Mish (and some of his readers) make some fantastic observations, especially timely as we are enjoying a moment to catch our breath in the bursting housing bubble, about an analogous bubble that he convincingly describes as having similar precedents.  Is it safe to say there will be similar antecedents?

“The cost of education has spiraled out of control with the cost of higher education far exceeding the payback unless one gets lucky in the jobs lotto process.

Many college graduates will be paying back student loans for 20 years or more. This is what happens when government tries to make things affordable. The same thing happened with affordable housing.”

When I applied to (and was declined by) some of the premier US universities  about ten years ago, the greatest shock during the process was the section where they expected me to list famous/powerful people that I knew and would presumably make me more eligible to attend the best schools in America.  The second most shocking part was the price.  As an international student, in the late-90s/early-aughts, I would have been paying somewhere between $40,000 USD and $60,000 USD for my schooling PER YEAR of my undergraduate program.  And my mildly-jacked tuition quotes as an international student are comparable to current tuition prices at Harvard, which was brought up to an average of $43,655 per student or the 2006-2007 years according to The Crimson.  And The Boston Globe reported that tuition, room and board, and student fees  rose to $47,215 in the (I believe) 2008-2009 year.  (Of course Harvard is just an example and I am in no way saying they were among the schools whose closed door I was able to observe in near-proximity.  But it was.)

That may not sound like much to any Canadian readers out there (our ‘elite’ institutions could easily be compared to the best state schools in the US and even could compete in many regards to many of the large US Ivy League institutions) and my undergraduate degree over the same period (as a domestic student, of course) was costing me between $4,500 CDN and $5,500 CDN per year.  Even including residence and the entirely sufficient albeit high in cardboard content meal plan it would be around $13,000 a year.  After the exchange rate conversion at the time, that would have been about $10,000 USD if memory serves.

As much as I’d feel like a BSD with an impressive degree from one of those institutions where mere mention of gets respectful silence.  And you have to mention in most polite company in hushed tones lest you be considered a braggart.  But for fuck’s sakes, a 4-yr degree in my case in Canada saved me about $120,000 USD.

Regardless of your level of talent, unless you pursue the career that will immediately net you the highest potential payout (any collapsing industries you can think of that meet that description?), is it realistic to be able to pay off that debt before age 25?  Or age 30?

Is it at all realistic to be able to save up and independently finance your education with summer and part-time work through a student’s entire high school life, even without considering the support many students are now providing to their families?

When heavy financing becomes a requirement for all but the superstars (full-ride athletes and scholars) and the ultra-well-heeled (those who fill up the “who I know and why I matter” section a bit better than I), Americans (and to a lesser extent, Canadians) are indoctrinated to a lifestyle of living on borrowed cash.  Of putting off financial planning for after the expense.  And for deferring difficult decisions into the uncertain future (that’s now, btw).

Not only does this add to the epidemic-level infection of debt-ignorance in American culture (go ask your Asian friend, if you have one, what they think of borrowing money to buy cars, stocks, or anything other than a primary residence, and then ask them the follow-up of how stupid and crazy and probably fat they honestly think Americans running up five-figure credit card debts during the good times, on top of no down payment — multiple — home and  — multiple — car purchases)… This arrangement eliminates the possibility for those talented students who wanted to go to personally fulfilling but perhaps lower-compensating professions to at least keep pace with previous generations’ concepts of success and failure.  For a real life example, see this USA Today article:

“”The first person who helped me was my pharmacist,” he says. Dillon, who no longer has epilepsy, would like to go into pharmaceutical research. But he knows he’d earn more money as a pharmacist for one of the big drugstore chains.

“When I get out, I’m going to have that $150,000 weighing over me,” he says. “What I decide is going to be dependent on that debt.”"

I try to think about it with a loose example (I apologize if my numbers and assumptions are a fair deal off:  I am a Canadian, as I’ve suggested above, and am not as familiar with what would be typical incomes and expenditures for a recent US university graduate.  Blame Harvard for denying me that personal experience.  Stupid Harvard):

Specifically, how does a graduate from (let’s say) Harvard, completing her studies in the 70th percentile of her graduating class (which probably puts her at or near the 99th percentile of her age cohort in academic achievement as is typically measured), pay off a $120,000 USD education debt by the time she’s 28 assuming no interest, no marriage, no babies, no sugar-daddies, etc.?  Besides, if she is lucky enough to be so talented, going to work for Goldman Sachs?

