1. Improving the Mobility of Children
Slide Presentations and Discussant Comments
Paper Sessions 1 and 2
2007 Annual Meeting
Association of American Geographers
San Francisco, CA, April 17-21
Sponsorships:
Applied Geography Specialty Group
Transportation Geography Specialty Group
Urban Geography Specialty Group
Organizers:
Selima Sultana - University of North Carolina-
Greensboro
Barry Wellar - Wellar Consulting, University of Ottawa,
and Transport 2000 Canada
Session Description: In car-oriented cultures the mobility of
children has seriously declined, with major impacts for both
them and their families. Children are at risk from lack of safe
pedestrian and bicycle travel in auto-dominated transport
systems, as well as suffering from the air pollution produced by
these systems. Families with children face serious transport
challenges as children often have to be driven everywhere: to
schools, after-school activities, day-care, friends' homes,
recreation locations, etc. Through an excessive propensity by
adults to drive, children are exposed to values that will
increase the difficulty of achieving sustainable transport
systems which are based on trips by walking, cycling and
transit. This two-part session is intended to stimulate research
on children's transportation for the present and in the future.

2. Slide Presentations
Paper Session 4238:
Improving the Mobility of Children I
1. Barry Wellar. Adapting Walking Security Index Concepts
and Procedures to Serve and Promote the Mobility of Children
2. Tracy McMillan, Allison Phillips. Cultural Comparison of
Caregiver Decision-Making on Children's School Travel
3. Anne Hurni. A Good Place to Bring up the Kids;
Investigating Neighbourhood Effects on Children’s
Development in Sydney, Australia
Paper Session 4338:
Improving the Mobility of Children II
4. Susan Wurtele, Jillian Ritchie. Transportation
Infrastructure Improvements and Children's Mobility:
Promoting Successful Transition from Busing to Walking and
Cycling
6. Selima Sultana. The Journey to School by K-12 Children:
Why Fewer Children are Riding the School Bus?
6. Discussant: Barry Wellar

4. Adapting Walking Security Index Concepts and Procedures to
Serve and Promote the Mobility of Children
Abstract
The Walking Security Index (WSI) project was approved in 1994 as an element of the
Transportation Environment Action Plan of the Region of Ottawa-Carleton. During the design
phase (1995-1998) ten indexes were developed to measure the levels of safety, comfort and
convenience expected and experienced by pedestrians at intersections. In the pilot study
phase (1999-2002) three macro indexes were tested for operationality. Over the course of the
project more than 25 documents were published, including Perspectives on Pedestrian Safety
(1995), Walking Security Index (1998), Newspapers as a Source of Fact and Opinion on
Pedestrians’ Safety, Comfort and Convenience (2000), and Walking Security Index Pilot Study
(2002).
In this presentation the origins of the WSI project are briefly summarized, and the index
formulation processes for the Intersection Volume and Design Index (IVDI), the Quality of
Intersection Condition Index (QICI), and the Driver Behaviour Index (DBI) are outlined.
Consideration is then given to how each of the macro indexes (IVDI, QICI, and DBI) can be
used directly or modified to explicitly represent the interests of children in road and
intersection designs and operations, and in motor vehicle safety and enforcement programs.
The presentation is concluded by discussing how the indexes can be applied by parents and
advocacy groups, as well as by law enforcement, planning engineering and other agencies, to
ensure that the levels of convenience, comfort and safety experienced by children while
walking or biking exceed those of private motor vehicle operators, and thereby actively serve
and promote the mobility of children.
Keywords: transportation, mobility, walking security index, children
Slide 1

5. About the Walking Security Index (WSI) Project
The WSI project was initiated in 1994, and the phase funded by the Region of Ottawa-
Carleton/City of Ottawa was completed in 2002. Since 2002 WSI project activities
include advising active transportation advocates, publishing journal and proceedings
articles, making presentations and holding workshops on index design, testing and
implementation, commenting on thesis proposals, providing media commentary on
issues related to pedestrians’ safety, comfort and convenience, providing opinions and
expert witness testimony on civil and criminal matters related to pedestrians’ safety,
investigating conflicts between vehicle operators and pedestrians, and exploring the
relationship between transportation infrastructure, area planning and children’s mobility.
Hardcopy publications from the WSI project are available from various libraries and
government agencies in Canada, the United States, and abroad. A limited number of
reports from the design phase of the WSI project are available for sale at cost to
individuals and organizations, and a limited number of reports from the pilot study
phase are available for sale to public libraries or other open-access organizations.
Inquiries about WSI publications should be sent to B. Wellar: wellarb@uottawa.ca.
Readers who wish to learn more about the Walking Security Index are directed to the
following websites: aix1.uottawa.ca/~wellarb/; wellarconsulting.com/;
geomatics.uottawa.ca/wellarweb/home.htm; www.pedestrian.org;
fhwa.dot.gov/environment/sidewalk2/sidewalks2ah.htm
Slide 2

