, unde: hall be a line of white constituting one-fifth ly area which shall extend over the ho ngine, and the base of the bus constit two-fifths of the body area shall be red in col Phe name of the school district shall be painted in black on the white line at the back, front and sides of the bus. It shall be the duty of the public instruction and the district board of educa tion of each school district in this state to enforce the superintenden rovisions of this section. (312) pense. Sec. 28. In the event that owners of buses no owned school bus; pa Private ] in operation for the transportation of s« ly aint their school buses in t shall of education for paint for that purpose board of education shall be required to fur en wish to re} lors and designs, they apply to t said paint free of expense to the owner! 314) Sec. 30. Buses, not engaged in the t: on non-school buses; Restrictions ; penal insportation school children, either part time or full time, not be permitted to be painted in these san and design. Any person, firm or corporat bus in contravention to the iting any of this act, will be guilty of a misdemeano Bills similar to the Michigan law were in troduced into several legislatures during their most recent sessions. The idea is said to have originated with a traffic officer in Cal tried it time in found it helpful in preventing school bus ltornia, who for a his district and tional organ lents. Thus introduced, a large n g; ization is now actively promoting legislation blue t to make red, white, and he standard for school rightly holds that uniform painting of buses colors buses.°° The organization thruout the nation would be of distinct advan tage, because then persons traveling from one state to another would always know a school bus for what it is. They claim further, how ever, that vellow or orange buses are not sufh ciently distinctive, partly because of dust and mud, and partly because many other vehicles are painted a similar shade. On this point there Maryland, Ma rth Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma achusetts, Pennsylv ng Department, June nal Bulletin, Vol. 4, No Florida, Maryland, Minne > policy of the Order is bas is considerable difference of opinion. Many of those long concerned with highway safety be lieve that yellow and black buses are distinc tive, and that, on the whole, these colors are more satisfactory than any other combination thus far suggested. The relative merits of various color com binations should be investigated thoroly, using research technics similar to those employed by the United States Bureau of Public Roads and the United States Bureau of Standards in testing the effectiveness of different road signs. In this way the visibility of different colors could be determined objectively for buses operating in all kinds of weather and against various landscape backgrounds in au- tumn, winter, and spring. The durability of the colors could also be taken into account— an important factor when buses are not painted at frequent and regular intervals. Until such research has been done, it seems doubtful whether the use of yellow and black school buses should be discouraged. This is the com- bination selected for road signs because of its high visibility under all weather conditions and against various backgrounds. These are also the colors now used on school buses thru- out eight states and in many districts in other states. In California, where the red, white, and blue combination was first employed, medium chrome yellow with black trim and lettering has been the uniform standard for school buses since July 1933. Identification: Lettering and Other Devices More than half the states have laws or regu- lations with respect to the lettering or other identifying signs to be used on school buses.?! In the great majority of cases the words SCHOOL BUS must be printed “in large letters” on both front and rear. Often the phrase “large letters” is accurately defined as, for example, “unshaded letters not less than 5 inches in height.” 2? In several states the name and number of the school district must appear on the sides of the bus. In one state, the sign SCHOOL BUS, on the rear, is followed by the phrase STOPS AT ALL RAILROAD CROSSINGS. In “1 Among the states with such regulations are: Arkansas, Indiana, Towa. Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, another, the signs read SCHOOL BUs rion. Where school buses are privately and are exempt from the usual requiren that the body be painted yellow, they are required to display a prominent schoo sign on front and rear while carrying s pupils. Black lettering on a yellow backg: is recommended for such detachable sign In Mississippi, school buses are ident by means of the unique device described the following excerpt from the state law: All persons, firms, or corporations when porting school children on the public highways 0 the State with motor drawn or other whether said driver be the owner of said ve! or whether said vehicle is furnished by the count or school district, or some other person, shall e said vehicle with two red flags to the fore and ty to the aft. Said flags shall be not less than eight inches wide and twenty-four inches long, with th: word “School” on each of said flags in capir letters and said flags shall be continuously played while the school children are being tra: ported or taken on or discharged from said m vehicle... . It shall be unlawful for any other person equip a vehicle with flags similar to or like tl flags required herein for the school transport ie wx vehi The value of this device or of any system lettering depends, of course, on its visibilit under different lighting conditions, which turn depends on factors such as size and amount of contrast between symbol and bac! ground. Mounting In the purchase of school conveyances, it highly important that the proper wheel bas: be selected for each length body and that th bus body be mounted correctly. Improper dis tribution, particularly too much overhang, makes steering more difficult, reduces the et fectiveness of the breaking system, increases tire and body maintenance costs, and impairs the riding qualities of the bus.*° In New York Oklahoma, and perhaps in certain other states at least two-thirds of the bus body must rest ahead of the rear axle. Automobile engineers point out that in addition to the foregoing standard, the overhang should not exceed 45 California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, [llinoi Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, Washington, and West Virginia. | [ae 22 The height of letters required varies from one state to another, ranging from 4 inches in California to 6 in New Jerse The National Safety Council recommends “letters at least 5 inches high.” 3 Section 6640, Code of 1930. % “Overhang”’ refers to that part of the bus body extending backward from the rear axle. *% Memorandum from the transportation engineer of the Automobile Manufacturers Association, April 20, 1936. 2 [ 214} percent of the wheel base, and that less than To illus for a 200 feet, or 270 45 percent overhang is preferable.” —the maximum body length inch wheel base would be 221% nches, the body mounted with a 90-inch ove: trate | Power The power of a school bus motor should be proportionate to the capacity load of the vehicle and to the road conditions involved. Lack of adequate power may cause unneces sary delays, result in undue engine wear, and create trafic hazards on hills where the bus cannot proceed at a reasonable speed. Act V of the Uniform Motor Vehicle Code suggests that the motive power be sufficient to propel the fully loaded vehicle at not less than 20 miles an hour on any grade upon which it In communities of flat 8 regularly operates.’ terrain, power enough to ascend a 3 percent grade at 20 miles an hour would be sufficient. In hilly regions, satisfactory performance on a 5 or 6 percent grade is often needed. In the state of New York the following regulation ipplies : The power plant shall be of a type and capacity approved by the manufacturer for the particular conveyance loaded to capacity. Power shall be ample to provide satisfactory performance in all gears when operating with a governor set at 30 miles an hour. Proper piston displacement of motor and rear axle gear ratio should enable bus loaded a to capacity to take a 3 percent grade in high gear on a first-class paved road.” Service and Emergency Doors More than a fourth of the states have laws or regulations pertaining to school bus doors which are similar in general outline to the recommendations of the National Safety Coun- cil. According to these standards, the service door should be located opposite the driver on the right side of the bus and should be under his control exclusively. Folding units or slid ing doors are recommended ; the “sedan” type is disapproved. The minimum horizontal clear ance should be 24 inches. Lower panels as well as upper should be of glass, in order that the driver can see the roadside and any pupils standing near the bus. Enclosed steps with Association, Transportation Building, Washington, D. C % Jbid. Tables showing correct body length in proportion to wheel base can bi risers not exceeding 10 inches should be pro vided. White steps and step-well lights are A channel of rubber hose at the doo: desirable. jambs should protect children’s fingers from injury. For the same reason the control leve be free should trom holes or notches, and should have no parts that come together with a shearing action. There should be no outside handle on the service door nor should it be possible for a pupil to open the service door by leaning against it. Placing the service door at the center rear was almost the standard practise a few years ago, and even yet is not uncommon. Experi ence has shown, however, that this is a haz- ardous arrangement. There is danger of the door coming open and of children falling out while the bus is traveling along the highway. Moreover, such doors are too far from the driver’s direct supervision. It is too easy to start the bus before all are properly loaded and the door securely closed. The outside steps and hand rails often placed at rear service doors are another source of danger, tempting the venturesome pupil to “hang on” for a ride outside the bus. Besides the bus has an emergency exit. It is recommended service door, every safe school that the emergency door be located on the left hand side of the bus, at the rear. It should have a horizontal clearance of at least 22 inches and Door.” that it should be clearly marked, “Emergency It should be fastened in such a way can be readily opened by almost any pupil but will not likely door should swing outward and it should be be accidentally released. This possible to open it from the outside of the bus. There should be no steps at this exit. A school bus should have no doors except A door at the unneces the two recommended above. left of the driver’s seat is not only sary but weakens the body of the bus. Other Safety Standards The safety of a school bus does not depend solely on the important equipment standards already discussed but to a considerable degree on the quality of many other parts and on the presence or absence of equipment of many f obtained from the Automobile Manufacturers 27 “Body length’’ is the distance from back of cowl to the end of the floor 28. S. Department of Agriculture 27New York State Education Department Albany: the Department, 1936. p. 5 Rural F15 Bureau of Public Roads Education op. cit., p. 38 Division. School Bus Requirements and Recommendations | other types. ‘lable 2 lists certain other safety Maintenance of Bus