No Child Left Behind?

In this blog, I want to focus solely on the repercussions of charging bus fees for families in a community that is by no means affluent. One of the comments left on a previous blog will be a good starting point to propel this discussion. Future Math Teacher wrote: “[i]t is hard to believe that a community struggling to keep their homes would be charging bus fees. I drive around Jurupa and see so many home foreclosures. What happens to the people who can’t afford those fees? Do they drop out of school? Do they walk miles to get there? I wonder what the statistics would be of high school drop outs once those fees are applied to busing.” Thank you for posting Future Math Teacher! Using statistics relevant to the Jurupa community, I will explain how those fees are unfeasible, especially during a tumultuous time when Americans are fighting for financial stability amidst a struggling economy. Hopefully, the last statistic you mentioned, of high school dropouts as a result of bus fees, will never have to be recorded.

We have all heard about the NCLB, or the No Child Left Behind headed up by our previous President, right? Well, what about those students who will be left behind? And no, I am not referring to the classroom here – I am talking about those students who will be left behind because their families can’t afford to pay for the bus; I am talking about those children who are going to watch that symbol of American public schools pass by their homes catering only those who have enough money for public school.

In my opinion, this is absurd. It is morally bereft to expect a community whose average income is not only below the state average, but the national average as well, to pay for public school transportation (Jurupa). The district can’t reasonably expect parents to pay almost $300 for bus rides to and from school based on the notion that many families have more than one student in the district. Although there is no law that requires districts to pay for busing, there is a law that states that students have to be in school.

And as such, over 60% of Jurupa's students are on the free lunch program (JUSD Fact Book). I know that I stated earlier that I am an English major, but I passed the CBEST, so watch this! If you take a high school student who purchases a mediocre school lunch, it will cost that person about $2.00. Now, say that student never misses one day of school, and he or she buys lunch every single day. A school year is 180 days. A really unfulfilling lunch is about $2.00. Multiply that together, and he or she will spend $360 a school year. What's the point? Well, if more than half of our district K-12 can't afford lunch, then how can we expect families to spend that much in busing? We can't.

I think that we must not forget that implications of bus fees in an area in where it has always been free. Many students will be left behind before they even have a chance to prove themselves inside a classroom. What kind of message is it sending to the families that do not have the means to provide transportation for something that has long been provided for free, simply because they are working to put food on the table?

I do not think the district understands the kind of criticism that will manifest from this kind of discrimination – a word that I wanted to deter this discussion’s focus from – but unfortunately, a word that will more than likely find itself at the forefront of this argument should these fees become reality. We need to remember that the certain standards that we expect our schools to uphold can only be reached if we understand that free busing is inherently interconnected with the ability to reach those goals.

Reference:

"Jurupa, California." City Data . 2008. 15 Mar. 2009. http://www.city-data.com/city/Jurupa-California.html.

"JUSD Fact Book." Jurupa Unified School District. Apr. 2006. 9 Mar. 2009. http://www.jusd.k12.ca.us/cnt/docs/fact%20book.pdf.