6. About Barry Wellar and the WSI Project
The WSI project was presented in 1994 as a research proposal to be
undertaken as part of the Transportation Environment Action Plan,
Region of Ottawa-Carleton. Barry Wellar was Principal Investigator for
the Walking Security Index project, and Director of the Walking
Security Index Program while Professor, Department of Geography
and Environmental Studies, University of Ottawa. Upon retirement in
2005 he formed Wellar Consulting Inc., and was appointed
Distinguished Research Fellow in 2006 by Transport 2000 Canada Dr.
Wellar is a Member of the Canadian Association of Geographers, and
the Canadian Institute of Planners, and is a Registered Professional
Planner (RPP). His research on the Walking Security Index has been
referenced in successful applications to have him qualified as an
expert witness in civil trials involving pedestrians’ safety.
Slide 3

7. Index Design Guiding Principle:
Apply a Reality Test to Potential Variables
Variable Evaluation Criteria Used to Design and Assess
Walking Security Index Research
General Particular
Support
Enforceability
Pertinence
Data Availability
Degree of Difficulty
Slide 4

8. Intersection and Volume Design Index (IVDI)
IVDI = V1 • V2 • V3 • V4 • V5 • V6 • V7 • V8
where,
V1 = number of passenger car equivalents2/hour
V2 = number of pedestrians/hour
V3 = number of lanes rating
V4 = number of turn lanes by type rating
V5 = intersection geometry rating
V6 = intersection slope rating
V7 = direction(s) of traffic flow rating
V8 = number of channels adjacent to intersection rating
Slide 5

9. Applying the Indexes: Illustrative Comments on the IVDI
The largest IVDI number identifies the “Intersection from
Hell”, relatively speaking, in terms of design, size and
vehicle volumes. Simply put, the larger the IVDI number
the less likely that an intersection would be deemed
‘pedestrian friendly’. That is, as the IVDI number
increases, the safety, comfort and convenience of
pedestrians decreases, and to varying degrees so does
children’s mobility.
Slide 6

10. Applying the Indexes: Illustrative Comments on the IVDI
The IVD Index can be used in engineering studies, collision studies,
pedestrian movement studies, and numerous other kinds of studies to identify
and modify structural or functional features of intersections that directly affect
the levels of safety, comfort and convenience experienced by children when
crossing an intersection.
For example, the IVDI formulation can be used to estimate what an
intersection will “look like” after a widening. This estimate can then be
matched against existing IVDIs to point which out intersections the widened
intersection will most resemble should the widening proceed.
Conversely, the variables that comprise the IVDI can be manipulated to reveal
the changes to the physical design, or to the amount and type of vehicular
traffic, that are necessary to achieve an IVDI score that approximates the
number calculated for an intersection that receives a “thumbs up “ from
children.
Slide 7

11. Quality of Intersection Condition Index
Slide 8

12. Applying the Indexes: Illustrative Comments on the QICI
It appears that the WSI research was the first in Canada to have
serious regard for the fact that there are usually four quadrants to an
intersection.
The QICI can be tailored to meet the travel patterns of children by
focusing on all quadrants, or particular quadrants, when looking for
conditions that affect children’s use of intersections.
Slide 9

13. Applying the Indexes: Illustrative Comment on the QICI
There are 18 variables in the QICI. Most if not all of them affect
children’s mobility. Time allows me to comment on one of them.
The variable ‘Stop bar painted and signed’ represents a narrow strip
of paint, and sometimes but not always there is a posted sign
beside the road pointing to the stop bar location. The sign is
especially important in locations where snow may cover the painted
bar. In the Ottawa research it was confirmed that the vast majority
of stop bars are too close to crosswalks, and especially crosswalks
near schools. It is our finding that stop bars should be at least six
metres from a crosswalk, and that a posted sign is required because
many drivers do not seem able to grasp that a stop bar is not always
located one metre from a crosswalk.
Slide 10

14. Driver Behaviour Index
Driver Behaviour Index = ALI + RLI + FTYI
P P P
where,
ALI = amber-light incidents per phase,
P
RLI = red-light incidents per phase,
P
FTYI = fail-to-yield incidents per phase.
P
Slide 11

15. Fitting the DBI to Serve Children’s Mobility:
Zero Tolerance for Running the Red
For DBI fieldwork purposes, we modified the official version slightly, so
that a red-light incident is deemed to occur if either of the following
events is observed:
• for left turns and straights, vehicles cross the stop bar after the red
shows;
• for right turns on red, vehicles do not come to a full stop before the
stop bar.
This tight definition not only serves field work purposes, it also removes
the large forgiveness factor that is currently available to aggressive
drivers.
Slide 12

