September, 1986
The Road to the Effective Cycling Program
By William H. Frey
Like most things in the universe, the Effective Cycling Program has had ups and downs during its evolution. This history of the first ten years of the program was written to provide some perspective on the kinds of problems that have occurred, and may recur in the future, as well as to credit those who have made contributions to the program.
Origins
In 1974, John Forester had the opportunity to teach an adult cycling course near his home in the San Francisco Bay Area of California. He developed a course outline and notes for the course, but soon discovered that his initial notes were inadequate for what he sought to accomplish. His primary goal was to teach the principles and on-the-road skills for safe and effective cycling in traffic. But he discovered that in order to achieve this it was necessary to also teach rudimentary bike maintenance skills and give his students some appreciation for the more enjoyable aspects of cycling. The result was the first edition of Effective Cycling, which Forester printed and published in 1975. The Preface of the latest edition [1984, MIT Press, dark blue cover ***get photo of cover] gives additional historical information about the subsequent development of the book.
In early 1976 the League had no program in bicycling education. Forester attended the LAW Board of Directors meeting at the National Convention (now called Rally) in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, and proposed to organize a League program based on the course he had pioneered and the content of Effective Cycling. The Board agreed to his proposal, and the Effective Cycling Program was born. As director, Forester set the new program in motion with an article entitled “Cycling Teachers Needed: League Sponsors Effective Cycling Training Program,” which appeared in the September 1976 L.A.W. Bulletin [***get article to scan]. In the article, he listed seven objectives of the Effective Cycling course, described the course, and called for those interested in becoming instructors to write him for information on how to participate in the program. He also indicated that eventually a “small, permanent organization within the League” would be needed to oversee instructor selection and qualification.
Objectives
The seven objectives of an Effective Cycling course, as listed in Forester’s article are:
- To guide and accelerate new cyclists’ progress from the “I don’t know what to do, I haven’t enough strength, I’m scared of traffic, and I’m not sure I’ll enjoy it” state to the competent, well-informed, healthy, and confident level where they know that they will enjoy whatever cycling they want to do within their developed physical capacity.
- To develop new cyclists who are good prospects for cycling club membership and have the knowledge and ability to participate in club rides.
- To increase the safety and enjoyment of cyclists by increasing the number and proportion of those who use proper cycling technique when with other cyclists or in traffic.
- To increase the level of cooperation between motorists and cyclists and to decrease motorist irritation at cyclists by improving the traffic performance of cyclists.
- To decrease the political emotions that power the present discriminations against cyclists by demonstrating that Effective Cycling is the safe, cooperative, and equitable use of the road that is the policy of cycling organizations and should be the cycling policy of government.
- To increase the stature, recognition, membership and income of the League of American Wheelmen as a result of its sponsorship, organization and quality maintenance supervision of the program.
- And last, but extremely important, to increase the enjoyment of cycling. We ride because we enjoy it—other people won’t ride until we show them how to enjoy cycling. In America (except in a few college towns) the fun of cycling is what makes it all happen. The course must be enjoyable for student and instructor, and develop the expectation of more fun from more cycling.
These objectives continue to guide the Effective Cycling Program as this is being written ten years later.
The First ECIs
Part of the certification process for the first group of instructor trainees involved reviewing a draft of the Effective Cycling Instructor’s Manual which Forester wrote as an instructor’s guide to the 11-week course described in Effective Cycling. In 1977, the first edition of ECIM [***scan cover] was published, and the first group of fifteen Effective Cycling Instructors earned their certificates. Their names were listed in the January 1978 L.A.W. Bulletin alongside an article which presented an update on the EC program. In the following year, Forester systematized procedures for submitting applications and established the three basic requirements for completing certification: a written examination, a proficiency test on the road, and sufficient practice teaching. The instructor qualification procedure was approved by the League’s Education Committee, then chaired by Bonnie Neff, of Lansing, Michigan.
Spreading the Word
One of the biggest problems in the early days of the program was the sparsity of ECIs around the United States. Of necessity, the initial group had earned their certificates largely through correspondence with Forester. But in order to generate more activity, he also presented seminars in various cities in the course of his travels. One was held in the Denver area in 1977, and another in Baltimore in 1978. The first one held officially in conjunction with LAW National Conventions was in Kalamazoo, Michigan in 1978. It was publicized in the January 1978 article mentioned above, which was entitled “Effective Cycling Program Prepares for Spring Training.” [***get article to scan] The seminar was a two-day affair involving in-depth discussion of teaching techniques, Forester’s course syllabus, and a road test for everyone present. Although the format and the faces have changed, this tradition of having Effective Cycling seminars at major League Rallies continues as this is being written (1986). Such seminars provide League members the opportunity to find out about the program, and prospective instructors the chance to meet experienced instructors, ask questions, and complete their road test requirement.