Equipment standards and the states in which each regu- There must be frequent inspections of ¢ ment and immediate attention to needed pairs if school buses are to be kept in operating condition. In Massachusetts West Virginia, schoolboards are require have each bus inspected by a competent chanic once a week; in Florida and N York, once a month. In California, Colo: Connecticut, Illinois, Kentucky, and ©]! battery, a small sending and receiving radio, Twenty-two other states require directional signaling devices on all vehicles so loaded or constructed as to make the ordina: hand signal invisible. ius [ 216 ] points, for inspection by the county superin- endent of schools, a representative of the state motor vehicle department, and sometimes other state officials. In Indiana the state highway police department conducts school bus inspec tions in each township. In a number of states the driver is held responsible for the condition if his bus, is required to make daily inspection f essential safety features, and must file re- ports certifying that the bus and its equipment ire in good condition. In sixteen states, and in certain classes of cities and towns in four other states, periodic inspection of all motor vehicles is required. \uthorized service stations check on such items 1s steering mechanism, alignment, brakes, lights, horn, and windshield wiper. In wheel some cases an annual inspection is required; in others, two or three inspections per year. In New Jersey the check-up is made ‘upon proclamation.” ** When buses are privately owned and ar- rangements for their repair and maintenance ire the responsibility of the owner, the school wuthorities must see that certain equipment standards are satisfied. When the buses are district owned, school authorities must carry full responsibility, setting up their own sys- tems for inspection and repair. The best main- tenance plan for a given school district will depend entirely on local circumstances. In some cases the best arrangement seems to be to patronize one or more of the local garages. In other cases, the employment of one driver mechanic seems advisable. Such an individual serves as bus supervisor, inspects and cares fo1 ill equipment, and makes all ordinary repairs. Still other districts have had excellent results from entrusting school bus equipment to their high school’s own department of auto me- chanics. If such departments are in charge of expert mechanics and are well equipped, this plan has much to commend it. Whatever the arrangement, should receive frequent attention from well-qualified mechanics. In too many cases the situation is comparable to that found by Jackman in his study of trans- portation in certain consolidated school dis- tricts: buses 81 The sixteen states are Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware Maine, Maryland Too few schools have set up a regular program of maintenance. As a result the equipment is being operated in very poor condition and is subject to unusual wear.™ The Cost of Safe Equipment lew will deny the importance of safe school bus equipment or disagree with, at least the intent of, the standards suggested in this sec tion. Many will assert, however, that the cost of such equipment is prohibitive for their own communities. And so it may be, if the local district is one with limited resources and is carrying all, or nearly all, the financial burden for its school program. Available funds must be used for teachers’ salaries, for school build- ings, and for other school purposes as well as for transportation facilities. A district may be forced to use unsatisfactory equipment for the that it building or engages low salaried teachers. In same reason uses an obsolete school that case the best that can be done is to make the equipment just as safe as is possible un- der the circumstances—to take every possible safety precaution. But the existence of such school districts, even in large numbers, does not argue for indi lower school bus standards. It merely cates the need for better distribution of the cost of education; it suggests an important area in which the need for state aid is urgent. When both the state and the local district assume their fair share of the cost of convey- ance the public will be justified in demanding, without exception, safe school transportation for every pupil. Approximately a third of the states pay some part of the cost of transportation or dis tribute funds which may be used for this as well as other school purposes.** In some cases the distribution is made on a pupil-mile, bus mile, or pupil-day basis. In others, the district is allowed a fixed sum for each pupil trans ported, or a certain fraction of the sums ac tually paid out for transportation purposes. Relatively few states, however, have systems of state aid which assure to every community the means necessary to provide safe equipment. Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming. Illinois, Iowa, Oregon, and Tennessee require periodic inspection in certain classes of towns and cities ® In addition, a special “brakes test” is required of all school buses during the first ten days of December and Marct 83 Jackman, M. F. Transportation in Consolidated Schools % Among the states providing financial aid for Massachusetts, Michigan. Minnesota, Missouri, Montana and Wisconsin. Master’s thesis, University of Nebraska, 1934. p. 4 transportation New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas Indiana, Maine Vermont purposes are: Connecticut, Florida, IV. Safe Transit Practises Given a safe conveyance and ar experienced, duly qualified driver, the chances of accidents to pupils are greatly reduced. Yet other risks are involved which require proper regulation and supervision. Among these are the risks as- sociated with incorrect driving practises on the part of school bus drivers, the hazards created by drivers of other motor vehicles, and hazards which the pupils sometimes create by their own indiscreet behavior. To a large degree, these risks are personal in character and can be elim- inated only by the constant exercise of vigi- lance and good judgment by each individual. Certain useful safeguards can be set up, how- ever, in state traffic laws, in the driving regula- tions for school bus drivers developed by state and local authorities, and thru the proper su- pervision of pupil conduct. It is with these safeguards that this section is concerned. Crossing the Highway One of the most serious transportation haz- ards, probably the pupil’s Enemy Number 1, is that brief walk which he takes across the high- way either to get to the bus in the morning or to get home after leaving it in the afternoon." Accidents occurring at this time are common, and a high percentage of them are fatal. One important safeguard that can be in- troduced is a state law requiring the passing motorist to stop when approaching a school bus that is receiving or discharging pupils. Eleven states now have such laws.’ In these states, the driver is required not only to stop, but to wait until the children are out of the road and the bus has started on, before he may proceed. In other states, passing motorists must come to a full stop, but may then proceed “with cau- tion.” * In Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, IIli- nois, Oregon, and Virginia the driver of an- other vehicle need not stop, but must slow down to 10 or 15 miles an hour. Countir these regulations, however, less than half states have set up this minimum safegu States in which a stop is required by law find the Ohio plan of enforcement helpf We receive many license numbers every day, in by drivers and school heads. These are che: thru the Bureau of Motor Vehicles and a lett; warning with a copy of the law is sent to the ow: of said registration. Also many special patrols ordered into territories where a great numb: violations are occurring and of course the unifo: man will cite the violator in such cases. How: due to our limited number of patrolmen on roads, we must of necessity use the educational plan. The number of repeat violations have very few.® The passing motorist is not always at fault The bus driver must assume considerable r sponsibility and should exercise whateve: pervision is required to guarantee safe cross ing of the highway. Pupils, too, must fol! safe practises. On certain points there is ger eral agreement: W 1. The school bus should load and discharge pas sengers at the extreme right of the road or hig! way.” 2. Pupils should be loaded and unloaded only designated stopping places.’ 3. Buses should not stop on curves or hills to let pupils on or off unless the road is visible at least 500 feet in both directions.* 4. The driver should always give the pro; signal before stopping.” 5. Pupils should not stand in the roadway while waiting for the bus.” On other practises, one in particular, agree ment is far from complete. Should pupils cross the road in front of the bus, or behind the bus In two states, Arkansas and Utah, they are required to “pass behind rather than in front of the bus.” In Alaska, California, Kentucky, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin they must pass “in front of the bus.” 1 This was reported as the leading hazard by the Massachusetts Special Committee on School Buses (authorized b; legislature in 1931). It is so regarded also by the State Highway Patrol in Ohio. 2 Alabama, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska, Ohio, South Carolina, Texas, and West Virginia. Maryland also has a similar law effective in Montgomery, Frederick, and Talbot Counties only. * California, Florida, New Hampshire, New York, and Washington. 4 The laws on this subject in California, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, and New York cannot be enforced unless the bus is paint: a distinctive color or lettered in the approved manner to identify it as a school bus. 5 Memorandum for school bus drivers prepared in the Ohio Department of Highways, State Highway Patrol, 1935 ® This is a state regulation in Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Utah T Children able to cross safely at one point on the highway may be taken unawares by traffic hazards at some other point particularly on hill roads or winding roads. This regulation is in effect in several states, for example in Utah by authority of the state road commission, and in California and Oklahoma by ruling of the state boards of education. 8 Kentucky, Oklahoma, and West Virginia are among the states where this regulation applies. ®In the regulations of the Ohio Department of Highways, the Territorial Board of Education of Alaska, and other centra agencies. 