16. Fitting the DBI to Serve Children’s Mobility:
Zero Tolerance for Running the Amber
For DBI fieldwork purposes, we again slightly modified the official
version, so that an amber-light incident is deemed to occur if either of
the following events is observed:
• for left turns and straights, vehicles cross the stop bar after the
amber shows;
• for right turns on amber, vehicles cross the stop bar after the amber
shows.
This tight definition not only serves field work purposes, it also removes
the large forgiveness factor that is currently available to aggressive
drivers.
Slide 13

17. Fitting the DBI to Serve Children’s Mobility:
Zero Tolerance for Failure-to-Yield
For DBI fieldwork purposes, a failure-to-yield incident is deemed to have
occurred if any of the following [nine] events are observed:
1 Vehicle blocks crosswalk when pedestrian signal in walk mode.
2 Vehicle unable to clear intersection before start of pedestrian signal.
3 Vehicle enters crosswalk when pedestrian in lane or about to enter lane.
4 Vehicle accelerates to “beat” pedestrian to crosswalk.
5 Vehicle fails to slow to allow pedestrian to enter crosswalk.
6 Vehicle causes pedestrian to stop or change direction to avoid collision
in crosswalk.
7 Vehicle causes pedestrian to delay entering crosswalk.
8 Vehicle changes lanes to cut in front of or behind pedestrian.
9 Vehicle fails to stop before reaching the stop bar.
Slide 14

18. Applying the Indexes: Illustrative Comments on the DBI
A total of thirteen variables (two for reds, two for ambers, and
nine for fail-to-yield) were considered when formulating, testing
and refining the DBI. The variables are fully discussed in the
project reports, as are the procedures for calculating index
scores and rankings. As a result, and in the interests of time, my
focus here is on presenting an indicative selection of operations,
enforcement, engineering, political, legal, and other initiatives
that DBI scores and rankings would point to as means to improve
the safety, comfort and convenience, and hence the mobility, of
children as pedestrians.
Slide 15

19. Applying the Indexes: Illustrative Comments on the DBI
1 The DBI is an exceptional means for police services to prioritize
the assignment of officers, photo radar and/or red-light cameras at
intersections or quadrants to deal with motor vehicle operators
who put children at risk.
2 Beginning with the intersections with the worst DBI rankings, photo
radar and red-light cameras should be installed at all signalized
intersections proximal to schools, libraries and other facilities that
attract children as pedestrians. In school zones, infractions should
entail triple-rate fines and license suspensions. This
recommendation is consistent with the Zero-Tolerance-No
Exceptions argument about how to deal with aggressive drivers
and their impact on vulnerable road users.
3 Crossing times at intersections proximal to schools and other high-
use children destinations should be set at the walking speeds of
children.
Slide 16

20. Applying the Indexes: Illustrative Comments on the DBI
4 Parents and community groups should make it a publicized practice
to obtain monthly reports from police departments on citations issued
for such offences as speeding, illegal lane changes, tail-gating, failure
to stop before stop bar, crosswalk violations, illegal window tints, and
failure to execute a complete stop near schools, libraries, parks and
other locations frequented by children as pedestrians.
5 Parents and community groups should conduct their own surveillance
of quadrants and intersections, compile their own records of violations,
and develop their own DBI scores. This body of information is valuable
when evaluating law enforcement and traffic engineering performance
on a quadrant-by-quadrant or intersection-by intersection basis. In
addition, this body of information would no doubt be exceedingly
valuable should a legal situation arise involving a vehicle-child collision
and lines of questioning in regard to the “effectiveness” of an
enforcement program, and/or the conduct of traffic engineers, planners,
or other professionals charged with providing safe passage for children.
Slide 17

21. Acknowledgements
Assistance from Sam Herold, Laboratory for Applied Geomatics
and Geographic Information Systems Science (LAGGISS),
Department of Geography, University of Ottawa, in preparing the
PowerPoint presentation is gratefully acknowledged.
In addition, I wish to thank Transport 2000 Canada officials and
members for supporting my research and publication activities as
Distinguished Research Fellow, and I want to express my
appreciation to the many individuals and groups who have
contributed support, ideas and encouragement for my work on
the Walking Security Index, sustainable transport, and other
transportation topics.
Slide 18

22. Cultural comparison of
caregiver decision-making
on children’s school travel
Tracy E. McMillan, PhD, MPH
University of Texas at Austin
pph partners

23. Youth school travel
Significant reduction in non-motorized travel to
school in recent decades
– Walking represents only 13% of trips
– Private vehicles make up over 50% of trips
Why?
– Plethora of associations such as…
Physical environment: distance to school
Household constraints: time, convenience
Caregiver attitudes: perceptions of traffic, personal security,
convenience
Child attitude: desire to walk/bike
Social/cultural: country of birth

