off road rule of thumb

For discussions within the Cycle Training profession.
Post Reply
charlytango
Posts: 8
Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 9:31pm

off road rule of thumb

Post by charlytango »

If there are two ways of delivering the same drill, and different instructors deliver differently depending on their preference, but one way involves less risk which way is best practise? Specifically, at the start of level 1 (starting/stopping) say there are 24 children in one playground, would you half the group into 2 groups of 12 (2 instrustors per group and drill both groups in a circular fashion so all 24 could be cycling at the same time) or divide the group into 4 (6 trainees per instructor and set each trainee off one at a time, only 4 trainees cycling at a time and then towards an instructor).

From previous posts I notice there are many views and not many replies; please reply.
User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 5470
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: off road rule of thumb

Post by pjclinch »

The problem with "less risk" is it's a relative term that ignores absolute risk. If the absolute risk is very low then the fact that it's more than bugger all risk is really a moot point. And just how risky is starting a bike, going from 0 mph to a low speed? "Not very", I would suggest, even with beginners.

So rather than worrying about risk I'd worry about how effectively can you teach what you're trying to teach and base your definition of "best practice" on that. On starting and stopping it's not so much the risk of running into one another at low speed while everyone rides at once that's the obvious gotcha, but can the instructor(s) see everyone properly to assess and troubleshoot performance? The manual says "the trainees set off and the instructor supervises their stopping. Where there are volunteers or more instructors one can supervise setting off and another stopping", so make sure you're doing that.

Getting back to the general thing of risk, and assessing it, remember that risk assessment is there to make you have a think, not to make you pointlessly paranoid. Risk assessment is there to stop you having disasters (that's disasters, not mishaps), not to place artificial limits on what and how you teach.

Pete.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20700
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: off road rule of thumb

Post by Vorpal »

I've not acome across many playgrounds that would suit teaching to 24 kids at once, whether they are split up or taught together. Also group management is more likely to be an issue than risk.

Whenever I have more than 12 kids signed up, I split them into two (or more) sessions rather than getting more instructors/volunteers.

With another instructor, I've taught up to 36 kids at one school, but split into three groups and taught during separate sessions.

As for whether to teach them as 12 or two groups of 6, it depends on the kids (and instructors). If they are all of a similar ability, it's probably better to teach the kids together. If the instructors have vastly different approaches, maybe switch off; one instructor teaches starting a journey & the other teaches stopping. One demonstrates, while the other explains and asks the kids questions. The differing style can make things easier for the kids, as long as both instructors use the same terminology (pedal ready versus 2 o'clock, etc.).

The biggest reason to split them up is if you have some kids who are very confident on their bikes, and some who can barely ride in the same group of 12.

Hope that helps.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
charlytango
Posts: 8
Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 9:31pm

Re: off road rule of thumb

Post by charlytango »

Hi, I'm neither expert or academic, and I'm trying to approach the situation as it arose in a common sense manner. If there are 24 children and the instructors use a single playground (which might have 2 courts marked on it) this does not make sense to me when there is an empty, similar sized playground adjacent to it. Even if the neighbouring playground was being used, it is straightforward, for one or two days of the year whilst teaching level 1 of Bikeability, to ask schools permission to use both playgrounds. Then there would be 12 children per playground, easy peasy, you'd think! Real risk, fake risk, pointlessly paranoid; have you seen 24 children cycling around a playground - towards each other (before actually observing them stopping/starting); I know children crash on their bikes, get up dust themselves down, cry, laugh etc however I can also see (imagine) a situation where 2 trainee cyclists cycle towards each other crash and at first glance seems like no big deal, what's the fuss and as you look closey a handlebar (with no end cap) has gone into one of the trainees eyes (an extreme example, I admit) but my point is, more likely to happen when there are more children as managing bigger groups is generally more difficult because, as the old school teacher cliche goes, instructors don't have eyes in the back of head.

Also, if a Bikeability course is 8 hours and an instructor is paid for 10 hrs (30 mins paperwork per session) @ £12 per hour X 2 instructors = £240 cost of instructors and funding for course is £320 (8 x £40) the provider is £80 pounds "to the good". If funding for the course is £480 (12 x £40), the provider is £240 "to the good". Why does any course need 12 trainees, unless the company is private and trying to make a profit, fair enough; if the provider is a council there is no need to make any profit, no need to run any courses with 12 trainees etc etc. If the council ran two courses a week using same figures it would still be up £160; what happens to that money?

Getting back to the general thing of risk, and assessing it, it's made me think. Thanks for replying.
Post Reply