1 In the regulations of the West Virginia State Department of Education. [218 ] crossing behind the bus | hose Ww ho fay oO! wrgue that the pupil has the best f the highway when standing just back of the possible view rear wheel. He can see any car approach from the rear and its driver can see him; e can see a vehicle coming from the opposite lirection, for it will be on the other side of the road and not obscured by the school bus. is further argued that if a pupil is stand v at the left front wheel, he is likely not to see another car which is following immediately hind the bus, ready to dart round as he starts to cross the road. Granting the obvious weight of this argu- ment, proponents of the other plan say that the driver must share responsibility in the matter and that he cannot do so if pupils are vehind the bus. On the other hand, if pupils go to the front of the bus, he as well as they can watch for traffic hazards. He can require pupils to cross, thus making safety. With this plan, too, there is no excuse for loitering in the hizh- to wait for his signal sure that they cross in way as the bus goes on. Either plan is superior to no plan at all, for there is some advantage merely in uniformity of procedure. California’s experience with these two plans is significant. Until recently the rule was t cross the road behind the bus. In the three year period 1933 thru 1935 under this regula- tion, there were four fatalities and nine serious injuries to pupils crossing the highways. The rule was then changed to crossing in front of 0 of _ the bus, and during the past school year no ac cidents of this type were reported. If the latter plan is used, pupils coming toward the bus should wait until the driver has made sure that traffic conditions are satis factory and has given the signal for them to cross, then cross the road promptly in front of the bus and get on. On leaving the bus, pupils should walk around in front of it, wait for the driver’s signal, then cross. On occasion, the children should even be escorted to safety. In any case, the bus should not start until all have safely crossed the highway. Especially in states where other vehicles are required to stop for school buses loading or unloading pupils, this plan seems to afford maximum protection. 11 National Automobile Chamber of Commerce. Fact mobile Chamber of Commerce, 1929. p. 84 12 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Public Road Government Printing Office, 1934. p. 19. (Act V of the Unifor 13 These states are: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Col Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Uta Mississippi } 1 Mi \ Railroad Crossings 5,000 railroad grade cros tates about 207.000 are warning signals, o1 ~ C3, | he sc vel ] VCTICLIeS, hazardous Tor for school the nine school bus New York Times 1931 and 1935 were crossing accidents result One red crossing where a bell signal was operating ; crossings, are sO unusually ‘Two cident of ed in the betwee! ing in sixteen fatalities. occul it ] tne other, a +} ie an unprotected crossing. In one cas« impact of the collision tore the body of the bus from the chassis and tossed both parts \cci dents of this type are especially tragic because of children either killed or seriously injured. to the top of a fifteen toot embankment. frequently a large number \s a means of eliminating such crossing a cidents, the adoption of the following | the National Conference on Street and Highway Safety: iw recommended by (a) The ing school bus Carry grade stop t ot any school child, ... before at track tracks of a shall such vehicle within 50 feet but not less than 10 feet driver any crossing railroad, any or from the nearest rail of such railroad and while so shall listen look both dis along such track for any approaching train stopped and in ections ind fo signals indicating the approach of a train, excep hereinafter provided, and shall not proceed can do so safely. ta until he (b) No stop need be made at a lirects trathe to proceed any such ¢ trafhie at siness where police officer or a control or street grade crossings within a bu district. At least require school buses to stop at railroad cros twenty-nine of the states ings—some thru state laws similar to the above, others thru the regulations of state school o1 officials. In Arkansas, Connecticut, North Dakota, Oklahoma, ] via the bus must not proceed until road Mississippi, and West Virgi a responsible pupil assigned to this duty has gone from the bus to the tracks and signaled to the driver. There are states, how ever, W here school buses are not required to stop at rail road crossings unless by regulations of the local school authorities. tobile Industry. New York niform Act Regulatin on High Trafic m Vehicle Code) rado Nebraska, Delaware, Florida, Idaho York, North Dakota, Ohio ngton, and West Virginia Connecticut New Wash irginia [ 719 ] Overcrowding ‘The overloading of school buses represents a hazard in school transportation which can- not be minimized. Overcrowding results in un- necessary shoving, jostling, and pushing while the bus is in motion and often is the source of physical injury as well as annoyance to pupils. The scuffing which overcrowding encourages may distract the driver’s attention, causing him to lose control of the wheel. Crowding at the front of the bus or even in the aisles impedes the driver’s view. Many would agree with the state department of education in Georgia that this should head the list of transportation risks. One case is reported where 62 children were carried regularly in a 25-passenger bus and on some days as high as 76 pupils were packed into it.'* This was the result of combining 5 routes into 3 in the interest of “economy.” Another case is reported where overloading created a real hazard. An overcrowded school bus began to sway because of the heavy load. The chil- dren picked up the rhythm of the swaying and, by applying their weight in unison, caused the bus to sway more. The bus was thrown out of steering control and a serious accident was nar- rowly averted as the driver brought it to a stop. Eight states mention in their regulations that overcrowding is forbidden, but seldom is overcrowding defined, except perhaps to say that “pupils shall not be permitted to sit or stand where they obstruct the driver’s view to side or rear.” *° Massachusetts and Rhode Island are exceptions, restricting the total load to not more than 25 percent beyond the rated seating capacity of the vehicle. Regu- lations of this type might well be established by other state and local authorities. Kentucky disapproves of any load “exceeding that pre- scribed by the board of education. The board of education should be advised by the manu- facturer.”’ Safe Driving Speed About 23 percent of all the motor vehicle accidents that occurred during 1935 are at- tributed to fast driving. Nearly 31 percent of all those killed in motor vehicle accidents were in accidents caused by excessive speed. ‘ Reported by G. B. Butterfield in a letter of July 13, 1936. % This regulation is in effect in California and Oklahoma Relatively few of the states have estab! maximum speed limits for school buses than those for all highway traffic. Some ; tain that this is not a matter for special | tion. Be that as it may, some means s|! always be found to prevent speeding and reckless practises associated with it. Okla! restricts the speed of school buses to 25 n per hour; Colorado, Connecticut, Mass setts, Mississippi, Rhode Island, and Virg to 30 miles per hour; and Ohio and the ‘] tory of Alaska to 35 miles per hour. Arka: Utah, and West Virginia have general re; tions to the effect that drivers shall procee a “careful and reasonable” rate or shal! attain “excessive” speeds. In the absence of adequate state regulati local school authorities can exercise cont in the matter in either of three ways: (1 local regulations supplemented by proper ministrative supervision, (2) by making maximum speed limit part of the driver’s « tract, or (3) by installing speed control go nors on the motors of all school buses. Further Suggestions on Safe Driving A few of the fundamentals of safe drivi have been listed by the National Associatio: of Motor Bus Operators in their “Ten Com mandments for Safe Driving.” '® These su gestions are listed in Figure IV. A self-rati: scale for drivers, used by the Oklahoma Stat Highway Commission, is given in Figure \ School bus drivers as well as others should fi it helpful to check their own practises agai: these general driving standards. Table 3 is a rather comprehensive list of t operating rules adopted specifically for schoo! bus drivers in one or more states—in a fi cases as suggested rules; generally as compu! sory regulations. Of course, they vary in det: from one state to another. The wording of ea rule listed is based on that of some state lav or official ruling—one believed to be typical Column 2 lists the states in which each regu lation or a similar one is known to be in effect For the sake of completeness, the regulations discussed in earlier paragraphs of this section are also included in this table. 1 Other useful lists of driving rules are available from: (1) The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio—a handbook for truck drivers; (2) The Fifth Avenue Coach Corporation of New York City; and (3) The Greyhound Bus Company. [ 220 ] FIGURE IV / TEN COMMANDMENTS FOR SAFE DRIVING Source: Adapted from a poster prepared and distributed by the National Association of Motor Bus Operators —| FIGURE V SAFE DRIVING EXAMINATION The maximum score for each point is indicated in the column at the right. Give yourself wt ever proportion of this perfect score you honestly believe you deserve. A total score of 9 more rates you as an_excellent driver; 80 to 90, good; 70 to 80, fair; under 70, poor. Your Perfect score score Do you always drive at a reasonable speed, giving due con- sideration to traffic, road conditions weather, etc. ? Do you make sure that your car is at all times in good order, particularly as regards brakes, steering gear, lights, wind- shield wiper, and tires? Do you refrain from passing other vehicles on the brow of hills, or on curves? Do you make it the rule never to cut in and out of traffic? Do you drive only when you are in Full possession of your faculties?... . Do you give the right of way to pedestrians, particularly children and the aged or infirm? Do you at no time let your attention wander, either thru conversation or sightseeing?. . Do you slow down when handicapped by approaching headlights? Do you always give proper and adequate hand signals before turning, slowing down, or stopping?............2.205- . Do you strictly observe all traffic lights, stop signs, and warn- ing signals? Do you approach intersections, particularly blind inter- sections, with your car under complete control?......... . Do you get into the left larre before turning left and into the right lane before turning right?..............2--0e eee Do you pull into traffic only after looking and signaling?... . Do you make way when a car wishes to pass, instead of speeding up? 7. Do you sometimes let the other fellow have your “right of way in the interest of safety? . Is your rear vision mirror O. K.?. 2.2... eee ee cee eee eee . Do you park your car so as not to interfere with traffic? fa) » Do you lock your car when parked? 100 __Research Division, National Education Assoc at Source: Adapted from one of the safety leaflets of the Oklahoma State Highway Commission. [ 222 ] TABLE 3—REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO THE OPERATION OF SCHOOL BUSES AND THE STATES IN WHICH THESE REGULATIONS APPLY Operating rule must not be per ls must not be permit pils should be receiv e extreme right en for 500 feet hall ll be brought t« ull stop b Bus should not be stopped near the crest of Driver should give proper signals b ff the pavement as conditions will Driver should give proper signals an making turns Driver should avoid jerky starts, sudder tops cabs School bus should not pass another v the road is visible a least 500 feet ahead , ises should run at least 75 yards apart nd clear of ot! uses must not be driven backwards Skid chains must be used when road Driver must not leave the bus wit! the brakes The bus should not be le. in gear when i anding Gas tank must not be filled while children are in the | Bus shall not be operated with clutch disengaged except to a stop Driver should adhere closely to the Driver need not wait longer than 2 m observed as makin A regular space in th g an effort to meet the br , ro Site soa WY e bus should be assignex ~ uy , Del., Ky., Miss., Okla., No person other than a pupil, teacher, or mitted to ride in t bus without wr tendent of schools TABLE 3.—REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO THE OPERATION OF SCHoo; BUSES AND THE STATES IN WHICH THESE REGULATIONS APPLY (c Operating rule No one other than the driver shall be allowed to e driver's pat.. mien shiz All keep the bus clean, well ve ntila ated, properly heated, and lighted when driven after dark ccupy th \ trailer must not be attached to a school bus Driver must maintain discipline on the bus, reporting cases of dis- obedience or flagrant misconduct to the school principal Driver should indulge in no unnecessary conversation while bus is in motion The use of tobacco, . alcoholic liquors, and prof ane e lang zuage ina a school bus is forbidden Driver shall maintain the same standards of personal conduct that are expected of teachers Without permission from the superintendent, no pupil ‘shall be per- mitted to leave the bus except at his regular stop No loaded weapon should ever be permitted in the bus... Driver must not permit dogs or other animals in the bus Driver shall attain reasonable efficiency in first aid treatment he bus schedule should be posted in the bus and subject to change only after parents have received advance notice of the change..... Safety drills’’ should be conducted, using the emergency door.. ‘In case of doubt, STOP” No bus shall operate with a broken window, except to finish the route and in case of emergency when repairs cannot be made at once .... States ® Alaska, Ark., Ky., Utah, and W. Va Alaska, Ark., W. Va. Alaska, Calif., Utah Calif., Colo., Ky., N. Y., Okla Colo., Conn., Ky., Mass Alaska, Ark., Calif., Conn., Del., Ky., M Y., N. Dak., Okla., W. Va., and Wis Calif., Colo., R. I., and Utah Alaska, Ark., Miss., Nebr., Calif., Colo., Conn., Del., K N. Dak., Ohio, Okla., R. I Alaska, Conn., Ky., Mass., and W. Va Alaska, Ark., Ky., and N. Y. Alaska, Calif., Colo., Conn., Ky., W. Va. Alaska, Calif., l. Va. Alaska, Ky., and Okla. Mass., Colo., Conn., Ky., Mass., Alaska, Ark., Ky., and W. Va. W. Va. Ky., Ohio, and Okla. Colo. ® The Territory of Alaska is included in this table. Altho care has been taken to list for each regulation all the states applies, the listing may be incomplete because of the limitations of the sources used or recent changes in state regulati Safe Practises for Pupils ‘There are a number of transportation haz- ards over which the driver of the school bus can exercise little or no control. In these situ- ations pupils must carry the responsibility for their own safety. Again, it is impossible for the driver to do what is expected of him with- out the cooperation of the pupils. Because of these facts, several state departments of edu- cation have developed regulations for pupils who ride in school buses as well as for school bus drivers. Some of these are listed in Table 4 alongside the states having each regulation or a similar one. Law Observance In view of their responsibility for the safety of others, school bus drivers should be exem- plary in obeying highway laws. That this is not always the case is shown by the following 17 Bentley, incident. In Ohio the law requires any ve carrying school pupils to come to a full before crossing a railroad track. The board of education recommends further a pupil get out of the vehicle and flag crossing. In a recent safety campaign, Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad Company a careful check-up made on all crossings Ohio for one day.'? Three hundred and fort vehicles carrying school pupils crossed the & O. tracks that day. Sixty-six drivers, nearly 20 percent, disobeyed the law requiring a stop at railroad crossings. In only 40 of the 340 cases, did a pupil act as flagman. It such violations that often end in disaster. N only the laws requiring a full stop at dangero' points along the highway, but speed limits an all other safety regulations should be observed without exception by all drivers of school cor veyances. L. G. “Making Crossings Safe for School Buses.” The Rail 19: 18; July, 1934. [ 224 | V. The Selection of Safe Routes 10 the caretul, skilful driver rarely has ident even on a defective highway, bad ls are sometimes the cause of unavoidable ] nts. Many school buses must travel roads ire too narrow, roads that are improperly | and surfaced, or roads having sharp steep inclines, “blind corners,” unpro- crossings, or other hazards which make lriving extremely difficult if not impos Something of the extent to which road ds exist is suggested by the fact that of 3,250,000 miles of roadway over which mobiles may travel in the United States more than 1,000,000 miles are surfaced. that term to include all such materials nd-clay, gravel, chert, and crushed lime similar survey of the > as well as concrete, macadam. and othe: rou eorgia last year, showed rd surfaces.! Driving hazards abound on m f unimproved road—43.5_ px le M TABLE 4.—RULES FOR PUPIL CONDUCT AND THE STATES IN WHICH EACH RULE APPLIES Regulation pertaining to pupil conduct the total mileage. Of the remainder, 32,972 miles had been graded and to some extent improved, but only 6,914 miles, or 9.8 percent, were hard surfaced. Defective bridges constitute a serious haz- ard in.many communities. Roads have fre- quently been rebuilt, leaving the old bridges to serve until more time and money become available. According to the bridge engineer of Allegany County, New York: Thousands of children are crossing unsafe bridges in heavy buses every day of the school year. ... 1 was under a bridge last spring, mak ing an inspection, when a bus load of laughing school kids was hurtled over my head by a thought- less driver. The bridge was posted for three tons with a speed limit of 15 miles an hour. The load was far in excess of three tons and the speed of the bus must have been at least 40 miles an hour... . The old structure creaked and sagged, but merci- fully it held... . It is an appalling thought that a bus load of school children might at any moment be sacrificed because of our indifference to the problem of antiquated bridges. The problem of bad roads is especially seri- ous in the case of school transportation because of certain factors inherent in the job. The need for consolidated schools and pupil trans- portation is greatest in sparsely settled rural communities where roads tend to be least satis- factory. Sometimes the best road from a pupil’s home to the school can hardly be used because it does not fit in with the remainder of a necessary route. Frequently, there. is no suit- able road which can be used. Route Surveys The safe routing of school buses is a complex problem, involving such specific questions as: When is a road bad enough that it should not be traveled by school buses? How can the relative merits of one route over another be determined objectively ? What does the quality of a road and the existence of certain specific road hazards suggest with reference to the type of equipment that should be used ? What safeguards can be set up against unavoidable road hazards? In answering these and similar questions school authorities need definite information about any proposed bus route, facts which usually can be obtained only by making a care- 2Colburn, H. E. [ ful route survey to determine: (1) th: and general character of the route; th. - kinds of road traversed; (3) the condi: | each road; (4) a complete list of speci hazards; and (5) an evaluation of the roy; for the purposes of the proposed pupil | portation. Surveys of this type can be made principal or superintendent of schools, operation with a well-qualified bus dri highway or transportation official. The 1 facts should be collected systematically, a survey form similar in purpose to reproduced in Figure VI. The su should determine distances, driving tim specific road hazards by actually drivin, bus over the route. Even the established bus routes should be resurveyed from tin time, particularly before the opening of each year and at any time during the when a new driver is about to begin his w When adequate information has been piled about all the roads that might p be used as part of a proposed bus route, sc! authorities face the problem of selecting which is safest and best. They must cons directness of route both as a matter of econ and in order that pupils need not spend necessary time on the road. But first of they should consider pupil safety, for dange ous short cuts are never justifiable. They must take into account stretches of road that m be satisfactory under ordinary conditions are extremely hazardous or impassable times. They may need to work out certa alternate routes. Frequently they must see} the cooperation of highway officials in elim nating certain hazards; sometimes, of t! children’s parents in caring for roads adjacent to their own farms. They may find it necess to purchase equipment built especially for c tain road conditions—perhaps a lighter vehic|: a shorter, more flexible one, or one with more powerful motor. In every case, it is thei duty to warn bus drivers of the road hazards involved, and to make clear to them ¢! operating instructions that shall be followed Finally, they must work out a time schedu! which permits the kind of safe, careful driving that will be expected. “Forgotten Bridges.” Reader’s Digest 29: 53-54; September, 1936. 226 | FIGURE VI THE SCHOOL BUS ROUTE |. The Route a Fr ry ee | zy” ¢ R fpf) FZ7NO— ZZUA5 > Chm a r t f } F. Check here if Class or Kind of Road A. Hard surfaced : or chert Condition of Road A Satisfactory (bre Oa } y ( . Consecutive Summary of Hazards Kind or nature of nazara' b The following key may | Blind curves Narrow bridge Unguarded bridge Unsafe approach Needs repairs Daa Cuive . Deep ditch or wash Unguer ec f Summary: Status with Regard to Transportation Well adapted in present condit Fair: passable at all times.... Impassable after prolonged rains Treacherous after any rain. Could be well adapted by ct Hazardous at all times. ..... . Totally unsuited for transportati + ision, Nat Source: Morphet, Edgar L. “The Influence of Roads on Schoo! Transportation and Consolidation." American School Board Journal 85 : 64; August, 1932. Transportation Maps ‘The transportation map is a useful device to portray the essential facts about the school The transportation manual in Kentucky suggests that the map contain the following items for information: transportation system. 1. The location of the schoolhouse. 2. The points of the compass. 3. The colors. various bus routes, shown in different +. The type of road surface on each portion of the bus route, and code symbols to show the condi- tion of the road.* §. Arrows indicating the direction in which each bus travels. 6. Every driving hazard on the route, with at- tacked suggestions for taking care of it.® Ihe home of each driver, indicated by a square with a capital “D” beside it. 8. The point where the first child is picked up, indicated by the letters “FP.” 9. Each house from which children are trans- ported, indicated by a circle at its exact location. 10. Each bus-stop, indicated by a triangle, and the number of children getting on at the stop indi- cated on the inside of the triangle. 