24. Health issues
Significant increase in prevalence of overweight
in youth since ’60s
– In 1999, over 15% of youth aged 6-19 overweight
Health disparities masked in this overall figure
– Highest prevalence in Mexican-American and non-
Hispanic black adolescents
Trip to school important physical activity
opportunity
– Contributes to overall amount of physical activity/day
– Youth traveling to school by active means are more
active overall

25. Programming/policy reactions
Safe Routes to School
– Encouragement of safe & active travel to school
– Several local and state-level programs since late
1990’s
– National program funded in 2005
Increase in research funding
– Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
Active Living Research/Active Living by Design
Recent announcement of $500 million investment in
childhood obesity
Population-specific/sensitive programming? Not
much yet

26. Methods
Qualitative research
– Two Central Austin elementary schools selected based
on demographics & interest
– Caregiver recruitment via flyers sent home in child
folder, parent listserv and local advocacy group
– Participants had to live within walking distance of the
school
– Interviews (non-Hispanic caregivers) & focus groups
(Hispanic caregivers)

27. School
locations

28. Participants
11 interviews with White/Black caregivers
– 10 moms, 1 dad
– Represented 15 children aged 4-9, 6 males/9
females
2 focus groups with Hispanic caregivers
– 10 caregivers overall: 6-7 moms, 1 dad, 1
grandmother, 1 adult sister
– Represented 19 children aged 4-12, 10
males/6 females/3 unknown

29. School travel
White/Black Hispanic
– Mode: – Mode:
8 driven by caregiver 9 walked
2 walked 1 driven
1 alternated between – No variation in travel from
walk/bike/drive morning to afternoon
– Some driven in morning – All accompanied by adult
walk in afternoon
– All accompanied by adult
– No carpooling in morning,
some in afternoon

30. Mode: Choice vs. Necessity?
White/Black Hispanic
– 7 reported mode was – All reported that mode was
necessity (all HH that a necessity, not a choice
drive) – Why? No car to drive,
– 3 reported choice (HH that traffic safety (one family
walk or bike) that drove in this group)
– 1 commented:
“initially I would say
necessity but really…if I
really think about it, it’s
probably more of a choice
because we do live very
close to the school and
could easily get up a little
earlier a walk, instead of
driving…”
– Why? Time, convenience,
too much to carry

31. When asked a different way…primary
factors influencing mode decision
White/Black Hispanic
– Driving caregivers – Driving caregivers
Traffic safety Traffic safety
Personal safety/security – Walk caregivers
Time/convenience No car
Materials to carry
– Walk/bike caregivers
Proximity
Weather
Like walking for
exercise &
environmental reasons

32. Traffic safety conditions
White/Black Hispanic
– Traffic speed – Lots of traffic, heavy
– Traffic volumes near around school
the school – Lack sidewalks in
“It’s crazy” places
Traffic in front of – Speed: “people do
school…it’s tend to go over 20
tremendous”
mph sometimes”
– Poor crossings
– Sight lines
– No crossing guard
– 2-3 crossing guards at
– Inattentiveness of this school
drivers
– No sidewalk on main
road to school

33. Personal safety comments
White/Black Hispanic
– “safe as it can be and still – “people you don’t know,
be normal” worse than when we grew
– “fairly safe” up—transients, drug
– Caregivers generally felt dealers, former convicts &
safe, given neighborhood squatters”
location, and felt general – “Drugs in the neighborhood
safety for children, but are a problem”
keep them close by – “It is safe”
“certainly not the level (of – Responses the same
safety) that existed when whether asking about own
I was a child where…you’d personal safety or child’s
leave on a summer day in
the morning and not
return until night”

34. “What do others think/would think about
your child walking/bicycling to school?”
White/Black Hispanic
– Mixed responses – “It isn’t good, there can be
9 felt folks would be fine if problems crossing the
child was walking with an street”
adult/not alone – “that something is wrong
2 felt friends & family with the parents of the
would not agree with it child…no reason for a small
– “I don’t think they would child to be alone”
care. That has to be my – Worried they would get hit
responsibility” by a car
– “They get kudos for riding”
– “I have in the back of my
head sometimes this
feeling of guilt that we’re
not making that walk more
often”

35. Age, sex & independent travel
White/Black Hispanic
– Generally 10-12 years – Age: 16-17 and up
old/6th grade “Not at any age”
“I’m a little old-
fashioned; I say like 12”
– Sex of child?
– Some felt older (15-
Some felt concern
16)
would be same no
“…nature of the time matter gender,
we live in” others felt greater
– Sex of child? concern for female
Influenced decision of
some, but not all

36. Then and now…
White/Black Hispanic
– 7 caregivers walked to – All walked to school
school – “Before you would do
– 4 were driven (private something & they would
vehicle or bus) tell your mom. Neighbors
– Pace of life different now, looked after each other”
overall seemed safer then, – “Life is fast now”
media—hear more – “Children have more
(“whether it occurs more opportunities, choices”
frequently now, I have no – “Then, if someone
idea”), wasn’t as concerned approached, you would run
then about child safety, or fight. Now kids panic,
just seems less safe now are fearful of people
getting aggressive”

37. Conclusions
Cultural differences
– Variations in travel mode & reasons behind it
– Personal safety/security in neighborhood
– Age of independent travel
– What would others think?
Cultural “sameness”
– Traffic conditions in neighborhood
– Sex differences in independent travel
– Feelings about change in conditions over time
Policy/programming implications?