Hard Times
By the summer of 1978, most of the pieces were in place to promote steady growth of the Effective Cycling Program. But by the end of the year, the program was embroiled in controversy. Some of the officers of the League were opposed to the program, due in part to Forester’s admittedly confrontational style, and as a result, no publicity was printed in the League’s magazine. Support from the Education Committee was of no avail. Without publicity, no training seminar could be set up at the 1979 National Convention in San Diego, interest waned, and only two new ECIs earned their certificates in 1979. Difficulties on other, more critical League issues also emerged in that year, however. Ultimately Forester was elected League President, which effectively disarmed opposition to the program for the time being.
Spreading the Load
As President, Forester asked me, in August 1979, to take charge of the EC Program as Chairman of a new Effective Cycling Committee (ECC), which would report to the Education Committee. To effect the transition from his one-man direction of the program to operation of the program by a League committee, Forester outlined his proposed operating procedures in a memo to the Board and the EC Committee in September 1979[ ***get and scan]. In this memo he detailed his views on qualifications for admission to the EC Program, emphasizing the critical importance of cycling knowledge and experience. He also envisioned a group of veteran ECIs serving as advisors to those seeking certification.
My first priority in the fall of 1979 was getting the EC Program rolling again. An article “League’s Effective Cycling program enters the 80’s” appeared in the League’s magazine, now called American Wheelmen in November 1979 [***get and scan]. It updated the list of certified instructors, which now stood at 26 instructors representing 12 states, and presented a new call for interested individuals to become involved in the program. At least 30 inquiries were generated from this publicity, and at least half of these individuals eventually applied for admission to the program. Renewed publicity also led to a successful one-day seminar presented by Forester at the 1980 LAW Centennial Celebration in Kingston, Rhode Island.
Reviewing the Situation
Some controversy about the program erupted again in the year following the Rhode Island Convention.
Questions were raised on the League’s Board of Directors about the name of the program, its purposes, and standards. The Education Committee was commissioned to review the EC Program. Education Chair Neff formed a Review Committee consisting of several ECIs (including Forester, Frey, and herself) and several others with cycling education background who were not involved in the EC Program. Review Committee members were surveyed, and the results circulated within the committee. No consensus was reached by the Review Committee, and the intended report was never written. By default, the do-nothing option was adopted, and since the EC Program continued to operate during the review process, its growth was unimpeded.
Why all the Fuss?
The thoughtful reader may ask why there has been so much recurring controversy about the program. In my opinion most of the questions about the EC program have been raised by individuals who have philosophical conflicts with John Forester, or difficulties with his personal style. Forester has devoted most of his life since the early seventies to researching and writing his books on cycling and related issues and uncompromisingly defending his point of view. To the extent that you are an experienced cyclist, familiar with his writings, and in agreement with him, you cannot help but admire his dedication and persistence. If you are unfamiliar with the thinking behind his books, if you have significant disagreements with him, or if you are uncomfortable with anyone with such strong opinions, you will probably find yourself on the defensive, opposing Forester, even if you agree with much of what he has to say.
One important area where many, especially those ignorant of EC course content, differ with Forester is that of standards. Those who see the program primarily as a way to `reach’ large numbers of beginning cyclists are frustrated by the idea of such a long course and such demanding requirements for becoming an ECI. Some have even tried to label the EC program as `elitist.’ Encouraging more individuals to seek ECI certification by lowering the requirements and shortening the course would presumably increase the ranks of cyclists and the League’s membership faster. But the idea of reducing the requirements has found almost no support among the 150 individuals who have earned their ECI certification. And although many ECIs view the 11-week course format as overly restrictive, they have generally been opposed to lowering the standards required to earn the Effective Cyclist patch and certificate. Experienced instructors generally agree that in order to satisfy the seven objectives set forth above, a rather thorough course, spread out over several weeks is necessary if there are beginning cyclists in the course.