11. The time the bus arrives at each designated stop. 12. All alternate roads over which buses can be run. Maps of this kind are almost indispensable to the proper administration of pupil transpor- tation. ‘They are recommended by the state departments of education in Oklahoma and several other states. Specific transportation questions often arise. Was the driver of Bus Number 3 justified in running off schedule today ? How did the rain last night affect Sec- tion 7 of Route Number 2? About when will this bus have to change to the longer, alternate route and go on the new time schedule? Should the Bronson children meet the bus at Stop 4, or at Stop 9 on the lower road after it has made the loop thru Beaver Falls? A set of good transportation maps is the princi; superintendent’s best and most con, source of information on questions these. Waiting Stations Unfortunately the school bus cannot the door for every pupil transported bu meet at some distance from their home living off the route. One common practi has much to recommend it is to have pupils, whenever possible, meet the bus home of someone living on the route. makes it unnecessary for pupils to wait the highway where they so often fo: habit of playing in the road. It has the tional advantages of adult supervision waiting and of protection from incle: weather. Where such arrangements cann made, shelters ought to be provided weather conditions are unusually favo. The laws of most states permit, and in cases require, school authorities to build ters wherever they are needed. Time Schedules The time schedule should be definite consistent with safe driving practises. } over, it should not require pupils to start home or arrive there at night at an unrea able hour. In some districts, no child is mitted to ride longer than thirty minute ing to or from school. In many cases, r* must be so arranged that no pupil is on the longer than an hour. Regulations usually st the time when the first pupils on the route n 1 } be received, and sometimes the hour by w! the last pupils shall be returned to their homes Whenever possible the pupils loaded earliest the morning should arrive at their homes { on the return trip, rather than subjecting t! to a long ride both morning and afternoon. * Kentucky State Board of Education. Manual on Pupil Transportation. Educational Bulletin, Vol. 4, No. 2. Fra Ky.: the Board, 1936. p. 30. * Possible code symbols for this item are: OK~—-Satisfactory. Road in good condition for its type F—Fair. Always passable, but needs repairs. IR—Impassable after prolonged rains. SR—-Slippery and treacherous after any rain H-—Passable but always dangerous. Numerous road hazards. NG—-Totally unsuited for transportation. In this item, however, and items 5 to 12, defined symbols will be satisfactory. a system of code symbols other than that given can readily be devised See Figure VI for the code symbols used by Morphet to indicate road hazards. VI. Safety Promotion ifety in pupil transportation requires a con re ng, and other subjects. It us and varied program of safety pro-no taught effectively thru extracurriculum The general public, and most school bus 5s. Ga posters, stories, son and pupils, need to be aroused to the lramatizations, essays, excursions, di rtance of safety and to acquire certain ad tions, y films and slides, and assemb th nal safety habits. Even the best drivers grams of various types are among the the most careful pupils need to be re ional dev hat can be employed. ded of the hazards involved and of the safe instruction is usually more or less ing ] ctises which they know, but sometimes fail, » some other school activity, the wo1 bserve. This section describes briefly some be carefully planned in such a way that the devices used in highway safety promo e continuous, systematic, and eftective n by local school systems and by state de The broad objectives of safety edu rtments of education and other state a rencies the elementary grades as outlined by ymmittee on safety education of the W e on Child Health and Pro tive ) Teaching Highway Safety in the Elementary House Confere School tection are aj ? h centers on schoo nc plicable to safety in 1 } \ ; D nk us experienc Che chances of serious injury to children ho ride school buses are reduced materially 1. Habits of personal safety . . ° > ‘onsciousness responsibilit tor vhen pupils learn in school how to assume 2. Consciousness of responsibility na 1 os . . yf others. per responsibility for their own safety. _ . 2 ‘ 4 spirit of cooperation School bus experiences can be used as the basis ra large number of safety lessons both in the ._ A respect for community regulation 1 social signifi y grades and in the later ones. In the begin An understanding of the causes of ng, emphasis can be laid on such basic safety a knowledge of how to meet them ractises as those given in Table 4. In the later Helpful teaching materials are now avail grades further emphasis can be laid on these able from such agencies as the National Safet) asic habits and attitudes as needed, and the (Coyncil.2 the American Automobile Associa program can be broadened to correspond with tion,? the Highway Education Board,‘ the the maturity and interests of the pupils. National Highway Users Conference,°® the Na Instruction of this type should occupy an tional Bureau of Casualty and Surety Unde: important place in the larger program of safety writers. and from a few of the state depart education. Numerous opportunities for it will ments of education and motor vehicle depart be found in connection with regular classroom ments.? Handbooks, manuals, supplementary activities. It rightfully enters into many units readers, and other materials are also available of instruction and lessons in civics, health work, from standard publishers.* 1 White House Conference on Child Health and Protectior Safety Education in Schools. Monograph IIIC. New York: th pecific objectives for each grade and refers to * Headquarters at 20 N. Wacker Drive, Chicag entitled Safety Education in the Rural Schools. (192° ®* Headquarters in the Mills Building, Washington * Headquarters in the Pan-American Building, Washingte D 5 Headquarters in the National Press Building, Washington, D. C > e lly the bulletin entitled Highway repared by the Conference in cooperation with the Association for Chi ation. (1935, 52 p.) ® Headquarters at One Park Avenue, New York City. See es; lly ok by Ruth Streitz entitled Elementary School (1926, 142 p.) ™The teaching aids developed by the Oklahoma State De Commission may be cited as one outstanding ill t Department of Public Instruction, 1936. 84 p 8 For example: Bailey, R. R. Sure Pop and the { Brinkerhoff, G. I., and Rowe, C. Safety First r t Roller Bears and the Safeway Tribe. New York: Ma lan I 259 p F. S., and Slown, R ictivities for Elementary and Junior High Schools. Ch the Beckley-Ca C 1931. 265 p . ifety Town Stories. New York: Lyons and irnahan, 193 D ea, t ‘ {ccident Preventio n the Elementary School. Boston: D. C and Co., 1928. 86 1 Wak Safety First for Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1933. 165 p. lsor e, and Cottrell e. Safety Th lementary schools) New Yorl I Five volumes on health Instruction in Highway Safety at the High- rules of the road if some of his passen School Lev . vas evel alert to any irregularities. Lessons in safety based on school bus experi- One of the early classes in automobil, ences and correlated with regular classroom ing and highway safety, including actu activities should not cease when pupils enter tise in driving, was given in the state high school. On the contrary, in the study of | high school at State College, Pennsylva: civic and social problems, in health courses, 1933 by Amos E. Neyhart. The wo: science classes, and in other fields, the many eminently successful. In the summer of ) opportunities for effective safety education Neyhart reported that not one of the st should be capitalized. The broadened program — in his classes had been involved in an accid of extracurriculum activities, too, affords new 2 splendid showing in view of the fact opportunities for safety promotion. At this level 31.9 percent of all motor vehicle accidents greater attention can be paid to the underlying to drivers who are in their first year of d causes of accidents, to the reasonableness of experience. So rapidly has the movement various rules for safety, and to the respon- that by 1936 more than a thousand high s og eae Ps e ° . . ° ° e ¢ sibility of an individual not only for his own Were conducting special classes in drivin; safety but also for that of others. thousands of others were including hig! Still another type of high-school instruction safety in more general safety courses. is having its effect on safety in pupil transporta- | Work has been endorsed and actively pron tion, namely, special courses on the proper care by governors, highway commissioners, and | and safe operation of an automobile. The pupils superintendents of public instruction. ; riding in school buses who study safe driving being offered in every high school in India are said to be better able than the rest to pro- and New York, and in several schools in N; tect themselves from injury and to look out Jersey, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, De! cal for the safety of others. They are more fully Ware, Minnesota, lowa, Colorado, and M " f conscious of trafic danger; they have “the an. ‘ safety habit.” They distinguish more quickly Many of the classes on driving and hig! ‘0 between safe and unsafe practises on the part safety are limited to ordinary classroom act i of school bus drivers and passing motorists and _ ties such as textbook study, discussion, explar thus when the occasion demands are better able _ tions, and demonstrations.’* In a growing nun to take unusual precautions. They appreciate a _ ber of cases, however, the classroom instruct n driver’s problems and are less likely to distract is being supplemented with actual practise ir to his attention or otherwise interfere with safe Operating an automobile on the highway. P driving. They quickly recognize specific road Special Materials for Safety Promotion hazards and shun dangerous situations. More- State departments of education and ot! over, a school bus driver tends to observe more agencies make liberal use of bulletins, leaf ’ ° . . ° Cr carefully the traffic regulations and common posters, road signs, windshield stickers, ® Stack, Herbert J. “Schools Are Teaching Safe Driving.’ Parents and the Automobile. New York: Bureau of Pub . Teachers College, Columbia University, 1936. p. 57-62 ; ” Among the vigorous champions of driving instruction in high-school classes have been Governors Herbert H. L« of New York, Harold G. Hoffman of New Jersey, Wilbur A. Cross of Connecticut, and E. W. Marland of Oklahoma; ¢ oners Charles Harnett of New York, Michael A. Connor of Connecticut, and J. M. Gentry of Oklahoma; and State S tendents Floyd I. McMurray of Indiana, Charles H. Elliott of New Jersey, and Agnes Samuelson of lowa. D A regulation recently announced by the state department of education. i 12 Suggestions on effective demonstration work are given by E. F. Willis in “The Use of Lantern Slides in Teaching ; Safety,”” The Educational Screen 15: 5; January, 1936 d The following state departments have issued manuals or courses of study on safety education: Alabama, Calif Connecticut, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, N Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Utah, and Wyoming. See, for example, Connect Intelligent Driving. Hartford: the State Department of Education, 1936. 32 p. Other helpful sources are: American Auton Association. Sportsmanlike Driving. Washington, D. C.: the Association, 1936. (A teaching manual and five bulletins suit for classroom use.) § Automobile Manufacturers Association. Automobile Facts and Figures. New York: the Association, | 96 p. (Revised annually) { Detroit Board of Education. Lessons in Trafic Safety for Secondary Schools. Detroit: the B 1936. § General Motors Corporation. We Drivers. Detroit: the Corporation, 1935. 36 p. {| International Harvester Com 1 Drive Safely. Chicago: the Company. 