Bikeability

[Scoop940]

Umm, as an adult I have learned from near misses that centre line is absolutely the right position to turn left. If you stay left to turn left, some clown (well the word begins with c anyway) will turn left with you giving you about 18" of space whilst turning

Not when it leaves enough space for a car to go nearside it isn't. I felt it stuck an 8-9 year old in a very vulnerable position.

 

[Profpointy]

Not when it leaves enough space for a car to go nearside it isn't. I felt it stuck an 8-9 year old in a very vulnerable position.

Well no, that would be silly

 

[mjr]

Well no, that would be silly

Yeah, sounds like a misunderstanding, or maybe extrapolating mistakenly from a narrow road where Bikeability was taught (and so primary position could be close to the centre line) to a wider one.

Until two years ago, we had the opposite problem with what was being taught by the local council's non-Bikeability cycling proficiency:

Left foot on the kerb when turning left? Really?

That's been replaced by "stop in the correct position just behind the junction line" but I've not observed a training session and I fear some instructors will still be teaching the squish-ready stop position.

 

[Andy_R]

The National Standard is that primary is the default position when turning left or right, to present maximum visibility and presence on the road.

 

[EasyPeez]

Unfortunate attitude to take there, as it is certainly not "mickey mouse" stuff. It is the start of a process of learning to deal with situations on road and develop coping strategies, recognise and process hazards, and make decisions based on information gained whilst riding. I doubt that a lot of parents ride in a manner that is commensurate with the National Standard - certainly I see bad riding on a daily basis.

What concerns me though, is that the instructor didn't allow your daughter to achieve level 2 for something that is not in the National Standard. There is nothing in the National Standard about having both hands on the handlebar when looking behind, merely that the trainee has to be able to maintain a straight line whilst looking behind. Indeed some people have to take a hand off the bars to look behind due to restricted neck/back movement. The instructor in this case was not delivering level 2 training to the National Standard.

Find out from your daughter's school who the training provider is and make a complaint to Steer Davies Gleave (they are the consultants who administrate Bikeability on behalf of the DfT) as the instructor will no doubt be "failing" a lot of other children incorrectly and acting outside the remit of the National Standard. Bikeability schemes are audited on a regular basis, and instructors are observed delivering training. A complaint like this will raise a red flag that SDG will want to look at closely - they have the wherewithall to remove a schemes registration and prevent access to funding (there are cowboy firms, usually one man bands, who are gradually being brought to heel or put out of business out there.) An instructor who is teaching the wrong things is more dangerous than any regular motorist your daughter may come across.

Ok, I checked the documents and here are the instructors comments in full in relation to the objectives failed -

"R does not always cycle in the correct position in the road. Refer to handout with section on 'primary' and 'secondary'.

Do not turn into major road when your view is blocked - vital observation missed.

You can hold a signal in road, but make sure you check behind before you signal and do not look behind with your hand off"
(I assume this means off the bars, but the sentence is written as I've typed it).

And the summary comments -

"R gained her level 1 and achieved several outcomes on level 2, however she requires further practice under adult supervision as she missed vital observations whilst cycling up to and out of a junction. R did not always cycle in the correct position in the road and needs to recap on the primary and secondary position."

So all seems fair enough, if that's what the instructor saw. My daughter says she looked behind and both ways at the junction and saw it was clear to progress, but the instructor obviously didn't feel confident that was the case. Clearly gets a cross in the signalling box for looking behind whilst signalling though.

 

[Profpointy]

wt %=

Yeah, sounds like a misunderstanding, or maybe extrapolating mistakenly from a narrow road where Bikeability was taught (and so primary position could be close to the centre line) to a wider one.

Until two years ago, we had the opposite problem with what was being taught by the local council's non-Bikeability cycling proficiency:
View attachment 379294
Left foot on the kerb when turning left? Really?

That's been replaced by "stop in the correct position just behind the junction line" but I've not observed a training session and I fear some instructors will still be teaching the squish-ready stop position.

I have a hazy ( 'twas 45 years ago) recollection of being taught summat like that. Took my adult commuting experience to realise how wrong it was

 

[mjr]

I have a hazy ( 'twas 45 years ago) recollection of being taught summat like that. Took my adult commuting experience to realise how wrong it was

I don't know the history of the Norfolk Cyclist Training Scheme but the handbook does begin "The road safety section in Norfolk has been carrying out cyclist training for more than 40 years" so I suspect it's an attempt to update an old course.

 

[Andy_R]

Ok, I checked the documents and here are the instructors comments in full in relation to the objectives failed -

"R does not always cycle in the correct position in the road. Refer to handout with section on 'primary' and 'secondary'.

Do not turn into major road when your view is blocked - vital observation missed.

You can hold a signal in road, but make sure you check behind before you signal and do not look behind with your hand off"
(I assume this means off the bars, but the sentence is written as I've typed it).

And the summary comments -

"R gained her level 1 and achieved several outcomes on level 2, however she requires further practice under adult supervision as she missed vital observations whilst cycling up to and out of a junction. R did not always cycle in the correct position in the road and needs to recap on the primary and secondary position."

So all seems fair enough, if that's what the instructor saw. My daughter says she looked behind and both ways at the junction and saw it was clear to progress, but the instructor obviously didn't feel confident that was the case. Clearly gets a cross in the signalling box for looking behind whilst signalling though.

It sounds almost as if the instructor conducted a "final test" which is a big no no. Outcomes are achieved over the course of the sessions and are continually assessed. Even if your daughter failed to look once, as long as she was doing it confidently, competently, and consistently (the 3Cs) on other occasions, she should not have been penalised - no one gets it right every single time!. The "looking behind with a hand off" is bollox, there is nothing in NS; the following is a direct extract from the NS (Level 1 outcome 11 and Level 2 outcome 10):


11 Look all around, including behind, without loss of control

11.1 The trainee must demonstrate an ability to look behind (over both shoulders) and take in information while riding in a straight line, without loss of control.

Good rear observation a key competence to be learnt, enabling the trainee to achieve most other outcomes more easily. However this outcome includes all round observation and making sure the trainee has ‘seen’ rather than just looked.


10 Understand how and when to signal intentions to other road users


10.1 Where trainees are seen to signal this should always be following a rear observation. However, this does not mean that the signal is solely for those behind. Trainees must look for other road users in front and to the side.


10.2 If they choose to make a signal it must be a clear signal with the arm extended as far from the body as possible, pointing in the direction they intend to turn, with the palm facing.


10.3 There should also be instances where trainees choose not to signal following good observation. If questioned immediately afterwards they must be able to explain, justifiably, that there was nobody they needed to signal to.


It is important that the trainee demonstrates that they can signal at some point during the course for this outcome to be properly signed off.


Signalling should always be combined with observation. This enables the trainee to judge whether a signal is necessary and in some cases whether the driver/rider has seen their signal.


With all turns trainees should understand that signalling is not just for the benefit of those behind. Pedestrians and oncoming drivers should warrant a signal.


Where there are particular hazards controlling the cycle is more important than signalling.

As you can see, at no point does it mention having both hands on the handlebars when looking behind. Indeed, as earlier mentioned, it can be beneficial for some with restricted mobility to take one hand off the handlebars when looking behind. The instructor in question is failing to follow National Standard, and is instead applying their own standard. If s/he was one of my instructors, s/he would be doing a Level 1 & Level 2 instructor refresher course.

 

[Andy_R]

Sorry for the lengthy reply, but it pees me off when I see NS instructors acting this way...