Look, Move, Signal

For discussions within the Cycle Training profession.
tatanab
Posts: 3477
Joined: 8 Feb 2007, 12:37pm

Re: Look, Move, Signal

Postby tatanab » 28 Apr 2018, 3:35pm

brynpoeth wrote:msm mirror signal manoeuvre, or look signal manoeuvre
Surely the title of this thread should be changed
No, because the title reflects what I heard the instructors say several times. I was asking why this should be the case, and possible circumstances have been explained. "MSM" remains the general case.

User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 3154
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Look, Move, Signal

Postby pjclinch » 28 Apr 2018, 6:53pm

CatherineB wrote: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.


This, very much.
Cycling Proficiency was built on learn-by-rote style drills, and they're not really good enough any more (if they ever were).

The emerging new National Standard (currently in consultation but we have an initial draft) very much emphasises the need for thinking and strategy rather than a list of things to do in order. It remains to be seen how it'll be implemented in teaching resources, but the idea at least is a step forwards.

Pete.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...

thirdcrank
Posts: 26707
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Look, Move, Signal

Postby thirdcrank » 28 Apr 2018, 7:25pm

pjclinch wrote: ... 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. ....


I think this is an excellent idea and it's good that you manage it in the setting of cycling lessons. I've posted previously in relation to driving tuition that IMO some so-called advanced driving techniques are more to do with being observable by an examiner than ensuring safety. Anybody who truly knows what they are doing should be able to give a basic commentary explaining their thinking but that's a lot easier to conduct in a car than riding a bike communicating with another rider, especially in a group. And so much harder with shy children.

If you get your trainees to be fully aware of what's going on around them and alert to what may happen AND to communicate their intentions with other road users, in addition to all the things like traffic signs, you are laying a foundation for proper use of the road on or in any vehicle for the rest of their hopefully long lives.

User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 3154
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Look, Move, Signal

Postby pjclinch » 29 Apr 2018, 11:03am

thirdcrank wrote:Anybody who truly knows what they are doing should be able to give a basic commentary explaining their thinking but that's a lot easier to conduct in a car than riding a bike communicating with another rider, especially in a group. And so much harder with shy children.


It is indeed a bit variable in a Bikeability context, and not just because of shyness.

A memorable example went something like this...
And I look around me for traffic (good...) and there's none so I'll move out (good...), and you see that house there, my cousin lives there, and he's got a new dog! (ah...)
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...

thirdcrank
Posts: 26707
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Look, Move, Signal

Postby thirdcrank » 29 Apr 2018, 11:27am

The fundamental thing is that children should be given clear explanations rather than "because I say so" or because it fits an easily taught drill.

I was explaining to one of my grandchildren the dangers to pedestrians presented by drivers on the minor leg of an angled junction who merely looked to their right without slowing before emerging, in spite of there often being pedestrians crossing the major road. The first driver carefully stopped and looked around before emerging. I explained that this was an exception to what I was saying and he announced "That was our Miss xxx (a teaching assistant at his school.) She wouldn't run children over."

Apologies for my digression: keep up the good work :D