Nottingham school bans pupils from cycling until they have passed safety test

The school is responsible once students enter the grounds, and are no longer responsible when students leave the school grounds. Dictating how students may travel to and from school is not their responsibility and is infringing on civil liberties. It’s a parental issue not the schools, stop interfering and stick to educating.

Why ban the pupils from cycling whilst waiting for bikeability? Why not ban parents from driving kids to school if they have ANY road traffic misdemeanour to their name and/or they haven't done their advanced driving test. Or are you not going to wnforce that seeing as we know who presents the by far greater harm so it's a totally logical and appropriate and should be done long before kids are being forced to go through an advanced cycling course.

Did this person come up with actual injuries caused to others by kids on bikes (that are above and beyond normal background incidents) and how did this compare to the parents driving or the kids leaving on foot? Typocal jack boot type who is utterly clueless.

And we know how bikeability indoctrinates kids into wearing noddy hats as you're not allowed to do it without thus yet another forcing of kids to wear something that puts them at more risk/increases victim blaming. The 'thinking' if you can call it that is illogical at best but best described as moronic and unlawfully overbearing ...natch.

Bike Ability I don't have a problem with kids being trained how to cycle properly and safely, but it won't stop them doing what they're doing, nor will Bike Ability stop them being knocked off by the hoards of parents driving their kids to school.

Perhaps Car Ability  and Pedestrian Ability need to be introduced?

Ironic that it's Nottingham, home of Raleigh Cycles, who've transported more kids to school than probably any other mode of transport.

My school, also in Nottingham, tried to stop me cycling to school because I had not taken cycling proficieny.

They tried to stop pupils cycling through the "teachers' car park" thinking we should walk whilst they drove.

They didn't want to allow cycling as an option for games lessons because there was no teacher who would be able to ride with us.

They failed in all of these attepts of course. They were of course happy to claim some credit when the handful of young bike racers in the school won medals in ESCA events.

My college, also in Nottingham, tried to dictate where and how I should park my bike even though they provided no facilities. They didn't succeed.

I wonder if young people these days can rebel properly on such issues or if the rebellion only extends to a few wheelies and a bit of rowdy riding? I really hope that they do - I hope they ride in on one wheel with no helmets, hi-vis or permits and I hope they lock the bikes to the railings until the silly headteacher sees some sense.

This isn't such a bad idea. Bikeability is actually quite advanced and is much more than 'cycle proficiency' it is a complete  syllabus that teaches cyclists to ride responsibly and competently in an urban environment. It has similarities to motorbike training. Of course young people are young people and can be cavalier with their own, and other's safety, but Bikeability is a skill for life. If the school is prepared to grant syllabus time for a full Bikeability course for any pupil who wishes to ride to school than this should be supported. A Bikeability course is between 8-10 hours, so that is a lot of valuable training   time. 

Shock, horror.  Kids acting recklessly on the way to school and on the way home. What about running across the road between parked cars, frightening old people, throwing other pupils bags into gardens? Is the Dr going to self-legislate against these aswell?

But look on the bright side. If they leave school having achieved a Bikeability award at least they'll have a usable qualification as opposed to being taught how to achieve exam passes without understanding the subject to get good Ofsted grade for the school.

I've decided there's just no reasons for these actions to be appropriate. The idiots who've come to this decision are just ankles*

*lower than a cnut.

The bits in the letter that was sent home that really caught my attention were:

"We have seen twice the number of students bringing bikes to school this term compared to last term"

That is fantastic news, I would love to know how this was achieved!

"We also have a growing number of students cycling to and from school in an extremely dangerous way"

Funny how this is not quantified, unless the figure of students cycling in an "extremely dangerous way" is more than double what it was last term then it is actually going down in real terms.

This is bonkers.

There are loads of school kids who cycle tremendously badly and dangerously - I purposely won't cycle commute through Bristol between 3pm and 4pm partly because of this (but mostly because the school run mums in their Audis and Range Rovers don't seem to care about anyone else'safety on the road).