38. A good place to
bring up the
kids?
Urbanism, transport
and child development
in Sydney
Anne Hurni

39. Child development
 Children’s health and wellbeing in early life has lifelong
effects that result from interactions between biological
development, and social, cultural and environmental
circumstances (Wadsworth and Butterworth, 2006)
 Children’s lives and livelihoods in different locations and at
different spatial scales are shaped by a complex array of
factors changing over time and space.

40. The role of transport
‘Transport’ is used as a
shorthand term for
passenger transportation,
broadly conceived as the
systems, networks, modes
and services that are
available within a given
locality. This includes the
infrastructure for
pedestrians, cyclists and
motorists, but also the
availability of public
The research aims to investigate the transport, (mass transit)
degree to which the transport provision and community transport
enables or constrains the mobility of (para-transit
children and their accessibility to a
range of activities and services that
comprise and differentiate their
everyday lives.

41. Mobility Accessibility Connectivity
Connectivity Learn
Work
Play
Mobility Accessibility
Engage
Create
Transportation
Share
Social outcomes Spatial patterns

42. Children’s mobility
Ability Mode Range
Children’s mobility, expands
and changes as they grow.
Their physical ability,
modes of travel and spatial
range develop, alongside
their health, skills and
learning, from their first
steps in their home to their
travels into their local
communities and beyond as
they develop competence,
confidence and
independence.
Competence Confidence Independence

43. Urbanism: the Radburn design
Mt Druitt, Blacktown
Early ideas about residential
planning developed in the
USA , such as the Radburn
design, were adopted in urban
expansion in western Sydney
in the 1960s and 70s, creating
car dependency in higher
income areas and transport
disadvantage in lower income
areas.

44. Urbanism and child development
1946 2006
A planning fundamental to separate Research on ‘sprawl’ and public health
harmful industrial sites from (such as Frumkin, Frank and Johnson
residential areas characterised the 2004) have prompted planners and
twentieth century low density developers to promote higher density
suburban developments in Sydney. living as the ‘new vision for housing’

45. Urban development in Sydney
Urban development in
Sydney followed rail
network until the 1960s.
Blacktown,
experienced rapid
urban expansion, w
n
has largest number k to
a c
of children in Bl
Sydney, is very
socially, culturally
diverse and has a
mixture of urban
form and density.

46. Population density
Population
density is
concentrated in
older established
areas of Sydney.
Car travel is
lower in these
areas but….

47. Pedestrian casualty rate: Casualties aged 0-16
years per 1,000 population
Child
pedestrian
casualty rate is
as much as
three times
higher.
Simple
deterministic
approaches to
planning are
inadequate for
complex inter-
relationships

48. Sydney suburbs: socioeconomic status
“Poor social and economic circumstances are the greatest threat to children’s growth”
M.Flood (2004)

49. Blacktown suburbs: socioeconomic status
Blacktown is at the intersection of Sydney’s urban socioeconomic divisions

50. Blacktown suburbs: child development
In localities
which have the
same low SES
there are
variations in
child
development
outcomes that
suggest factors
in physical
environment
can influence
outcomes, eg
Emerton
compared to
Shalvey

51. Blacktown: local connectivity
BMX
Track
Emerton
Swimming
Centre Qualitative research can help explain
why differential outcomes emerge at
local scale and what might be the
important transport links that can
support healthy child development.

52. Conclusion
 Children’s mobility and accessibility is enabled or
constrained by their social and physical
environments
 Children’s range of mobility and levels of
accessibility may influence their developmental
outcomes
 Child-centred “connectivity” focuses on the
networks, passages and infrastructures that enable
their mobility and accessibility

53. Transportation Infrastructure
Improvements and Children’s Mobility:
using maps to support the transition
from busing to walking and cycling
paper presented to the AAG Annual Meeting,
San Francisco, April 2007
by
Susan Wurtele, Department of Geography, Trent University
and
Jill Ritchie, Peterborough County-City Health Unit