She would have to apply roughly $20,000 a year post-graduation towards the principal.  That’s after rent, after maybe her first not-too-fancy car, after taxes, other living expenses, likely some periods off work especially immediately after graduation.  Can it be done on an average $60,000 income per year for those six years post-graduation?  $80,000?  Would it be a stretch at anything under $100,000?

And even if this achievement is attained (and I think it’s fair to describe this hypothetical young woman’s wiping out of $120,000 of debt in six years as an achievement), as a 28 year-old woman with a low-six-figures annual income, a very impressive piece of paper signed by someone important at an Ivy League school, is she keeping up with expectations?  Can she afford to marry, start a family, and own her own home with white picket fences (my understanding of the prevailing middle-class expectation) by the time she’s 30?  Well, unless she and her husband pay for the wedding on their credit cards and buy a home with no money down…  The same USA Today article linked to above refers to this very real dilemma of cascading college debt effecting the issues that would have once been thought of problems for a different life stage:

“Those higher payments carry huge implications for this generation of college graduates. The weight of debt is forcing many to put off saving for retirement, getting married, buying homes and putting aside money for their own children’s educations.”"

Have we managed, aided by the the big, fat, clumsy hand of government assistance Mish describes, to price out the ideal of middle-class success to even middle-class kids in the 99th percentile of achievement?  And what will happen to the 98th percentile?  And those middling intellects in the 97th?  (And can you guess where I placed myself?)

[I know my math is rough (please see my many excuses above) but I'd love to hear what those who went through something analogous to the US student debt cycle experience, and correct where my math or assumptions stray too far from reason.  I just wanted to imagine and illustrate a very sympathetic and fairly realistic case where even doing everything right in America, absent an NBA-ready body and buttery j, can lead to something short of middling success by the end of young adulthood.]

[... And for those really interested in the idea of finding ways of maintaining a high level of learning and reducing student expenses, check out this old post of mine about what I was hoping to be a cheap online textbook revolution.  Also has my bitchy personal anecdotes that I'm ashamed to admit I actually enjoyed reading just now.  Can anything be more self-centered than typing up an opinionated post on a blog no one reads that links to another post in that very same blog that mostly consists of various personal anecdotes?  Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!]

… and the cow goes moo

I have very little to say about each of these links except that it’s been a glorious week or so of online reading.  I could not bring myself to close these articles from my Firefox tabs without recording them for posterity (as self-centered as I am, it appears I believe widely-circulated articles available on the Internet cease to exist when they leave my screen).

First, from The Atlantic Monthly (yes, I still call it that):

What Makes Us Happy? – By Joshua Wolf Shenk

An excellent, beautiful in that New Yorker-sorta way interrupted (by experiment subject narratives) interview with the man that has been behind the decades-old longitudinal Grant study at Harvard.  It makes me think my Bachelors in Psychology isn’t such a scarlet letter after all.

George Vaillant, head of the study for the past 42 years tries to plumb from the disparate measurements and surveys conducted since 1937 – questions changing to reflect the interests and eras that the study has now outlived – and from the ups, downs, ups and downs again from the cohort of Harvard men the cues to living well and growing up.

The author of the article beautifully ties Vaillant’s near-theology – which often sounds little different than self-help pablum – to Vaillant’s own surprising neuroses and private scandals.  Perhaps in doing so revealing a little known property of Psychologists (and Psychology students) outside of the discipline:  Our interest in mental illness is entirely self-serving.  Physician heal thyself.

And despite the shames of the researcher and the researched, the article lifted my spirits.  The technical feat of the collection, the triumph-against-adversity of the project itself to remain fecund and funded, moreso than even the subjects, is story of a hero.  Even if the hero is a collection of bits and bytes, papers in aged folders, and punch cards stuffed away in some filing cabinet monument in Boston.

Now from Chinese finance and economics magazine, Cai Jing (don’t worry, it’s in English):

Tight Spot for Fed, Blind Spot for Investors – Andy Xie

Mr. Xie provides what seems to me a very thorough and intuitively consistent synopsis of the state of American and international investment, with a US-centricity to his analysis despite the source of the article.

He provides a good anaylsis of the various push and pull forces active in the currency, Treasury, and commodities markets, tying his observations to current action within the equity markets and providing some broad predictions that may give pause to those on the sidelines (like myself) that have been failing to decipher all the noise of the market into something that resembles language.

On Mr. Xie’s implicit recommendation, I think I’ll invest in something loud with two wheels wrapped in Pirelli Diablo Super Corsa SPs.  I think that’s what he’s saying, anyways.

And now for something completely different!

