05-26-2016, 09:21 AM
So, the concencus, at least on this forum, is that training is effective and useful. To go back to my original post:
Quote:The riders were put through a VicRide coaching program put together by the Monash University Accident Research Centre in conjunction with Honda Rider Training Australia (HART) and Learning Systems Analysis.
The on-road motorcycle rider coaching program involved pre-program activities, four hours of on-road riding and discussion in small groups with a riding coach.
Results were obtained from the riders reporting back to the researchers and crosschecked with police records of crashes and traffic offences. The Victorian study was carried out by university researchers Rebecca Ivers and Teresa Senserrick, whose results have just been released. In their report, they say there is no evidence that on-road coaching helped novice riders avoid crashes."
Monash University is regarded (by those that respect universities) as very well respected. [url=http://hart.honda.com.au/]HART is a well regarded motorcycle training organisation and [url=http://www.lsanalysis.com.au]Learning Systems Analysis, to quote from their website, "applies systematic procedures to the definition of training and training support requirements for major and minor capital projects. These procedures are based on US Military Standards such as MIL-STD-1388 Logistic Support Analysis and MIL‑STD‑1379D Military Training Programs, as well as modern theories and principles of instructional design. Experience in major projects includes Joint Strike Fighter, F/A18 Hornet, Airborne Early Warning and Control, Air Defence Ground Environments, Maritime Helicopters, and Undergraduate Military Aircrew Training" (whatever all that means).
So, if the report is wrong, how did they get it so wrong? Maybe Pete Erickson's post provides us with a clue; or Curlyjoe's, who tracked down the report and actually read it. Notice that " It [the report] was funded by the Victorian Government Motorcycle Safety Levy, paid by all state riders in their annual registration fee".
Riko, if iyo, this is a non-discussion I think that you have missed the point. The point is not so much about what you, or I, or other forum members think, but rather what road traffic authorities and legislators think when reports like this cross their desks. It may even have a bearing on what possibly is a very bleak future for those who enjoy riding motorcycles for pleasure. But that is a rant for another thread. Standby.
Cheers
Quote:The riders were put through a VicRide coaching program put together by the Monash University Accident Research Centre in conjunction with Honda Rider Training Australia (HART) and Learning Systems Analysis.
The on-road motorcycle rider coaching program involved pre-program activities, four hours of on-road riding and discussion in small groups with a riding coach.
Results were obtained from the riders reporting back to the researchers and crosschecked with police records of crashes and traffic offences. The Victorian study was carried out by university researchers Rebecca Ivers and Teresa Senserrick, whose results have just been released. In their report, they say there is no evidence that on-road coaching helped novice riders avoid crashes."
Monash University is regarded (by those that respect universities) as very well respected. [url=http://hart.honda.com.au/]HART is a well regarded motorcycle training organisation and [url=http://www.lsanalysis.com.au]Learning Systems Analysis, to quote from their website, "applies systematic procedures to the definition of training and training support requirements for major and minor capital projects. These procedures are based on US Military Standards such as MIL-STD-1388 Logistic Support Analysis and MIL‑STD‑1379D Military Training Programs, as well as modern theories and principles of instructional design. Experience in major projects includes Joint Strike Fighter, F/A18 Hornet, Airborne Early Warning and Control, Air Defence Ground Environments, Maritime Helicopters, and Undergraduate Military Aircrew Training" (whatever all that means).
So, if the report is wrong, how did they get it so wrong? Maybe Pete Erickson's post provides us with a clue; or Curlyjoe's, who tracked down the report and actually read it. Notice that " It [the report] was funded by the Victorian Government Motorcycle Safety Levy, paid by all state riders in their annual registration fee".
Riko, if iyo, this is a non-discussion I think that you have missed the point. The point is not so much about what you, or I, or other forum members think, but rather what road traffic authorities and legislators think when reports like this cross their desks. It may even have a bearing on what possibly is a very bleak future for those who enjoy riding motorcycles for pleasure. But that is a rant for another thread. Standby.
Cheers