54. Relative Location of Peterborough, Ontario, Canada
Source: http://www.2ontario.com/

56. School A School B

57. Survey #1

58. Expected Impact of Changes to Busing
School B: Current Mode of Travel to School
School A: Current Mode of Travel to School
Walk/Bike Other, 1% Walk/Bike
Other, 2%
11% 28%
Car, 31%
Car, 32%
School School
Bus, 55% Bus, 40%
School A Mode of School B
Travel
(# of students) (# of students)
Current Expected Current Expected
29 38 Walk/Bike 106 151
153 80 Bus 157 60
+ 63 + 50
87 150 Car 118 168
5 6 Other 4 6
274 274 Total # 385 385
School A: Impact of Changes to Busing School B: Impact of Changes to Busing
(assuming proportion of Walk/Bike and Car (assuming proportion of Walk/Bike and Car Mode
Mode remains constant) remains constant)
Other, 2% Walk/Bike Other, 2%
Walk/Bike
14% Car, 43% 39%
School School
Car, 55%
Bus, 29% Bus, 16%

59. Example of
Annotated
Map from
Parent
Survey

65. ST.
PATRICK'S
SEPARATE

66. HUMBER
OTONABEE
VALLEY
PUBLIC

67. Aerial Photograph Showing Schools and Their Surrounding Community
RIDEAU
CRES
HUMBER
OTONABEE
School B VALLEY
PUBLIC
KIWANIS
PARK
HIGHLAND PARK
HIGHLAND PARK
CEMETERY
CEMETERY
DENNE
CRES. PK
ST.
PATRICK'S
SEPARATE
School A
0 500 m

68. Busing Policy, by School Board
Average Minimum Busing Distance
Average Age (years)
Age (years) (between home and school)
Catholic School Board 1 (School A)
Grades: Junior Kindergarten - 3 4–8 1.0 km 0.62 miles
Grades: 4-8 9 – 13 1.6 km 1.0 miles
Grades: 9-12 14 – 18 3.2 km 2.0 miles
Public School Board 2 (School B)
Grades: Junior & Senior Kindergarten 4–5 1.0 km 0.62 miles
Grades: 1 - 8 6 – 13 1.6 km 1.0 miles
Grades: 7 & 8 (stand-alone middle schools) 12 – 13 2.4 km 1.5 miles
Grades 9 - 12 14 – 18 3.2 km 2.0 miles
1 Peterborough,Victoria, Northumberland
& Clarington Catholic District SB
2 Kawartha Pine Ridge District SB

69. Survey Responses to Question asking:
What would make it easier for your child(ren) to walk or
bike to school?

70. The Journey to School by K-5 Children: Why
Are Fewer Children Riding The School Bus?
Selima Sultana
Department of Geography
UNC-Greensboro
AAG 2007 at San Francisco
Acknowledgment
This research was supported by the University Summer Research Excellence Award

71. Why does it matter how kids get to
School?
According to The National Academy of Sciences
and the U.S. Department of Transportation
(2007) school buses are:
Safest form of transportation for students
Reduce Traffic
Beneficial to Environment
Economic ($5,774.28 per year) and time (740 hours
per year) benefits to parents

72. Background
Trends in school siting are paralleling the trend toward
increasingly spread out urban development, commonly
known as sprawl.
School location has been a very important factor regarding
school travel behavior in children (Collins et al., 2001).
I suspect, low-density siting has clear impacts on childrens’
bus travel time and mode choices to school, just as
researchers (e.g. Sultana and Weber, 2007) have found
people who live in low density peripheral areas travel longer
to work.

73. Background
How school bus services are operating under these circumstances are not
known, and nor are the effects on children’s school trip time.
McMillan (2005) pointed out that there is a scarcity in the literature on urban
form’s influence on children’s travel, particularly for school.
The Maine State Planning Office (1997) has found that although student
enrollment dropped by 27,000 between 1970 and 1995, school busing costs
rose from $8.7 million to over $54 million during that same period because
of changing land use patterns.
Another finding (McMillan 2007) reveals that urban form is important but
not the sole factor that influences school travel mode choice.

74. Background
• “…an easy way to save millions of dollars:
consolidate yellow school bus routes so NYC
was no longer paying for buses for hundreds, if
not thousands, of children who never actually
rode them (NYT, Feb 1, 2007).”

75. Research Questions
1. Do children who live in low density school catchment areas
tend to have a longer bus ride to school than children who
live in high density urban school catchment areas?
2. How do bus routes affect the school trip length of children?
3. Are children who live in low-density peripheral school
catchment areas more likely to be driven to and from school
by their parents than ride a school bus?