Toward an EC Standard
The Effective Cyclist patch and certificate were instituted by Forester as awards for those who successfully completed his 11-week 33-hour course. Based on my teaching both short EC courses for experienced cyclists as well as 30+ hour courses for beginners, I proposed that it was more important to focus on the level of competence attained, than on the length of the course. This raised the question of how to standardize the required skill level. My approach was to develop, with considerable assistance from other Detroit area ECIs, especially Paul Epton and Bob Dickieson, the first “National Effective Cyclist Examination” (NECE). In 1981 the first version was created in the form of an objective, 50-question multiple-choice exam that could be distributed to ECIs nationwide for use in their courses. The policy was established that anyone who scored well enough on this exam, and also passed a road test could earn the Effective Cyclist patch, regardless of the kind of course they had taken, or whether they had taken a course at all. The first use of the NECE outside of Michigan was at the League’s National Convention in Ames, Iowa in 1981. Forester edited and printed about a dozen copies of the exam for this occasion, and several cyclists were successful in earning their EC patches. As a result of this experience, some poor questions were identified and revised, and new versions of the exam were developed for subsequent National Rallies. [***get and scan]
Instructor’s Written Exam
The first written examination for ECIs was a 50-question short essay exam. Forester assembled it from a list of about 150 questions he had developed partly for use in his courses. Supposedly the 50 questions could be answered in “about 3 hours.” As Effective Cycling Committee Chairperson, recalling that I spent nearly six hours taking this exam, I decided to shorten it to 40 questions in late 1979. Using Forester’s question list, I put together several versions of the 40-question exam, which were used until 1982. Once the NECE was regarded as reasonably perfected, half of the 40 question short-essay exam was replaced by the NECE. This approach permitted knowledge of cycling to be covered largely by the 50-question multiple-choice exam, and teaching techniques and cycling issues to be covered by only 20 essay questions. This format is still in use in 1986 [***Get and scan].
Road Test Development
Forester developed the original method used in the EC program for testing riding proficiency on the road. The testing ECI would follow the examinees on a ride, either calling out directions or giving them a prescribed route in advance. Observations were usually made using a portable tape recorder unless the number of examinees was very small, and their skill level high. His scoring system is described in the ECIM. It involves tallying all relevant situations encountered, rating the examinees on each, and computing the overall score as a weighted average of the ratings, more difficult situations being more heavily weighted than the others.
Although Forester’s scoring system has the advantage of versatility, it is tedious to administer and to score, and never found wide acceptance among other ECIs. In response to this situation, I developed a new scoring sheet in 1982 which covered the same situations, but in which each item (such as a correct left turn, or proper cadence) was scored on a pass/fail basis. This version has found somewhat better acceptance, but still begs for improvement. Some other instructors, such as Bill Hoffman, of New York [Pennsylvania, as of 2009], have devised their own scoring systems. It is not an easy matter to develop a general purpose road test scoring system, and new creative efforts are encouraged.
Administrative Progress
Up until 1981, all financial transactions of the EC program were handled by Forester, and then myself. Funds were kept separate from other League funds, and even such matters as sales of the EC patches were handled by the EC Committee Chair. The program was completely self-supporting. By December 1981, the program had grown to the point where it was no longer practical to continue in this way. The balance on hand, and the patch supply were turned over to League Headquarters, and accounts were set up in the League’s financial records to keep track of income (largely ECI application fees) and expenditures (postage, envelopes, telephone costs, etc.), as is done with other League Committees. Patch sales were subsequently handled like other League patch sales, except that they were only available to certified ECIs. The following year, Headquarters also became the distribution center for standardized forms to ECIs, and the first issue of an EC newsletter to everyone involved in the EC program.
ECI News
In the fall of 1981, Karen Missavage [as of 2009 Karen Dunnam] (then living in Montana) approached me about putting together a newsletter for the EC program. It would serve to disseminate new ideas about teaching cycling courses, inform ECIs and ECI Trainees about progress in the program, and announce upcoming events of interest to instructors. Missavage was appointed Editor, and put together issue Number 1 of ECI News in the spring of 1982. It contained articles contributed by Reed Waite (now Education Committee Chair), herself, and myself, along with timely announcements about planned EC-related Summer activities. Two issues per year were envisioned and in 1982 that goal was achieved. Issue Number 2 (Fall 1982) included contributions by John S. Allen (Massachusetts), Jack Bourdess (Nebraska), Missavage, me, and a special report from Jane Atkinson, the first ECI in New Zealand. Both issues included survey forms designed to get feedback from instructors on their recent teaching experience.
