Gene, my debate is with ILTB's "no credible and tangible evidence" argument, not with you. When I said that the fact that cycling ed is in its early stages is no reason to knock it, I was talking about ILTB knocking it, not you.

I agree that Road 1 is just a start. As you know, Forester feels it's so lame that he took away the right for them to use the name Effective Cycling for it.

Personally, I think that a lot of the basic maintenance stuff needs to be cut out, or taught in a separate course. They could have "Bike Maintenance 1" and "Traffic Cycling 1", or something like that. It is my understanding that there would be far more interest in BM 1 (in general, those types of classes are much more popular), but part of that class time could be used to convince student they need to take the traffic class. This could be done during a short ride, or with a short test, or with a combination. For example, "I noticed some of you did XYZ while out on the road .. the traffic cycling will realy help with that by teaching you ABC" "Anyone who scored below X on the evaluation should strong consider taking the traffic cycling course".