What message does this shout at you?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

presta

Guru
According to Ian Walker it's that "wealthier kids who get driven to school do worse in their exams ".

GVLwJFgWUAALd5K?format=png&name=small.png
 

Drago

Legendary Member
Lance Stroll used to be flown the 1km to school in a helicopter. No wonder he's brain dead.

Is their any causative link to travel mode in the study?
 
Doesn't scream to me that you can link wealth to being driven to GSCE result at all. From that data kids from wealthier families (if Quintile 5 is the wealthiest) also walk or take the bus more and they do significantly better at school. If its quintile 1 = wealthiest there isn't much difference. But worryingly those that cycle to school get lower GCSE points again :-/
 

Dogtrousers

Kilometre nibbler
A link to the source please

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10040056/

Conclusion
Our finding that there is no clear educational advantage for any one travel mode should end some long-standing speculation within the research literature about the impact of travel experiences on learning3–9 11–13 and thereby help unlock public health gains by removing an impediment to reducing the use of private cars for the school commute. Modes like walking, cycling and buses are immediately positive for children’s well-being20 and also provide health benefits,1 2 so it is perhaps surprising they do not translate into more substantial academic performance advantages. On the other hand, as we have clearly shown here, nor does spending time in cars with adult caregivers. Given the known negative consequences of driving children to school, including air pollution and lack of physical activity,1 2 11 it is now clear that policymakers can recommend active and public transport modes as the default choice without fear of meaningful long-term educational disadvantage.
 

cyberknight

As long as I breathe, I attack.
My son cycled to school every day and still fu**ed up his A Levels, one of his pals was driven in by his parents every day and is now at Cambridge.

I caught a bus and after a levels was told to get a job, younger brother got driven and parents got extra part time jobs to put him through uni
 
WHen I was a teacher I found that it made little diference
Kids attitude was the main thing

Had one pupil who came from well off parents - both had degrees - kids couldn;t care less
predictions from the school management system was for him to get As and Bs across all subjects
I was asked why I was predciting him to get an E or F and said that if he handed in some course work he might have more of a chance as the course was 100% course work and he had done as little as possible

Parents were caring and involved - but if he insisted on doing naff all then there was very little I could do!

I also had parents who didn;t give a damn and the kids saw school as their way out and tried like hell to get good marks

Guess which category I would spend my free time helping out??

I was also criticised for that - spending loads of time helping a kid get an A when they were predicted to get a D and running at a B on current marks
When I "should" be helping the lazy git who was heading for an E but predicted to get a B

stuff that!!!
 

gbb

Squire
Location
Peterborough
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10040056/

Conclusion
Our finding that there is no clear educational advantage for any one travel mode should end some long-standing speculation within the research literature about the impact of travel experiences on learning3–9 11–13 and thereby help unlock public health gains by removing an impediment to reducing the use of private cars for the school commute. Modes like walking, cycling and buses are immediately positive for children’s well-being20 and also provide health benefits,1 2 so it is perhaps surprising they do not translate into more substantial academic performance advantages. On the other hand, as we have clearly shown here, nor does spending time in cars with adult caregivers. Given the known negative consequences of driving children to school, including air pollution and lack of physical activity,1 2 11 it is now clear that policymakers can recommend active and public transport modes as the default choice without fear of meaningful long-term educational disadvantage.

It's the conclusion that gives it meaning. The original statement /graph/ question doesn't have any context, why who, what ?
Made no sense to ke until I read the conclusion.
 
Top Bottom