Issue Number 3 appeared in the spring of 1983. The lead article in this issue summarized the survey results from the previous year. The focus of issue Number 4 (Spring 1984) was how to organize events at rallies. An article by Bill Hoffman (New York) and me, and another by Karen Missavage (now on the League Staff in Baltimore) covered this subject in depth. Charles Chesney (then in Oregon) also described some new ideas for improving bicycling education. Issues Number 5 (Fall 1985) and 6 (Summer 1986) were produced by a new editor, Joan Gaedke (Texas) after Missavage moved on to become editor of the League’s magazine BICYCLE USA. These issues included contributions by new ECC chairman John Jefferson describing implementation of the new ECIT application procedure.
Textbooks
Throughout the first ten years of the EC program, Forester’s books Effective Cycling and Effective Cycling Instructor’s Manual were the principal references, and served to define the content of the instructor’s written examination. His third book Cycling Transportation Engineering (CTE) provided additional relevant technical information concerning bicycle accident data and engineering aspects of bicycle transportation. All three were initially printed and published by Forester through Custom Cycle Fitments. The first three editions of Effective Cycling were printed from typewritten masters, and the fourth (1981) was much improved by preparation on electronic word processing equipment.
Another book which played an important role in the EC program was The Complete Book of Bicycle Commuting (CBBC), by ECI John S. Allen of Massachusetts, published by Rodale Press [***scan cover]. Although it was more limited in scope than Effective Cycling, it was also written in support of vehicular cycling, and had the advantage of being very well illustrated with photographs. Most ECIs used Effective Cycling as the recommended reference in their courses, and arranged to have copies available for sale to their students. Some used CBBC instead, either because they preferred it, or when EC was temporarily unavailable.
Forester incorporated improvements into each new edition of his books before reprinting them. However, because of the time required to make the necessary improvements, the increasing demand for his books due to the growth of the EC program, and mechanical difficulties with his printing equipment, there were occasional periods when either EC or ECIM was unavailable. As a way out of some of these recurring problems, and as an opportunity to produce more readable and attractive books, Forester made arrangements to have CTE and the fifth edition of EC published by the MIT Press. Unfortunately, the price of this progress was that EC was unavailable in any form for more than a year in 1983–4. ECIs responded by teaching courses without using a textbook, by using CBBC instead, or by not teaching courses during that period. Some ECITs were delayed in completing the requirements for certification, which led to sluggish growth of the EC program. The fifth edition at last appeared in the Summer of 1984 (at about the same time CBBC went out of print) and EC program development started returning to “normal.”
EC for Kids
From the earliest days of the EC Program, the focus had been on adult cycling (age 14 and up). However, a number of ECIs have taught courses for elementary and middle school aged children. Once again, John Forester played a pioneering role. In December, 1980, Forester taught a 3-week course based on EC principles in a Palo Alto, California middle school. As a result of this experience, he wrote a new text book, Effective Cycling at the Intermediate Level, for the novice cyclist needing urban cycling skills. New sections on teaching children are now included in his Effective Cycling Instructor’s Manual. Diana Lewiston and Alan Wachtel earned their ECI certification by teaching this material to 12- and 13-year old middle school children. Lewiston has achieved national recognition for continuing to develop the intermediate program. Other ECIs elsewhere have also developed instructional programs for young people, notably Bonnie Neff (then in Michigan), Dennis Koelmel (Pennsylvania) and John Williams (Montana).
Further Administrative Progress
A critical, but often unappreciated part of any program is the system by which it carries on from year to year. In the EC program, the system includes dozens of details that need to be handled by League staff, by Advisors, or by members of the EC Committee. In the early days of the program, almost everything was handled by the director or EC Committee chairperson. As the program grew larger, various tasks that were straightforward or clerical were transferred to League staff, while those requiring the judgment of an ECI continued to be handled by the advisors and the EC Committee. As already mentioned, financial record keeping, distribution of information packets, ECI News, and standardized examinations, and EC patch/certificate sales have been handled by League staff since 1982.
In the fall of 1983, it became clear that program administration would be greatly simplified if League staff could also handle most admissions to the program. But in order to accomplish this, the application form, which had changed hardly at all since the start of the program, and which required considerable judgment for evaluation, needed to be reworked to enable League staff to perform the evaluation. In order to make this revision it was necessary to take a close look at what the minimum standards for an ECIT should be. As EC Committee Chairperson, I drafted a multiple-choice questionnaire form of application which covered the same items that appeared on the original form: experience in cycling, bike maintenance, ride leadership, teaching, experience in EC courses, and service to cycling clubs or cycling. The questionnaire could be scored by giving point credit for all types of experience. An advantage of this kind of objective scoring system was that a potential applicant could evaluate his or her own experience before applying for admission to the program, and note any areas where more experience was desirable. It was also far less intimidating than the original application form, which was known to have discouraged some well qualified individuals from applying to the program.
