According to an article on the Telegraph website the Cycling Proficiency Scheme, or Bikeability as it is now known, faces the axe in the 'bonfire of the quangos'. Good. It's a pile of shit.
A few years ago my daughter passed hers with top marks and wanted to ride her bike to school so I took her out to help her familiarise herself with the hazards on the route. I've never been so scared on the roads with another rider than I was with her that day. She had so little basic road sense it made me wonder if the children who only just scraped a pass would survive a the journey.
If we want kids to ride bikes we need to provide them top quality instruction not worry if their brake cables are correctly terminated (yes, there is a clipboard checklist). The Cycling Proficiency Scheme is clearly not fit for purpose and should go.
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
10 comments:
I was struck by the comments from RoSPA - how terroble it was and so on. Wondered why - if they were so bothered - they din't take on running it themselves?
I'm sure there are some dedicated cycling enthusiasts who give proper and effective training as part of the course. Unfortunately there aren't enough and, as in many things, the checklist has won out over actually passing on knowledge and skill.
I'll have to fight with my wife over this but I don't want either of our sons (who both ride competently off road) to do the course. I'd rather teach them myself and know that they're safe.
I'm afraid your understanding of the Bikeability scheme is inaccurate and muddled as was the Telegraph article. The scheme shares very little in common with the old Cycle Proficiency test, it is mainly focussed on practical training on real roads and in real traffic. There is no pass/fail but an honest assessment of the riders demonstrated skills, there is no "checklist" for the bikes other than that they are safe and roadworthy.
To suggest, as Mr Cooke does, that an accident prevention charity should administer this national scheme is rather glib and misses the point that cycling is not generally a hazardous activity and is positive way to improve the health of the nation. If the DfT can no longer fund it a more reasonable option would be to transfer it to the NHS where increased active travel could save a fortune (see this recent report http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2010/08/20/walk-cycle-obesity.html)
Man Widdecombe is quite right.
I was off out on my bike one morning a few months ago, past the primary school were there was some sort of "training" going on. It was hi-viz tabards and helmets all around, FFS, and a few teachers stood around instructing, none of whom looked like they'd swung their leg over a top tube in years.
One lad was virtually riding up the gutter before passing a parked car a whisker from its wing mirror. This was apparently acceptable. I was riding past him at the time completley on the otherside of the road so as to let the car behind us know that he wasn't to come through at this juncture.
I really wanted to leap off and tell the lad how it's done. "Own the road, indicating isn't just about sticking your arm out, are you sure there's no one sat in that parked car about to open the door?"
Unfortulately hard won experience counts for a lot. The majority of cyclist deaths, in London especially, would seem to be amongst newcomers.
Sorry Don but the information that we have access to is different. It may be that you are part of a team in another area that runs a bikeability program but someone who is known to me was part of one of the teams that performs the assessments locally. Kids were prevented from taking the training, for example, for failing to have terminating caps on brake cables or other minor faults that were listed on a clipboard. Any cyclist will confirm that in itself failure to have and end cap is not a serious issue and does not render a bike unroadworthy.
What frustrates me the most I suppose is the ease of getting top marks. Maybe I expect too much from my kids but my daughter was not safe on the roads after achieving the highest pass from the course. It worries me that those who just scrape through will be scraped off the tarmac if they are told they have the ability to do something that they are unsafe doing.
I think also that I should re-affirm that I come at this from the perspective of a cyclist. I've even been known to dress in (non-dayglo) lycra at times.
Any cyclist will confirm that in itself failure to have and end cap is not a serious issue and does not render a bike unroadworthy.
Ferrules! Maybe. But I for one would be ashamed to leave the house if the manufacturer's name on my tires were not aligned next to the valves.
For fear of giving you a heart attack I will refrain from posting a picture of the current condition of my bike Blognor Regis. To say that it's a little muddy is an understatement .. .. .. .. :o)
That's the way to do it: http://blognorregis.blogspot.com/2007/05/french-conservative.html
Manwiddecombe - What was actually wrong with your daughter's riding?
I ask sincerely, as some people's idea of correct riding is quite out of date. The 'old' cycling proficiency is different to Bikeability in many ways.
Hi Clive.
When I was shadowing her down some quiet local roads her road position was not very good at all and the way she approached a right hand turn would have, had there been traffic behind her, got her killed. At one point she went from the gutter (literally) diagonally across the road and then into the oncoming lane of the road she was turning into without so much as a glance over her shoulder.
I accept that her age and inexperience were major factors in that manoeuvre as was the fear and excitement of riding on the road. What worries me greatly is that she scored top marks in all areas of her bikeability course which is supposed to prepare her for such things.
Post a Comment