61 p. ¢ National Safety Council. Accident Facts. Chicago: the Council. (Iss i annually) { National Safety Council. Good Driving: A Manual for High Schools. Chicago: the Council. { National Safe ] Council. Safety Education (A monthly magazine issued by the Council.) § Neyhart, Amos E. Driver Training Manual. Washingt D. C.: the American Automobile Association, 1936. { Travelers Insurance Company. Highway Hazards. Hartford, Conn Company. (Monthly safety lessons forwarded on request.) § Travelers Insurance Company. Live and Let Live. Hartford, Ci the Company, 1936. 40 p. { Travelers Insurance Company. What’s Wrong With These Drivers and Pedestrians? Hartford, Cont the Company. (A picture test involving the prompt recognition of road hazards.) { Whitney, Albert W., editor. Man and ¢ 1 Voter Car. New York: National Bureau of Casualty and Surety Underwriters, 1936. 256 p. [ 230 ] ‘ nted materials in carrving their mes L ] SCHOO! bus drivers, Official rules 1 safety to school “e ind the general public. ulations for drivers and rules for pupil t are often distributed in a form suitable manent display in the school bus. Kentucky, Massachusett and New York are among ch departments of education or other ideas o1 posters, materials which can be used in safety promo tion. In at least two states, certificates of recog nition are issued by state authorities to school us drivers without known violations of driv regulations and having perfect “no acci records. (See Figure VII.) Safety Conferences \ccording to reports from state departments f education, one or more satety conterences Public Transportation of School Pupil lrans portation. Frankfort: Kentucky Boston: Massach Albany: New York State Department ions, April 15, 1936 * As an illustration see the article referrec See: Shea, Patrick F. Accident Pret 6 Arizona, Delaware, Florida, Indi: West Virginia. 7See ‘Improving School Transportat Pupils in Massachusetts ae @ Pus . p Pupil Transpor ‘ ' ‘rs and schov of the thir mes these conterencs -d out by the state the department of n ghwavy commission ntly ; sometimes they art é- planning. Lhey may d -or a large region w 1] serve a small area suc ! | ] endance may bde volunta veness of ich confer on the proportion on the quality of d and onferences. similar should o} 1001 buses for schoolboard members, and il a consideration of transportation lems should lav the foundation for efte prop tive safety work thruout the vear. Trainin classes for school bus drivers, similar in genera purpose and character to those which the Grey hound Bus Company has arranged for OF ariver;rs, might well be conducted by state hig Way department . ind othe state agencie School Bus Patrols NX ition | with respect to school The recommendations of the Safety Council patrols have been incorporated into the hil] etins of several state departments cation and are being followed in man the p1 patrols for each bu munities. This plan provides that shall appoint two DOYS, Or a boy and a girl, In an ideal SI ' +] the pupil } s will be chosen w ho because of ind personality h ive the respect ot the mates and who, in addition, live near f the route. Even if the natural leaders + live near the end of the route, visable to appoint them to bus, with assistant patrols to take he remainder of the period. that a bus pa ‘ . s points out roi is a tional nse of that word He only helps protect pupils from danger and at all times must cooperate fully with him. He must not act independently or try to assume the driver’s iuthority, for it is the latter who is responsible tor pupil safety. one usually is assigned to a seat at the rear of the bus, the other near the front. include the following: 1. At the school building assist the driver in seeing that pupils enter and leave the bus in an orderly manner. 2. See that all pupils are on board and before the bus leaves the school building. 3. Warn children not to get on or off motion. 4. Caution children not to move bus while it is in motion. from If two patrols are appointed, Their duties seated buses in about within the 5. Keep aisles free books, lunch baskets, ind other objects. 6. Report to the driver any serious violations of tampering with the door. 7. Caution children not to extend hands or heads from the bus windows. rules such as release on the emergency “hitching” skaters, or 8. Report to the driver any attempts at on the part of bicycle riders, roller others. 9. Leave the bus and serve as flagman at any railroad crossing where the driver does not have a clear view of the tracks in both directions—or at ill crossings, if the state law requires this of some pupil. 10. Descend first at each pupil stati small children on and off the bus and ¢ other ways as needed. Children coming bus will not cross the highway until taking his signal from the driver, beck come. In the evening when children must highway to reach their homes, the patrol s company them around the front of the point just ahead of the left front wheel. 7 a safe interval in traffic occurs, the drive r; and atas he will direct them to cross. If ; heavy, he may need to accompany small ; Attendants In some cases an adult attendant accompanies the driver, assisting him the same way that bus patrols would di times on unusually large buses, and oft case of buses carrying physically hand pupils, the attendants are paid empl. other voluntary basis, perhaps taking turns t the burden. Even under the best conditions, a s driver’s responsibilities are heavy. H efforts need the support of safety educat the schools, of numerous safety bulletins, posters, contests, and confere: and of competent bus patrols or adul; tendants. cases parents serve as attendant 1 remin FIGURE VII State of Ohio Diploma Be It Known That: Governor's School Safety Program To Whom These Presents May Come Has this day been awarded this Certificate for Meritorious Service L | in the interest of Safety for the school children of © ee Baperintenden CERTIFICATES AWARDED FOR SAFE DRIVING STATE Of WEST VIRGINIA 1934-35 SCHOOL BUS QPERATORS SAFETY CLUB wey ~~ THIS CERTIFIES, Tha — eee opersted & Schoo! Bus as » catia, ae Bord ol E during | the school year gader Rules and and Regulations approved by (7 State Board of Educatic t Commission, and State Derertment of Public Safety, withont aceident involving perwne injury of property of, bereby awarded this Certificate for during ~~ period of employment, and bs, in recognith Safety in Transportation Research Division, Nationa! Education Association Autborized Ly {te te An € VII. Business Practises udent business management has an im- bearing on safe pupil transportation. thout sound business practises, a school- ird is unlikely to obtain the most competent irivers and the best equipment available, or to ave from its employees the most faithful per- formance of duty of which they are capable. Some of the business problems affecting pupil eafety are considered in this section. Bus Ownership Whether a school district should purchase nd operate its own buses or contract with rivate owners for the necessary transpor tation f its pupils is a problem with several important ngles. Before action is taken in any school listrict careful consideration should be given iny legal restrictions and to questions of To this discussion, however, only one question is cost and administrative management. ertinent: Which type of ownership, generally speaking, results in the use of safer equipment ? \ltho no final answer can yet be given to the strongly favors the use of district owned his question, evidence now available vehicles. One school district changed from the tract plan to district ownership and _ re- ported that safer and more comfortable vehi- les were provided at lower cost than before.' More conclusive evidence is found in a survey f school bus equipment in 69 consolidated school districts in Minnesota in 1934. District owned vehicles were used in 13 districts, pri- vately owned buses in 39 districts, and jointly 17 districts. The checked on 30 important construction features with the following result: owned? in vehicles were District owned Jointly Privately owned owned Number of buses inspected. 42 55 148 Maximum defects possible, checking on 30 construction features Actual number discovered Percent of deficiencies..... 4440 of defects 144 11.4 1351 30.4 Table 5 shows the frequency with which certain kinds of specific defects were found in the district owned and privately owned buses. 1 Finch, H. A. “School Bus Ownership Gives Better Service at Li Affecting Pupil Safety Vehicles ] ] than the former but more satisfactory than the latter jointly owned were less satisfactory lhe survey report points out that Ww here iS Among the district owned vehicles only two could third of the privately owned buses were of inferior con- struction. Many of these were built of soft woods wall and be reported as not being substantial, one fragile material. . In twenty-five cases the bus compartment was built in boards, other back of the driver’s cab. When the buses are con structed in this manner the drivers have no oppor tunity either to observe or control the discipline of the pupils. In fifty-three cases the buses were too narrow. Obstructions the floors in man The pac ity loads but did not overcrowd to the extent t were on district conveyances were carrying ca the others did. Twenty-one percent of the privat motor buses were overcrowded; 9 percent of the In most of the districts emp] listrict owned. ing private motor buses to convey pupils, the driv ire usually engaged by the bid method. The contrac tor accepts the job at a low figure in competition with his neighbors in the community. It then becomes impossible for him to furnish the type of equipment essential to the safe and comfortable transportation of pupils. Thus, an inferior conveyance is furnishe [he district saves money in cost of operation at the ] hazard of the health, life, and limb of the pupils TABLE 5.—DEFICIENCIES IN SCHOOL BUS CONSTRUCTION IN THE CASE OF CERTAIN DISTRICT OWNED AND PRIVATELY OWNED VEHICLES District Privately owned buses owned buses Type of defect Perc ent defective Percent defective l 2 3 Vehicle unsafe because of, or with respect to: Fragile construction Width (usually too: Ventilation Windshield wiper Seating arrangements Emergency door Steps Handrails Door controls SCHOOL BUS sign. Overloading Service brakes Emergency brakes Adapted from: Engum, T. C. Survey of School Bus Con tion in Sixty-nine Consolidated School Districts in Minne State Department of Education, 1934. Table II St. Paul wer Cost.’’ Nation’s Schools 14: 59-61; igust, 19 2 In such cases the usual plan is for the school district to own the bus body, and the driver or contractor, the chassis ’Engum, T. C. Survey of School Bus Construction in Sixt) Department of Education, 1934. 