David Martin said:
Mark Thompson said:Quoted message said:> That's the way to go. I'm still hopeful that my school governors will
> change their minds about mandatory helmets while children are
> training.
Circulate them Ian Walker's research from Bath that was widely reported
on the BBC etc. <snippity>
As Tom is the expert at the school, I thought just wait until he re-does
the risk assessment, then he can recommend helmets be used for complete
novices on the playground. I presume he's got a stock of helmets for those
that want/need them.
Risk assessment gets accepted by Governors. Mandatory helmets gone.
Not sure if it can work like that thobut if they're reasonable people,
they'll listen to what their expert is saying and follow his advice. Guess
they've ignored it once already tho.
I am in two minds over the issue of making them wear helmets. My RA
would go something like (quick OTTOMH):
1. there is a very low risk of an accident when riding a bike. Novice
cyclists are more likely to have a single vehicle accident.
2. Single vehicle accidents rarely provide serious injuries and are
approximately as hazardous as free play in a playground. Serious
accidents are in the vast majority of cases caused by motor vehicles.
In a two hour lesson with 15 novice cyclists I would expect two
children to have an accident causing trivial injury requiring nothing
more than a wash and a short break from training. This makes novice
cycle training approximately four times more hazardous than a games
lesson when I would expect a trivial injury once every two hour long
lessons with a class of 30 children.
I can recall only one slight injury in teaching about 8400 games
hours* and two slight injuries in teaching about 2400 cycling hours*.
In all cases the injuries needed minor first aid. This tiny sample
suggests cycle training to be approximately 3.5 times more dangerous
than a games lesson.
*estimated by myltiplying number of lessons by length in hours by
number of pupils.
Quoted message said:3. Helmets provide marginal benefit in accidents involving other
vehicles.
4. Activities should be structured to avoid conflict between cyclists.
Activities where a cyclists balance may be compromised should be
performed in a safe environment.
I often play dodge with children as part of their Level 1 training as
it's an excellent way to learn close control. Children cycle within a
defined area, if their front wheel touches another bike, or put a foot
down for balance, or leave the area, they are out of the game. The
defined area becomes smaller and smaller until one child is left the
winner. With this game conflicts between cyclists is inevitable, but
speed is low and I've never experienced anything worse than a low
speed collision.
Quoted message said:5. Mandating helmets may lead to social exclusion for those who do not
have one or who cannot wear one for religious reasons.
I'm sure the school's PTA would be happy to buy a small supply of
helmets, and any formal or informal policy on mandatory helmets should
allow for exceptions for cultural reasons.
Quoted message said:6. Helmets should be encouraged but not mandated for school activities,
with children being explicitly told that they will only protect against
minor injuries. For certain activities, it would be prudent to mandate
helmets, eg skills trials,racing and mountain biking.
That's a sensible line to take.
Quoted message said:(just off to the school for the first session. Not heard anything about
lesson plans so I have snarfed some Go-Ride/Cycling Scotland stuff that
works on the basic balance and actions (signal, stopping, going, bike
control, looking behind) and got a lesson outline up my sleeve. Need to
get some cones etc from the school so I will be there a bit early.
I hope it all went well and you enjoyed the teaching as much as the
children enjoyed the learning.
