Am I making a difference? If reflective practice is the cornerstone of professional integrity, instructors who ask themselves this question are probably already delivering high quality and effective Bikeability training. But how do we (and others – commissioners, DfT, HMT) know for sure that Bikeability makes a difference, or what that difference is?
This TABS 2014 conference workshop set out to answer these questions by reviewing current evidence and studies demonstrating the quality and effectiveness of cycle training in general and Bikeability in particular. Workshop delegates were asked to reflect on their own professional practice by answering two questions:
What are we trying to achieve?
How do we know if we are getting there?
• Key points from the discussion:
Their answers illuminate the diverse range of different views that inform the starting points, contexts and priorities for Bikeability today. Bikeability schemes believe they are contributing to the following outcomes:
• Health – fewer casualties, more physical activity, less obesity
• Transport – modal shift from motorised to active travel
• Cycling - Bikeability achievement and progression, more people cycling
• Environment – cleaner air, carbon reduction
• Society– community cohesion, improved educational attainment
• Well being - greater independence, competence and confidence.
Yet most monitoring arrangements do not help Bikeability schemes to know how well they are contributing to these outcomes. Schemes return input and output data (funding spent, numbers trained/achieving training outcomes) to Bikeability commissioners and the Department for Transport. In addition, schemes also collect feedback on the quality of training provision from pupils, parents, schools and adult trainees. However, they rely on external administrative datasets for observing changes to the diverse set of outcomes outlined above. Examples here include STAT19 recording road conflicts involving cyclists, cycle counters measuring traffic flows, and annual school census data.
A missing link was identified between the close monitoring of inputs, outputs and quality on the one hand, and the wider health, transport, environment etc. outcomes on the other. This gap makes it difficult for schemes to know how their work is contributing to wider outcomes, and how training delivery might change to improve quality, effectiveness and impact. A national primary data collection focused on cycling and physical activity outcomes, was proposed.
Post a reply
Bold
Italics
Link
Image
List
Quote
code
Preview
Formatting Help
Don't worry about formatting, just type in the text and we'll take care of making sense of it. We will auto-convert links, and if you put asterisks around words we will make them bold.
Tips:
Create headers by underlining text with ==== or ----
To *italicise* text put one asterisk each side of the word
To **bold** text put two asterisks each side of the word
Embed images by entering:  That's the hard one: exclamation, square brackets and then the URL to the image in brackets.
* Create lists by starting lines with asterisks
1. Create numbered lists by starting lines with a number and a dot
> Quote text by starting lines with >
Mention another user by @username
For syntax highlighting, surround the code block with three backticks:
```
Your code goes here
```
Just like Github, a blank line must precede a code block.
If you upload more than 5 files we will display all attachments as thumbnails.
Post a reply
@mcfrearson
Am I making a difference? If reflective practice is the cornerstone of professional integrity, instructors who ask themselves this question are probably already delivering high quality and effective Bikeability training. But how do we (and others – commissioners, DfT, HMT) know for sure that Bikeability makes a difference, or what that difference is?
This TABS 2014 conference workshop set out to answer these questions by reviewing current evidence and studies demonstrating the quality and effectiveness of cycle training in general and Bikeability in particular. Workshop delegates were asked to reflect on their own professional practice by answering two questions:
• Key points from the discussion:
Their answers illuminate the diverse range of different views that inform the starting points, contexts and priorities for Bikeability today. Bikeability schemes believe they are contributing to the following outcomes:
• Health – fewer casualties, more physical activity, less obesity
• Transport – modal shift from motorised to active travel
• Cycling - Bikeability achievement and progression, more people cycling
• Environment – cleaner air, carbon reduction
• Society– community cohesion, improved educational attainment
• Well being - greater independence, competence and confidence.
Yet most monitoring arrangements do not help Bikeability schemes to know how well they are contributing to these outcomes. Schemes return input and output data (funding spent, numbers trained/achieving training outcomes) to Bikeability commissioners and the Department for Transport. In addition, schemes also collect feedback on the quality of training provision from pupils, parents, schools and adult trainees. However, they rely on external administrative datasets for observing changes to the diverse set of outcomes outlined above. Examples here include STAT19 recording road conflicts involving cyclists, cycle counters measuring traffic flows, and annual school census data.
A missing link was identified between the close monitoring of inputs, outputs and quality on the one hand, and the wider health, transport, environment etc. outcomes on the other. This gap makes it difficult for schemes to know how their work is contributing to wider outcomes, and how training delivery might change to improve quality, effectiveness and impact. A national primary data collection focused on cycling and physical activity outcomes, was proposed.