8 p. (mimeo.) nine Consolidated School Districts in Minnesota. St. Paul Except where school buses are district owned, safe equipment should be guaranteed by covering all the important safety standards in the specifications on which the bids are let. A description of acceptable equipment can also be written into drivers’ contracts. Bids and Applications for Employment as School Bus Driver The state law in some instances will not allow a schoolboard to enter into any contract for pupil transportation except on the basis of open competition in which bids or applications are received from any responsible person or firm. Wherever specific legal provisions exist they should be followed in every detail, for any irregularity in the form of procedure may jeopardize a contract. Even in the absence of a law requiring the board to advertise for bids, or to give public notice of vacancies for school bus drivers, it is good policy to hear the claims of all interested parties and award the con tracts, without favoritism, to the most satis factory applicants. In New Jersey and Ohio, each bid for a transportation contract is accompanied by a questionnaire filled out by the applicant. The New Jersey questionnaire contains evidence of the driver's financial responsibility and his qualifications and experience as a driver; it indicates something as to his personal habits, and describes the equipment offered and the route to be followed. The Ohio inquiry also covers health status, including a certified state- ment from a physician that the applicant is in good health and free from certain specified handicaps. A cash deposit must sometimes ac- company each bid as a pledge that it is made in good faith by one who is in a position to enter into the proposed contract. Drivers’ Contracts Some form of contract is necessary wherever transportation is provided. Nearly always con- tracts are in writing and in many states they are uniform in character, following a standard outline developed by state authorities.° 5 The nature of the contract will ya what according to the type of service If the district provides and maintains ¢ ment, the contract will relate onl matters as the duration of the agreemen; pensation, and whatever is thought with respect to working conditions, and the duties and responsibilities of th: If this is not the case, the contract will ; specify the kind and amount of equi; be provided and the condition in whic be maintained, as well as the more sin line of driving practises. The important from the standpoint of pupil safety, is t ence of a definite written contract wh mits no neglect or carelessness with r any essential safety precaution. If no contract is provided for statewide use, t district should develop a satisfactory) terms of local needs. Where a stand: is employed it may be advisable in s stances to insert certain provisions whi plement those laid down by state auth Bonds The requirement of a surety bond f faithful performance of the terms of a tract is a practise widely followed.® From : standpoint of pupil safety, it is an import administrative control, giving the schoo! an effective means of enforcing whatever standards the contract provides—safe « ment, proper maintenance, safe driving tises, regular schedule, etc. In some case law requires a minimum bond of $250 Minnesota, or perhaps $1000 as in Mont In others the amount of the bond is a cert percent of the sum named in the contract, « in Arkansas, 10 to 25 percent. In at least state (New Jersey), the contract must accompanied by “a suitable bond for th amount of the contract.’”’ Again, the size of ¢! bond may be left to the discretion of the sc! board, the legal requirement being only a gei eral one to the effect that a “satisfactory sufficient bond shall be posted.””* In the absen 1933, Ch. 383. (Quoted in Pupil Transportation. 1 * For an example of this type of legislation see New Jersey P.L. New Jersey State Department of Public Instruction, 1935. p. 3-4.) In at least the following states, uniform contracts either are definitely required or are available for use and ha recommended by state departments of education: Arkansas, California, Delaware, Florida, Iowa, Mississippi, New New York, North Dakota, Washington, and West Virginia. In a number of other states the law requires written and names some of the provisions which must be inserted. For an example of a brief contract see that of Califor detailed form, see that of Delaware. “In the following states, and perhaps certain others, surety bonds are regularly required: Arkansas, Minnesota Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, Ohio, and Tennessee 7 Ohio Public Laws, Section 7731-33, as amended June 6, 1935. [ 234] yond, certain school districts seek to ac ish the purpose which such a bond might e by providing in the contract that the first ith’s salary will be held back until the end year. Because schoolboards sometimes confuse the oses of surety bonds with those of insur _the distinction between the two should bx rly drawn. A bond is not a form of insur . Regardless of its size, it affords virtuall) protection to pupils or to the general public iny injury or damage sustained in a school accident. A bond is only a financial pledge fulfil the ms of his contract. For this reason, t the driver, or contractor, will a mod --sized bond shor sntirely satisfac Liability of Schoolboards " . ‘ +} 11. IL? In certain states schoolboards are liable tor njuries and losses sustained in school bus acci nts; in others, they are not. In California the iw specifically imposes liability on the several hool districts of the state, authorizing them insure their school buses and declaring that a proper irge from public funds.* In New York and Washington there is no specific law comparable the premiums for such insurance are to that of California, but court decisions have granted the possibility of district liability. De cisions have hinged on such questions a whether or not the injury was due to any negli gence, and whether or not the injured persor was guilty of contributory negligence.® There probably other states, too, in which the ourts would impose liability on any district which failed to carry the insurance authorized or required by the state laws. In several states, however, the courts probably would be slow in admitting school district liability, holding that the schoolboard is an agent of the state immune from any suit for damage or injury. Decisions f this type, involving school bus accidents, have been rendered in at least two states, South Carolina and Oklahoma.’ The Personal Liability of Bus Drivers rsonal liability t sucn listric judgment was rendered against when an accident occurred t1 a detective grill covering one of the w [In lowa a driver was relieved of liability ] iccident in question resulted from rective door latch which he negle ted to per repair.'? At present no general end of opinion, clearly prevails. Insurance at least four states public liabil must be carried—either by school in pupil transportation. In Rhode | $5.000-$10.000 public | the d district—on every motor ordinary licy is required in the case of vehicles t p rting fewer than ten pupils, and for large: a $10,000-$25,000 policy.'*® Massachu setts, New York, and New Jersey also specify t uses, different amounts of liability insurance fo vehicles of various sizes.'* The upper limit is $50,000 in Massachusetts and New Yorl $40,000 in New Jersey. New York also quires insurance against property dan policies ranging from $1000 in small buses to $5000 for the larges Florida and West Virginia require all pr insurance and pet school districts to purchase insurance if they wish to do so. Colorado, Minnesota Ne braska, Vermont, Washington, and Wyoming states authorizing schoolboards The California liability insurance contractors to carry are among the insurance. makes virtually mandatory thruout that s Missouri, 1 1 tucky, and probably in other states to carry suitable law, already cited, In Wisconsin, insurance covering property damage liability is not legally necessary but is recog- Administrative Reports on Pupil Tra nized as a proper safeguard. In Missouri and tation Arkansas the state departments of education Adequate supervision of pupil transpo strongly urge at least the minimum protection js possible only when the responsible ; afforded by a $5,000-$10,000 policy. In Ken- ties keep themselves informed on what ; tucky, schoolboards have been exempted from done. In well-managed systems the fol! “legal liability” but the courts have recognized reports are required: (1) a report fro a “moral responsibility,” with the result that driver at frequent intervals to the prin $5,000-$30,000 policies are strongly urged in superintendent, or transportation manager the transportation manual issued by the state whom he is directly responsible; (2) a department of education. from the driver to local school authoriti: In a few instances school districts have been to the proper state highway officials of forbidden to use public funds for the payment accident involving property damage or of premiums on liability insurance.’® The argu- sonal injury; (3) weekly reports from ment advanced has been that in the absence of cipals and transportation managers to liability an insurance premium is an expendi- superintendent of schools; (4) frequent ture for a service which the board is not ports from the maintenance department authorized to provide. Few interpretations of head mechanic, to the superintendent this kind have been rendered ; and even in such schools; (5) monthly reports from the s cases, the board probably could have required jntendent of schools to the board of edu its drivers to carry adequate insurance, so long and perhaps to the state department of as it was done at the drivers’ expense. cation; and (6) an annual report from Proper insurance should serve in some meas- superintendent of schools to the local sc! ure as an incentive to drivers to operate their board and to the state board of education. buses as safely as possible. They know that any Forms now in use for such administt insurance claim will be carefully investigated reports are available in the transportat and that any negligence on their part is likely manuals of state departments of education to be exposed. Further than that, the assurance Arkansas, Kentucky, and New York and of some financial compensation in the event of unpublished form from the departments unavoidable accidents seems but a reasonable education in certain other states. type of pupil safeguard. A schoolboard, in In adopting or developing report forms, every case, should determine what the law is jn using those already at hand, care needs t with respect to insurance and should conform taken that information on the cost of trans; to the law in every particular. If the law is tation is not emphasized to the exclusion silent on the matter and no interpretation jnformation about pupil safety. Adherence } limits the board in using its discretion, ade- schedule, condition of roads and equipment quate insurance seems indeed a “moral obliga- the nature of minor accidents, and many other tion.” '? Because schoolboards are often de- facts relating to pupil safety should be clared to be exempt from liability, however, corded as systematically as cost and milea; every insurance policy should carry a clause figures. Such reports not only have a whol waiving the right of the company to refuse some influence in preventing accidents, but payment on any claim on the basis of original they also serve as the surest foundation { non-liability of the schoolboard. necessary administrative changes. ‘® For example, an opinion rendered by the attorney-general, School District No. 2, Lake County, Two Harbors, Minnesota 1927 17 Kentucky State Board of Education. Manual on Pupil Transportation. Educational Bulletin, Vol. 4, No. 2. Frankfort, Ky.: the Board, 1936. p. 20. VIII. Implications of This Study \nalysis of the regulations and practises of he various states with reference to safety in ransportation has indicated certain areas re further work is urgently needed. Effective Cooperation Since state and local authorities must share responsibility for safe pupil transportation, considerable attention should be given to the machinery and procedures which make for ef ective cooperation. The state is responsible adequate minimum standards and for gen It is the duty of local school authorities to carry out state regulation and supervision. culations and to adopt other pupil safeguards needed. This calls for the