76. Study Area: Guilford County Schools
• This research
examines Guilford County
these issues in
the Guilford
County School
District, North
Carolina

77. Data
Digital Student Enrollment Records 2006
Home address
Bus stop and time to be picked up
Digitized School Catchment Area Maps
Census Tiger Files
Survey of Parents for Selected Elementary
Schools

78. Distribution of Students in Study, 2006
*Elementary
students that
ride A.M. bus
to schools
selected for
this study.
Source: Guilford County

79. Selected Elementary Schools and Number of
Students Assigned to AM Bus, 2006
Characteristics Total Percent Total
Students Students Schools
Students Assigned to AM Bus 39,665 55 60
Students NOT Assigned to AM bus 32,972 44
Selected Number of Elementary 12,138 17 24
Schools geocoded
Selected Schools Assigned to AM Bus 8,152 67
Assigned Students’ successfully 7,927 97
geocoded for selected schools
Students from selected school NOT 3,986 33
assigned to AM Bus
Source: Guilford County Schools

80. Population Density by School Catchment Areas, 2006

81. Percentage of Students Assigned to Morning Bus

82. Average Travel Time By School (student)*
*Based on
average
travel time
of individual
students.
Shown in
standard
deviation.
Source: Guilford County

83. Average Travel Time By School (stop)*
*Based on
average
travel
from each
stop.
Shown in
standard
deviation.
Source: Guilford County

84. Average Bus Route Time By School*
*Based on
the average
total travel
times of AM
bus routes
for schools
selected for
study.
Source: Guilford County

85. Number of Bus Routes by School*
*Based on
the total
number of
AM bus
routes to
schools
selected for
study.
Source: Guilford County

86. Number of Stops Per Route by School*
*Based on the
number of
stops
scheduled per
route for each
school in
study.
Source: Guilford County

87. Spearman’s Correlation Coefficients for Students’ Average
Travel Time and Associated Variables, 2006
Percent Percent
Students Students Number Number Population
Assigned NOT of of Routes Number of Density by
Total for AM Assigned to Students by Bus Stops Students School
Students Bus AM Bus per Stops School per Route per Routes Districts
Average Travel
-.138 -.104 .104 -.351(*) -.167 .505(**) .102 -.650(**)
Time by Students
Average Travel
-.153 -.110 .110 -.310 -.158 .445(*) .076 -.588(**)
Time by Stops
Average Travel
-.238 -.011 .011 -.543(**) -.136 .579(**) -.044 -.588(**)
Time by Routes
Total Students
.148 -.148 .033 .830(**) .213 .121 -.352(*)
Percent Students
Assigned to AM -1.000(**) .057 .409(*) .100 .294 -.121
Bus
Number of Students
per Stops -.178 -.691(**) .559(**) .393(*)
Number of Routes
by School .163 -.231 -.287
Bus Stops per Route
.112 -.697(**)
N 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (1-tailed).
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (1-tailed).

88. Choosing 5 Schools for Parental Survey
Summerfield
Irving Park
Oak Ridge
Claxton
Sternberger
Source: US Census, Guilford County School

90. 1= <1/2 Mile; 2= ½ to <1 Mile; 3= 1 to <2 Miles; 4= 2 to <5 Miles; 5= 5 to <10 Miles

91. 1 3
1= School Bus; 2= City Bus; 3= Family Car; 4= Carpool; 5=Vanpool; 6=Walk; 7=Bike; 8=Other

92. Reasons for not allowing your Children to
Ride School Bus in the Morning
40.0
35.0
30.0
Percent Respondents
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
Bus Comes too Early Bus Travel Time is Bus stop is not close Bus service is not Others
too Long available
Reasons

93. Reasons for not allowing children to ride
school bus
• “…requiring him to get up earlier and spend an hour
longer on the bus, and he had no choice to participate in
after school activities..”
• “My child does not ride the bus as she would have to
leave home 45 minutes early to reach a school 5 minutes
away by car.”
• “Safety..so many bullies on the bus…bus driver is not a
caregiver and can’t watch over every child..”
• “Misbehavior of children on the bus..”

94. What Types of Improvement Will Allow Your Child to
Ride School Bus
60
50
Percent Respondent
40
30
20
10
0
Shorter Bus Route Time Bus Stop Closer to Home Other No Improvement Necessary
Types of Improvement

95. Conclusion and Future Directions
• Children from low-density school catchment areas are
traveling much greater time than children in high
density areas
• Because children in these areas are expected to travel
greater times to school, parents are more likely to
drive their children to save time (as they can get up
later in the morning, and have more time for after
school activities)

96. Conclusion and Future Directions
However, there may be additional factors, such as household
income, household structure (such as single parent or two parent
household, and both parents working vs. one parent working),
race, and age of children that are also important determinants of
the parental choice of school transportation mode.
Parental attitudes toward the car culture and urban environment
influence mode choice for their children’s transportation as
well.
These issues need to be examined before any generalizations
can be made.

