opinion In defense of MSF training programs


By Ray Ochs, MSF Vice President of Training Systems changes


In the April 2015 issue of BMW Own- ers News, David L. Hough authored a MotoSafe column detailing changes taking place in California and the decision by the California Highway Patrol to award the contract to admin- ister the California Motorcyclist Safety Program to Total Control Training, Inc. Hough stated that the Motorcycle Safety Foundation (MSF) had worked hard to become the primary provider of motorcycle safety programs in the United States and losing California meant a loss of nearly one-third of the nation’s rider training. The following comments by Ray Ochs, MSF Vice President of Training Systems, repre- sent th e MSF reaction to Hough’s article.


THE MOTORCYCLE SAFETY FOUN- dation (MSF) has always welcomed constructive criticism. We see it as a valuable tool to help us fulfill our mission to provide quality, safety- related programs and services to the motorcycling community. We prefer to take a positive approach to inform interested parties about the true, cur- rent MSF story, rather than directly counter specious arguments and fic- titious claims. Unconstructive opin- ions,


unsubstantiated claims and


misguided legislation could actually harm motorcyclist safety initiatives and reduce the motivation or oppor- tunity for riders to take advantage of lifelong training opportunities. There has been significant MSF


activity in recent years. Highlights include international conferences, fully funding the MSF 100 Motorcy- clist Naturalist Study, expansion of MSF’s Rider Education and Training System, improvement in licensing practices, release of MSF’s newest learn-to-ride curriculum, and


38 BMW OWNERS NEWS February 2016 to program administration by


some jurisdictions. The training “industry” does not hide the


real hazards of riding a motorcycle; after all, that’s why training exists, and that’s why the MSF was founded in 1973. Back then, sales were increasing, crashes and injuries were increasing, and the manufacturers decided to do something about it. They didn’t need training to help them sell motorcycles; they needed education and training because they were selling motorcycles. There likely would be no organized rider education and training networks in all 50 states today if MSF hadn’t provided the impetus in the early 1970s. While MSF believes that motor- cycling can add value to one’s quality of life, we also believe that motorcycle riding isn’t for everyone. This point is made abun- dantly clear in MSF novice training as well as in MSF’s iBook, “Rider Choices.” A notable reference to our work can be


seen in a 2009 study of novice training in the Pennsylvania program, at that time administered by MSF. With 17 years of crash data including driving records, for- mally trained riders who completed the Basic RiderCourse had much cleaner driv- ing records and were significantly less likely to be cited for speeding, DUI, and improper riding than untrained riders. Trained riders were more likely to wear protective gear, and those who had the misfortune of a crash had less severe injuries. It is clear that formal education and training help riders make better choices. One real issue we all face is how to convince the 51% of riders who haven’t taken any safety-oriented training course to do so and to continually refresh their skills and attitudes. The “one-course-and-done” approach


often receives heavy criticism, but state gov- ernments and riders generally demand a one-course-and-done approach to training. MSF, however, promotes its CORE approach to training, which is far from one- and-done: a BRC, followed quickly by


additional formal courses under the guid- ance of a safety-minded, MSF-certified RiderCoach. Our full CORE, with eight recommended courses, takes riders to lev- els similar to what our friends in Germany have the political will to mandate. Anecdot- ally, the types of riders in the U.S. most likely to avail themselves of beyond-the- basics training are enthusiasts affiliated with the likes of the BMW MOA, the GWRRA, and the H.O.G.® organizations. Regarding the California Motorcyclist


Safety Program and MSF’s recent choice to not submit a bid to administer the program: MSF is proud of its success in working under the California Highway Patrol’s over- sight in managing the motorcyclist-funded CMSP for the past 11 years. During that time, MSF more than doubled the number of training sites, reduced the wait time for students


to get into class by 60%, and


increased the training volume from 40,000 to 60,000 students per year, all with a sharp focus on improving student outcomes in skill and judgment. However, in late 2014, CHP announced a new contract strategy which would allow them to make changes that would bypass the rigorous evaluation, field-testing, and refinement measures required to maintain our novice rider cur- riculum’s integrity and our organization’s credibility. Our curriculum’s success is based on a significant amount of direct, objective participant and RiderCoach feed- back, input from safety-minded individuals and organizations, and application of the findings from primary and secondary research. For this reason and others, including that


we would be required to assume all liability for CHP’s curriculum modifications, we declined to bid on the contract, thereby handing the program over to the current contractor. We wish California novice riders success


under the new program and are hopeful the efforts will produce positive rider


NEWS


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116