This draft was reviewed by five other Michigan ECIs, who were asked to fill out the new application based on the experience they had had at the time they had been admitted to the program. The results were collected, but no further action was taken. In the spring of 1985, I created a second draft and circulated it to the EC Committee and the Advisors for comments. In the Summer I finalized the new application form, and in the Fall it began to be distributed, and completed applications began to be processed by League Headquarters.
Another important administrative problem of the EC Program is that of ensuring continuity in leadership. Forester directed the EC program from 1976 to 1979. I served from 1979 to 1985, during which much of the administrative load was gradually delegated to the Advisors and the League staff as the program grew. In late 1984 a rotation system was set up to reduce the total time commitment of the Chairperson and to ensure program continuity. John Jefferson, of Minnesota, became Vice-Chair until the summer of 1985 and then served for one year. Upon stepping down as Chair, I served another year as Past-Chair, and a new Chair-Elect, Steve Gottlieb, of Indiana, was selected. Gottlieb, in turn, became Chair in July 1986. In future years, the three-year service cycle will be continued by bringing in one new EC committee officer each year.
From a One-Man-Show to a Team Effort
By far the biggest changes in the EC program since the early days are the number of people involved and the improved materials available. In the beginning, there was only John Forester and his loose-leaf book Effective Cycling. In 1986, there are 150 people who have earned certification, spread out all over the United States, plus some in Canada and New Zealand. Forester has now published two of his several books in hardcover.
It is difficult to overemphasize the debt the program owes to John Forester, who has provided most of the creative effort that made the program possible. Therefore, it came as a shock to most ECIs that in the spring of 1984, Forester dropped out of all League affairs and disavowed any future responsibility or support for the EC program. The issues that brought about his decision involved League politics and actions of LAW officers and board members, rather than issues internal to the EC program. Nevertheless, Forester’s withdrawal from LAW’s EC program saddens and still mystifies many of those who know him and worked with him.
On the brighter side, many hundreds of instructor hours of experience have been gained over the first ten years by people in all parts of the United States. Furthermore, a considerable number of ECIs have made their own creative contributions to the EC program by encouraging and advising trainees, by assisting in EC activities at the League’s rallies or by serving on the EC committee. Everyone who has contributed to the program can point with justifiable pride to what we have accomplished, and the biggest challenge facing the EC committee in the future is to effectively draw on the vast experience of over 150 ECIs to further improve the program.
The Road to the Future
Since this history of the EC program is written primarily for the benefit of future advisors and EC committee members, it seems appropriate to conclude with a few bits of “wisdom” gleaned during my term as ECC Chairman.
The first is the all-importance of recording and developing one’s ideas and actions in some non-volatile form. The human brain is a wonderful device, but, at least in my case, it is also rather unreliable for remembering complex details for longer than five minutes. Text on paper or magnetic medium is much more permanent, and in the latter form it is very easily edited. Although the EC program is far more than its documentation, it is no exaggeration to say that all of the books, examinations, form letters, newsletters, applications and information packets are the skeleton that give the program its structure, and without which there would be no program. As most of you who read this can appreciate, it takes a lot of time and effort to develop good exam questions and answers, clear descriptions of requirements and procedures, and any other standardized text or illustrations suitable for a national program. But it is critically important that this kind of work be continued, because once available, good documentation leads to quality instruction and simplifies so many other details of program operation.
Secondly, I would caution future EC committee members to be wary of “opportunities” to dramatically improve the program, such as by a sudden, large increase in funding support of the EC program. The program now exists as a largely volunteer program with carefully chosen additional support by League staff. More staff support will hopefully be needed in the future, and should be welcomed, but it should be phased in gradually. This allows the necessary administrative changes to be accomplished in an orderly fashion, and without lowering the quality of the program. Funding sources outside the League should not even be considered unless such support is given unconditionally, i.~e. without imposing control on program content or structure.
Finally, I would remind all EC program enthusiasts of what they should already know well. To enjoy and complete a long ride, “Rest before you’re tired.” The same advice applies to volunteers seeking to improve and carry on a quality program. There may be no limit to what we would like to accomplish or what we can imagine for the future of the EC program, but there are limits to what any individual can accomplish in a given period of time, and to the amount of effort one can sustain. Therefore, in your work to improve the future of cycling, be realistic in what you expect from others and what you expect from yourself. As we map the road to the future, let us enjoy the scenery along the way.