Look, Move, Signal

[tatanab]

This morning I saw some local instructors, I've seen them before, and they were calling to the children "look, move, signal". That puzzles me. Why are they teaching them something different from that we expect from motorists i.e mirror (look), signal, manoeuvre (move). Are they training motorists of the future where the signal means "I have moved". It also seems odd if the rider is moving from stationary because it means a signal goes out when the rider has little speed and so is potentially unstable.

[Si]

The national standard is:
Look ....over right shoulder
Signal....if necessary
Move.....into primary
And then as you reach the junction...check for traffic etc, final check over shoulder on the side you are turning, turn if safe to do so.

[tatanab]

Thanks for that. So the instructors I heard were wrong. By their position they may have been teaching moving off from the kerb, and then turning left in a few yards. Perhaps. So maybe I should be more forgiving.

[pjclinch]

Thanks for that. So the instructors I heard were wrong. By their position they may have been teaching moving off from the kerb, and then turning left in a few yards. Perhaps. So maybe I should be more forgiving.

Or maybe not...

If you've just got going there should be nobody close behind you, so who would you be signalling to? A left signal to a more minor road typically doesn't need a signal to people on your road anyway, main reason for a left signal for that would be a courtesy signal to anyone coming out that they don't have to wait for you to pass. Nobody gains much by you taking a hand off the bars to tell folk you'll be getting out of their way.

Pete.

[Cyril Haearn]

It is often better not to signal, avoid interacting with motons

[pjclinch]

Particularly if someone behind is indicating the same left. Doing so yourself then invites the Numpty Tendency to overtake and cut you up on the corner.

Pete.

[Psamathe]

It is often better not to signal, avoid interacting with motons

I've found (from personal experience) that on occasions indicating can prompt a following driver to consider you have already moved - e.g. I rarely indicate when turning left as on occasions the moment I indicate following driver accelerates to pass misjudging that I might have to slow to make the turn or just that it means I am about to move NOT I have moved!. Don't indicate and you just suddenly disappear; indicate and they make (incorrect) assumptions ...

Edit: Just saw pete's comment above - reassuring that my experience is common with others, not reassuring that such driving is widespread.

Ian

[Si]

For bikeability youhave to teach what the national standard says, thus although we might have reservations about signalling a left turn major to minor, we still have to tell them to do it if there is other road users to interact with (inc peds sbout to step into the road)

Of course, for this left turn we tell them to get into primary to stop left hooking, and, indeed, to start it all with a look behind which is not just to let them know what is behind but to tell the following road user that they are about to do something, and create a 'relationship' with that road user. Amazing how many experienced cyclists dont realise the advantage that a good look behind (rather than a 'roadie nod') can give when negociating with traffic. I was doing L3 with year 7 yesterday, down a busy highstreet, WVM trying to push past, my trainee just turned round, gave him her best paddington stare, and suddenly he slowed down and dropped right back, giving her loads of room for the right turn....great stuff

[pjclinch]

For bikeability youhave to teach what the national standard says, thus although we might have reservations about signalling a left turn major to minor, we still have to tell them to do it if there is other road users to interact with (inc peds sbout to step into the road)

The relevant bit clipped out of the current NS outcomes would be

10.3 The trainee should signal if necessary

What constitutes "necessary" is open to some degree of interpretation, and defining it as having someone there doesn't really cut it for me. Furthermore, we also have

9.2 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.
9.3 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.

That's nobody they need to signal to, not simply "nobody there to signal to".

Having said that, of course we do need to see trainees show they are able to make a clear left signal and in a mixed ability class (which in practice is just about all of them) I'd tend to stack the odds in favour of too much signalling over too little.

Of course, for this left turn we tell them to get into primary to stop left hooking, and, indeed, to start it all with a look behind which is not just to let them know what is behind but to tell the following road user that they are about to do something, and create a 'relationship' with that road user. Amazing how many experienced cyclists dont realise the advantage that a good look behind (rather than a 'roadie nod') can give when negociating with traffic. I was doing L3 with year 7 yesterday, down a busy highstreet, WVM trying to push past, my trainee just turned round, gave him her best paddington stare, and suddenly he slowed down and dropped right back, giving her loads of room for the right turn....great stuff

This is all, as you say, great stuff.
For signalling/not signalling I start with folk signalling everything, to show they can, and as we progress through the course introduce the concept of not doing so. However, I need to know that thinking is going on, so not signalling in a lesson requires a shout of "no need to signal" or similar. In practice most of the children tend to go for signalling everything, just in case, and as noted above I'd sooner they do that than not signal enough.
In the Cycling Scotland resources there's the "Safe Cycling Strategy" of COPS: Control, Observation, Position, Signalling. As I explain to trainees, the last one should really be "Communication" as it can be far more than "this is what I want to do" (beautifully shown by the Paddington Hard Stare example), but we already have a 'C' and COPC is a bit pants as a catchy mnemonic.