closest possible yperation between local school authorities state agencies. Less directly, perhaps, it implies the need for close cooperation among various state agencies, especially, state depart ments of education, motor vehicle departments, highway departments and commissions, state highway police, and state councils or commis sions on highway safety. With the possible ex ception of a few states, closer cooperation among these agencies could readily be devel oped. A plan now in use in one state seems to merit wider use. There a coordinating com mittee, with representatives from each state agency concerned, has been created expressly to promote safety in pupil transportation. Another improvement urgently needed in many states is a clearer definition of authority and function for all the agencies concerned with pupil transportation. tion is difficult, to say the least, when the vari ous departments and commissions are uncer- Effective coopera tain as to their jurisdiction, or when two or more agencies seem to have the same duties. Appropriate State Laws At present, legislation relating to the opera tion of school buses is quite meager in a number of states. In the interest of safety, laws of this type ought to be examined from time to time with a view to enacting needed amendments and supplements. A definite policy should be developed, too, with respect to the scope of safety legislation. Some states enact laws that prescribe safety standards and practises in con siderable detail; other themselves to general laws, delegating to one or more state agencies the authority to develop and enforce the more detailed regulations. The legislatures confine ! latter plan the rel favored, if sufficient authority, but is usually laws not only conte! make it mandatory for each agency to exercise he control with which it is entrusted Adequate Supervision Safety in pupil transportation can be assured only by careful and continuous supervision by ind local authorities. Even the more de tobe tailed safety laws need to be supplemented by appropriate rules and regulations. State agen } ind local school authorities should adopt c1es whatever standards and regulations properly come within their jurisdiction. Laws and standards with reference to drivers’ qualifica tions, equipment, routes, and operating pra tises must be enforced. Altho without adequate information a effective supervision is impo bout the tran portation program, the situation in many states is similar to that described in the following quotation from correspondence with one state department of education: Transportation of school children is a | in this state. Much of tl formation requested is not reported to this office trict’s responsibility I might state further that in attempting to secure further information I have consulted with the State Director of the Department of Motor Vehicles and with the Attorney General. Safe Transportation as a Factor in School Consolidation Safe transportation is basic to the success of the consolidation program. Granting the ob vious educational advantages of consolidated schools over those of the one-room type, the S( hool should be established in a given community question of whether a_ consolidated often hinges very properly on the financial ability of the community to provide safe trans portation. The consolidation of schools in dis tricts that are forced to use ramshackle equip ment, employ drivers at less than a living wage, and establish routes over dangerous highways tends to discredit the consolidation movement. Frequent Evaluation School authorities ought frequently to take stock of their own efforts on behalf of pupil safety and consider other safeguards that might be introduced. Figure VIII is a checklist which can be used in such appraisals. [ 237] FIGURE VIII A CHECKLIST OF IMPORTANT SAFETY STANDARDS AND PRACTISES Check each standard or practise used In selecting a school bus driver, the successful applicant is required to: . Enter a bid, or application, in competition with all others who care to apply ae page 234] . Hold a regular driver's license issued by state authorities [See page 206] ie . Hold a special license (e.g. chauffeur’s license or bus driver's license) [p. 206] . Present evidence that his » Ae » license has never been revoked [p. teh . Pass special driving tests [p. 206] 5. Cite reliable references who will vouch for his driving skill [p. 207] . . Have a satisfactory experience record in driving a vehicle of comparable s size [p. 207] . Be between the ages of twenty-one and fifty-five years [p. 205-06] . . Pass a thoro physical examination (including tests of vision and hearing) [o. 207) A 10. Present satisfactory evidence of good character and wholesome personal habits [. 207] 11. Enter into a written contract covering essential features of the service [p. 234] . 12. Post a satisfactory surety bond for faithful performance of the contract [p. 234] Vehicles used as school buses must be satisfactory with respect to: 1. “~~ ao enough to prevent overcrowding; small enough that size is not a hazard p. 210]... 2. Type of construction Bus bodies strong enough to withstand turnover (no improvised frame extensions and frail, home-made bus bodies permitted) [p. 212] . Brakes—Four-wheel brakes, in good condition, sufficient to stop the bus within 30 feet when traveling on a dry pavement at 20 miles an hour [p. 212] . Tires—Alll in good condition and properly inflated, including a spare tire [p. 219] . . Safety glass in windshield, doors, and windows [p. 213] . Distinctive coloring (preferably uniform thruout the state) and a prominent SCHOOL BUS sign displayed on front and rear [p. 213-14] . Mounting—At least two-thirds of the bus body resting in front of the rear axle and the overhang, in no case, exceeding 45 percent of the wheel base [p. 214] . Power—Sufficient to propel loaded bus at 20 m. p. h. on any grade regularly used [p. 215] . . Service door—Folding or sliding type located at the right front corner [p. 215] 10. Emergency door, preferably on the left side at the rear [p. 215] 11. Suitable devices for heating and ventilating the bus [p. 216] 12. Proper lights, signaling devices (including horn), windshield wiper, and mirrors [p. 216] 13. Window guards (grills or heavy screens) [p. 216] 14. Traffic guard rails (to protect in case of side swipes) and bumpers [p. 216] . . . . 15. Fire extinguisher, first aid kit, and other emergency accessories [p. 216] . . Equipment is maintained in good condition by requiring: 1. Daily inspection of brakes, tires, lights, etc., by bus drivers [p. 217] . .. 2. Thoro inspection at frequent intervals by a competent mechanic [p. 216] ... 3. Periodic inspection of brakes, etc., at authorized inspection stations [p. 217] 4. Inspection at any time by members of the state highway patrol [p. 216] 5. Frequent and specific reports to proper authorities on the condition of each bus [p. 236] Laws or regulations with respect to school bus operation: Require a full stop at railroad crossings [p. 219] Prohibit a load in excess of rated capacity [p. 220] Restrict speed to a safe maximum (probably about 30 miles an hour) [p. 220] Provide that pupils be received and discharged only at regular stops [p. 218] Direct pupils who cross the highway to pass in front of the bus [p. 218-19] £8 . Require drivers to report all accidents to the proper local and state authorities [p. 236] . . . Specify, in considerable detail, other safety regulations for drivers and pupils [p. 221-24] . . Are written into the driver's contract, if considered essential to pupil safety [p. 234] . Each bus has at least one (usually two) boy patrol to assist the driver [p. 231-32]. . School bus routes are carefully selected after a survey of all available roads [». 226]. . Waiting stations are designated and, when needed, shelters are provided [p. 228]. . . Bus — require a minimum of time on the road, but allow for safe driving [p. 228 School bus experiences are used by teachers as the basis for safety education [p. 229-30] Drivers are made safety conscious thru posters, bulletins, conferences, contests etc. [p. 231] Adequate liability and property damage insurance is carried on all buses [p. 235-36] . Research Division, National Education Association DNAOVAWI A [ 238 ] AVAILABLE RESEARCH BULLETINS \ Handbook on Teacher Tenure. Vol. XIV, No. 4, September, 1936. 32 p re The Efforts of the States To Support Edu- eation As Related To Adequacy and Ability. Vol. XTV, No. 3, May, 1936, 64 p. The Preparation of Teachers’ Salary Schedules. Part II. Drafting the Sched ule. Vol. XIV, No. 2, March, 1936. 52 p... The Preparation of Teachers’ Salary Sched- ules. Part I. Administrative and Fact Finding Procedures. Vol. XIV, No. 1, January, 1936. 48 p Better Reading Instruction. Vol. XIII, No 5, November, 1935, 51 p..... The Teacher’s Economie Position. \ XIII, No. 4, September, 1935. 104 p Creating Social Intelligence. Vol. XIII, No. 3, May, 1935. 96 p Salaries of School Employees, 1934-35. Vol. XIII, No. 2, March, 1935. 32 The Nation’s School Building Needs. Vol. XIII, No. 1, January, 1935. 36 p Modern Social and Educational Trends. Vol. XII, No. 5, November, 1934. National Deliberative Committees in Edu- cation. Vol. XII, No. 4, September, 1934. Education for Character, Part IT. Improv- ing the School Program. Vol. XII, No. 3, May, 1934, 64 p Edueation for Character, Part I. The Social and Psychological Background. Vol. XII, No. 2, March, 1934. 40 p Five Years of State School Revenue Legis- lation, 1929-1933. Vol. XII, No. 1, Janu- ary, 1934. 40 p mia Current Conditions in the Nation’s Schools. Vol. XI, No. 4, November, 1933. 20 p..... Constructive Eeonomy in Edueation. Vol. XI, No. 3, September, 1933. 36 p Salaries in City School Systems. Vol. X No. 2, March, 1933. 16 p Facts on School Costs. Vol. X, No vember, 19382. 24 p Crime Prevention Through Education. \: X, No. 4, Se ptember, 1932. 68 p Estimating State School Efficiency, Vol. X No. 3, May, 1932. 5 Administrative Practices Affecting Class room Teachers. Part II. The Retention Promotion and Improvement of Teachers Vol. X, No. 2, March, 1932. 44 p.. Administrative Practices Affecting Class- room Teachers. Part I. The Selection and Appointment of Teachers. Vol. X. No. 1, January, 1932. 32 p..... ; Teacher Demand and Supply. Vol. IX, No 5, November, 1931. 102 p..... The Outlook for Rural Edueation. Vol. IX No. 4, September, 1931. 72 Dis Salaries in City School Systems, 1930-31. Vol. IX, No. 3, May, 1931. 64 p.. Current Issues in Teacher Retirement. Vo! VIII, No. 5, November, 1930. 68 p.. Investing in Publie Education. Vol. VII! No. 4, September, 1930. 56 p.... A Self-Survey Plan for State School Sys- tems. Part II. Handbook. Vol. VIII. No. 3 May, 1930. 76 p A Self-Survey Plan for State School Sys- tems. Part I. Check-lists. Vol. VIII, No 2, March, 1930. 36 p The Questionnaire. Vol. VIII, uary, 1930. 52 p Salary Scales in City School Systems, 1928- 29. Vol. VII, No. 3, May, 1929. 68 p The Principal and Progressive Movements in Education. Vol. VII, No. 2, March, 1929. 60 p Can the States Afford To Educate Their Children? Vol. VII, No. 1, January, 1929 PE wh dsdR dense bene ee ees Can the Nation Afford To Educate Its Children? Vol. VI, No. 5, November, 1928 1S p. All orders for publications should be accompanied by funds in payment for same and must be so accompanied when orders for material amount to $1.00 or less. Orders not accompanied by funds in payment are subject to transportation charges. Make checks or money orders pay- able to the National Education Association, 1201 Sixteenth Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. STOPPING DISTANCES AT VARIOUS SPEEDS FE THINKING DISTANCE