Banning children from cycling isn't the way forward, educating them is. One of the local sixth forms had a very good road safety lesson. They were taken onto the school field to do what they thought was a fun road safety activity when they got there, a woman pulled a cover off the wreck o a car and announced to the pupils that it was the car her son died in when he crashed in-part due to speeding. Pretty horrible way to learn, but I wish it had been done at my sixth form, a couple people I knew might have made it to the end of college/sixth form...

Too extreme for school children, but there must be some sort of way the teachers can engage with them and teach them about road safety. Mind you, the head teacher at my school didn't give a damn about road safety, seeing as he got caught driving drunk TWICE - he didn't get banned though!

It's a bit "damned if you do, damned if you don't", really - if there were to be a serious accident, no doubt some people would be asking why the school didn't "do more" to prevent it.

While I think the Bikeability scheme is a good idea, they're being rather heavy-handed overall with permits and locked gates.

I’ve no issues with this whatsoever. We had to do our Cycling Proficiency test in the 70’s so we were safe to ride on the roads and so should all kids.

The current cycling trend for the young team is to smash about on Halfords 29ers on the pavement, into oncoming traffic (wheelie optional) or just generally causing mayhem in large groups. It’s not a Mail frenzy – it’s a simple fact. Fitness doesn’t come into it – it’s a cheap getaway vehicle for w@nkers with pitch shifting voices.

At least they have a bike shed. My town's secondary doesn't and although it has racks, they are barely used because no one wants to leave a bike out for 7 hours a day in Scotland.

They cannot ban people from riding bikes, not even to and from school.  All they can do is stop people leaving them on school grounds.  But if a pupil dies or is injured traveling to and from school then there would be questions raised.  Sounds like they are being responsible.

While I agree that knowing how to be safe doesn't guarantee being safe, it would be good if more schools actively encouraged safe cycling.

When I was nine, our entire classed was asked to take our bikes to school to do cycling proficiency.

Half the playground was marked out with proper road markings so we could practice.

I've always assumed this was a standard part of education.

Quote:

Dr Coulton said that students who wish to cycle to school will now need to have completed a Bikeability course and to have been issued with a cycle permit.

I don't like it, but at least saying they've got to do Bikeability is a little more positive than just saying they've got to have a helmet and hi-viz.  Practical skill and all that.  However, WTF is "a cycle permit"??  

So no child on foot ever crosses the road badly? No child on foot ever has a race with their mates and takes a risk? None step off the pavement to pass another group? Push a mate?

I actually have no problem with the head teacher doing this, in order. If most pupils attend by foot then have a pedestrian test. I'd guess the second most common is by car and as the driving test isn't fit for purpose (proven by driving standards around schools) make the drivers sit a school drop off driving test. After that, bikes.

In a way I can't blaim the head teacher for this. It does seem heavy handed, but the cause is the fact that these children and their parents view bikes as a toy rather than a form of transport. If, fdrom a young age, cycling was seen as a form of transport, and children were taught to cycle on the road by their parents, rather than just being given a bike for christmas and told to use it to get to school when their parents can no longer be arsed to drive, they would know how to behave on the road. But then most people dare not take their children out on the road for fear of the behavior of drivers. It's a self sustaining circle, and no amount of training will change the culture (and what self respecting teenager is going to take a cycling test, wear a high viz vest and a helmet).

Is this crap even legal? Barring people from using a form of transport because of things that may happen OUTSIDE school?

Because we all know how well we all drive having passed a test! Ha!
And surely as bikes are faster than walking they should be let out first? Or maybe when and if any incidents happen between pedestrians and cyclists they'll be away from the school so who cares?

Quote:

 We will secure the bike in the cycle sheds but these will not be open until 3.15pm to allow students on foot to leave the site before the cyclists.

Why not keep students on foot back to allow the cyclists to leave first?