Pete.

[mjr]

It is often better not to signal, avoid interacting with motons

I've found (from personal experience) that on occasions indicating can prompt a following driver to consider you have already moved [...]

I disagree with both of the above. My experience is that signalling a left major-to-minor turn can prompt a following motorist to ease up and wait for you to get out of the way rather than attempt to overtake... but that may be in part because I'm a fairly tall man usually on a rather large and substantial-looking Dutch bike, with a fairly obvious handlebar camera which is probably often visible from behind, so maybe they prefer not to chance annoying me?

Also, I usually turn left from primary, so it would be a long way round to left-hook me and if they decided against deliberately putting me into their left side (I usually leave scope to turn tight for the left kerb to avoid it, but they don't know that), they'd end up in oncoming traffic or a traffic island. It's been a while since I downloaded the national standard, so I just checked and "10.1 In advance of the junction, trainees must look behind and then should move into the primary position." This is good.

The sometimes-dodgy Norfolk course currently says to "Keep in the correct position" but does not say what that position is - which is an improvement on the pre-2015 version that put them too close to the kerb, but I suspect some instructors still teach to turn left from the kerb because they think that's "the correct position".

[Si]

10.3 The trainee should signal if necessary

What constitutes "necessary" is open to some degree of interpretation, and defining it as having someone there doesn't really cut it for me

yep, thats the thing...if you say if necessary but dont then stipulate exactly what is necessary then you are going to get different interpretations. I think that mine is based on a combination of what was said in the 4 day course, and what one of my itos says.

As to your way of teaching signalling then telling them that they dont need to signal if not necessary...once you know that they can do it, i would prefer to do it that way, but my itos are not keep, prefering to teach them to make a decision from the get-go. Makes sense on paper, but we all know its a bit different when you are out on the road.

Anyway, ive just been talking to my new ito's training god, and it seems that we have been misinterpreting the ratios for years so we might end up with enough time to teach 'properly'!

[pjclinch]

Anyway, ive just been talking to my new ito's training god, and it seems that we have been misinterpreting the ratios for years so we might end up with enough time to teach 'properly'!

A look through the feedback for the new draft suggests things might move again. This is what respondents said rather than what will be, but:

• At Level 1: 1:15 is difficult, 1:12 would be better;
• At Level 2: 1:5 would be better;
• At Level 3: 1:2 is preferred;
• More flexibility is needed in timings for delivering NS outcomes to different trainees and in different settings

I'd agree these would be better, but whether they'd be achievable is a whole other can of worms!

Pete.

[Si]

Weve been doing two instructors, 5 kids, three hours for l2. The thing that she has raised is that we are really doing 1 instructor, 1 assistant , 5 kids for three hours as both instructors arent instructing at once. Strangely we've had the steer davis inspectors in a couple times over the last year or so and theyve not raised this.

[CatherineB]

It has to be look,signal,move but even this has its dangers. As a Bikeabilty instructor I have seen children more than once do exactly as they were told,look ,see a car a few yards behind,signal and then move into it’s path. So chanting mantras like look,signal,move have very limited use. When moving road position we might look several times before a gap in fast moving traffic allows us signal and move into the traffic flow safely. As children start off training on roads with little traffic we want to avoid them acting like it’s a dance routine,twist your head,fling your arm out and move. It’s really important that they know what they are looking for.Decision making and accessing risk is the hardest bit for a child so it’s really key that they work out that they are not just looking, they are deciding whether it’s safe to signal and move road position or not. With regard to left hand turns it’s also key that they are not just looking behind but all around them,is someone overtaking them on the inside as they are about to swing left?is a child just about to cross the road that they are just about to turn into.

[Cyril Haearn]

msm mirror signal manoeuvre, or look signal manoeuvre
Surely the title of this thread should be changed