One need only read the many responses to the tweet announcing a ban on pupils cycling to school to know that Nottingham’s Ellis Guilford school has not had to look far and wide to track down criticism of its decision. Unsurprisingly, Chris Boardman has been among those having their say.
Earlier this week, we reported head teacher Dr Sally Coulton’s claim that the ban had been introduced in response to “a growing number of students cycling to and from school in an extremely dangerous way.”
She said that while warnings had been issued and some students had already been banned from taking their bikes to school, “there are many students who continue to ride recklessly and it is only a matter of time before we have a serious accident.”
The new policy means that students who wish to cycle to school now need to have completed a Bikeability course and to have been issued with a cycle permit.
Cycling UK says it is hearing of more and more educational establishments who are putting up barriers to those cycling to school, knowing that it would take a determined parent to challenge such a policy when their child is threatened with disciplinary sanctions and possibly exclusion.
The move comes after a Surrey school told its students they could only cycle to school if they fitted a number plate to their bikes in November, and the same month, a school in St Albans said it would suspend children caught riding to school on the pavement or without a helmet.
Responding to Ellis Guilford’s decision, Boardman questioned the school’s authority to carry out its threat.
Reasonable?
Takes powers beyond school, locks bikes until others have left. Requires things beyond the law, punishes pupils who have done nothing wrong as well. Bans active travel (rather than bad behaviour)
Is the same approach taken for driving around school…?
Reasonable? https://t.co/YMqcp3wVzf— Chris Boardman (@Chris_Boardman) January 17, 2018
18 thoughts on “Chris Boardman questions school’s authority to enforce cycling ban”
Do they also ban kids from
Do they also ban kids from being driven if their parents have had a speeding ticket or other driving infractions? If not, why not?
hawkinspeter wrote:
Ban kids being driven because some other people using the local roads have had a speeding ticket!
They aren’t just banning the naughty ones. It’s the naughtly step for all regardless.
hawkinspeter wrote:
Only if they are in school uniform….
I hadn’t realised that
I hadn’t realised that “passing a test” meant that you never behaved badly… Hmm.
It must be lovely for Dr
It must be lovely for Dr Coulton in her ivory tower with a staff who all have blemish free driving records.
I’d be very interested to
I’d be very interested to know what’s has caused this rash of schools acting in this manner. I wonder if a change to insurance terms or slightly different advice given to heads has prompted a few to over react?
Geez, is that allowed?
Geez, is that allowed?
It would not go in NL.
It would not go in NL. Cycling is everyones way of transport.
Shock! Horror! Cycling
Shock! Horror! Cycling without a Helmet! Soft arsed English!!
Well done again Chris,
Well done again Chris, highlighting power hungry, idiotic behaviour by people that are meant to know better and educate future generations.
I’d love to know the accident rate compared to walking up the stairs, rugby, paper cuts in the library etc.
Under what primary or
Under what primary or secondary legislation does she claim to have this power?
Basically ultra vires.
Perhaps this post from
Perhaps this post from Facebook today should be passed on to Dr Coulton, to give her a glimpse into the world of people who have passed a driving test that proves how safe and qualified they are to operate a vehicle. Shocking.
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10213344402037172&id=1612071403
1961BikiE wrote:
What a cracking post, and shit situation.
1961BikiE wrote:
Both that and the school situation are caused by the same thing. Bikes are treated as toys rather than a form of transport and cyclists are treated as though they are playing around, vs cars very important and serious reasons to be on the road. Drivers don’t take cyclists seriously and too many children treat cycling as play. You will always get kids messing about on the way to school, but it seems more prevalent with cycling, because it is seen as a toy.
This is exactly why I have said my son is getting bikes when he needs them, not as birthday or Christmas gifts. If he wants more than one bike, which I’m hoping he will, then the N+1 will have to be, but the main bike, like my N bike needs to be seen as a functional object like shoes. If your child needed new school shoes in September you wouldn’t make them wait u TIL Christmas, and it should be the same with bicycles, so they don’t see it as a toy or something strange, but an every day transport. He may get smaller presents to pay for it, but it’s the way it is viewed.
John Smith wrote:
sounds like an excellent way of taking the fun out of childhood.
ConcordeCX wrote:
beat me to the punch! The absolutley wonderful thing about bikes is their ability to be wonderful toys, tools of adventure and utilitarian transport vehicles, all at the same time.
If they suspended every child
If they suspended every child whose parents flounted the highway code on the drive to school, it would be a very quiet week for the teachers I’m sure.
Is this even a new thing? My
Is this even a new thing? My primary school back in the early 90s made you do the Cycling Proficiency Test before they’d let you ride to school. It was enforced by way of not allowing you to bring your bike onto school grounds until you’d done the test.
Personally I don’t think it was an onerous requirement and I did have to cross a busy dual carriageway to get to school.