97. Average Time By Average Time By Average Total Route
School Student (minutes) Stop (minutes) Time (minutes)
Cone 22.8 25.8 33.6
Frazier 25.2 -2 25.8 30.0
st.
Sedgefield 25.8 27.0 32.4
de
Irving Park 26.4 v. 27.0 33.0
Lindley 26.4 28.2 52.8
Archer 27.6 31.8 35.4
Jefferson 28.2 29.4 37.2
Joyner 28.2 29.4 34.8
Sumner 31.8 -1 34.2 41.4
st.
Hunter 32.4 31.8 40.8
de
Oak Ridge 32.4 v. 34.2 47.4
Brightwood 33.6 36.0 48.0
Alamance 34.2 34.8 46.8
Bessemer 34.2 37.8 43.2
Pleasant Garden 37.2 37.8 60.0
Foust 38.4 +1 40.2 55.2
st.
Stokesdale 38.4 36.0 55.8
de
Alderman 39.0 v. 39.6 49.2
Claxton 40.2 38.4 48.6
Jesse Wharton 42.6 42.6 53.4
Summerfield 42.6 +2 43.2 57.6
st.
Madison 43.2 42.0 48.6
de
Sternberger 43.8 v. 48.0 63.6
Sedalia 47.4 46.2 64.8
AVG. 34.3 35.3 46.4

98. Number of Students Assigned to Bus by School*
*Based on the
total number of
students
scheduled to
ride the AM bus
to schools
selected for
study.
Source: Guilford County

99. Number of Students Per Route by School*
*Based on the
number of
students
scheduled per
route for each
school in study.
Source: Guilford County

100. Discussant Comments on Presentations in
Paper Session 4338:
Improving the Mobility of Children II
In order to give members of the audience an opportunity to
raise questions and make comments, I limited my remarks
during the Session. The following comments briefly elaborate
several considerations that I regard as having major
implications for the quality and impact of research undertaken
by Geographers dealing with the topic, Mobility of Children.
1. Referencing. Problems associated with obstacles to the
mobility of children have been in the literature for decades, and
include matters such as urban design, street patterns,
vehicular traffic, distance, safety, crossing guards, sidewalk
provision and maintenance, and so on. In several presentations
in Session II (as well as in Session I), references are limited to
research done in very recent years, and seriously misrepresent
how long situations has been known to exist, and how long
solutions or changes have been awaited.
2. Knowing the literature. There is a well-established,
decades-old literature on how school quality factors affect
decisions about residential choice decisions. Current research
would likely be more useful if it focused on why and how
residential and transportation mode choices interrelate for
households that have children or plan to have children,.
3. Knowing how cities work. Municipalities have laws and
by-laws regarding the construction and maintenance of
infrastructure that affects children’s mobility, and liability can
extend beyond financial costs/compensation to include
professional misconduct penalties and even criminal charges.
The legal dimension as a means to remedy unsafe or
unsatisfactory situations that affect the mobility of children
(and other vulnerable transportation facility users) warrants
attention as a first resort when applying research methods,
techniques or findings to real-world situations.
4. Knowing the subject matter. This is a challenge in any
non-trivial field of inquiry, but when the research in the public
domain the need to be ‘up to speed’ is sharply higher. Simply
put, not having a solid understanding of the state of knowledge
in a field, and particularly in one where conventions are being
challenged, invariably leads to research limitations. By way of
illustration, the term ‘improvements’ has been used for many
years in the civil and traffic engineering fields, generally to

101. refer to initiatives that are designed to move more vehicles
faster with less cost and inconvenience for the vehicle
operators and their passengers, clients or owners. As cases in
point, road widenings and intersection enlargements are
frequently referred to as ‘improvements’, but they are actually
just modifications: both features are just bigger, not
necessarily better after the so-called improvements, and could
represent worsened situations for some road users. For the
past decade more of the alternative transportation literature
that deals with the modes used by children and teens --
walking, cycling, transit -- has focused on expressing
improvements in “people terms”, such as increasing children’s
mobility, promoting children’s good health, reducing children’s
obesity, reducing numbers and rates of collisions between
vehicles and children, and encouraging children to increase
their propensity to walk, cycle or use transit.
5. Retaining credibility as a researcher. Terms like “index”
occupy a very critical place in the transportation literature, and
their role increases with the complexity of processes and
circumstances. If such a term is mentioned in an abstract or a
slide, it is imperative that the index formulation, for example,
be included in the presentation. To mention and not discuss
important terms can be taken as ‘name dropping’ at best. A
useful rule or test to apply in this case is to look for concepts
that are mentioned but not discussed, and then assess whether
the discussion is necessary to make the presentation self-
contained and complete. If the answer is “No”, then maybe the
honest thing to do is to drop the term from the report.
6. Making the geographic aspects or factors of the research
explicit. It is expected that at a meeting of geographers the
geographic aspects or factors considered in research into
“Increasing the Mobility of Children” will be a central part of
the presentation. Many geographers attend the annual
meetings of various disciplines and professional associations --
economics, sociology, operations research, traffic engineering,
public health, law enforcement, road safety, etc., to learn about
why and how their fields contribute to the mission of
“Increasing the Mobility of Children”.’ It is both sensible and
fair that we reciprocate. Moreover, if we do not discuss the
importance of geography to this issue, who will?
Barry Wellar, MCIP
Professor Emeritus
University of Ottawa