The Ninth Life of a Berkeley Boomer – John Dolan (single page view)

Mr. Dolan always writes wonderfully (though the low-rent site which I enjoy and frequent doesn’t seem to stress spellchecks) and has some especially fascinating insights into the life of the near-literati; the failed writers who became failed academics who became just plain poor.

Here he captures the story of a friend much like himself: talented, but lacking the good sense to slow his pace to stay within the proximal zone of his ‘betters’ that would ultimately judge him and decide his fate.

In its telling, he reveals the life of some of the members of the true American elite: The filthy rich and the chieftains of academia who rule their roosts.  And even to them, a smart person cannot escape subjugation by them.  And a crazy person doesn’t escape their useful purposes.

He describes a secret bit of life that I probably always lacked the talent to access, or at least the high school extracurriculars.  And my entrance essays truly sucked.

… and the cow goes moo

Or so says this Chicago Tribune article (found originally at Exiled Online):

“In one case, a relative of Antoin “Tony” Rezko, the now-convicted influence peddler for former Gov. Rod Blagojevich, got admitted after U. of I. President B. Joseph White wrote an e-mail stating that the governor “has expressed his support, and would like to see admitted” Rezko’s relative and another applicant.

White’s message to the university chancellor was passed on to admissions officials on the same day they entered a rejection decision for the Rezko relative. “He’s actually pretty low,” replied an admissions officer, referring to the applicant’s ACT score and other credentials. “Let me know when the denial letter can go out.”

Instead, the relative was admitted.”

OMGWTFBBQ!?

Why is this news?  I would be absolutely shocked if some unstated factors weighed heavily on acceptance into a college, company, or even country club.  That Mr. White did so using methods that leave a very clear trail of evidence is the only news story here.

New headline:  University of Illinois President Too Dumb to Cheat Properly

And if you don’t know how to cheat, you really have no business attending a University let alone leading one.

… and the cow goes moo

Mr. Johnson’s (who blogs at the aesthetically barren The Baseline Scenario and teaches at MIT’s Sloan School of Management) frankness in regards to the political, more than the economic, realities of the crisis and the responding bailouts is shocking considering the stature of the source, and the political significant of the institution (the International Monetary Fund).

His article in The Atlantic can be found here (found at Naked Capitalism, where it was Yves Smith’s must read link of the day and I would definitely concur that it is a must-read for anyone baffled by the continuing refusal by federal officials to consider options other than bigger versions of those that have already failed.  Barry Ritholtz at The Big Picture links to and provides a short comment to it as well).  The video of his similar-in-content interview with PBS’s Bill Moyers from a month ago can be streamed for free here.

Short summary: Taxpayers bear the costs of bailouts in captive governments as the taxpayers have a higher threshold for pain than the fragiles hides of the business elite.

Implication: Since American heads of finance are being treated with the kiddie gloves, and taxpayers are being thrown into further debt without regard, America is acting like a crony capitalist system.

Conclusion: ‘We’, whose economic well-being is largely tied to the country we live in, are fucked.  Those whose great wealth allows them access to the elaborate welfare programs of the state (PPIP?) will have their fall broken by the resilient and slow-to-complain taxpayers.

And one quick observation:

“So the IMF staff looks into the eyes of the minister of finance and decides whether the government is serious yet. The fund will give even a country like Russia a loan eventually, but first it wants to make sure Prime Minister Putin is ready, willing, and able to be tough on some of his friends. If he is not ready to throw former pals to the wolves, the fund can wait. And when he is ready, the fund is happy to make helpful suggestions—particularly with regard to wresting control of the banking system from the hands of the most incompetent and avaricious “entrepreneurs.””

How many failed CEOs have been brusquely shown the door as corollary to a bailout?  America wouldn’t qualify for an IMF loan.  There are a number of lessons we could learn from emerging markets.

… and the cow goes moo

Well, one of them.

I stumbled upon this TED talk as a related presentation from a presentation linked to in the comments on a previous post on statistics and homelessness.  And I’m very glad I did.

I am always blown away by how many professors and teachers that I’ve had over the years thought that either (a) the material being presented was intrinsically interesting enough that no dressing up was required; or (b) the kids are here with the option to learn, and they are free to choose not to.  I am here to teach those who choose to learn.  If they don’t make an effort, then they deserve what they get.

I was one of the kids who did NOT choose to learn for many of my courses (though this may sounds like a joke to Americans, I paid about $4,500CDN a year in tuition, and I felt that warranted some enthusiasm from Professors.  I felt ripped off and in my immaturity let an opportunity to get something out of my $4,500/year pass me by).

There were about four or five lecturers (out of maybe thirty?) who did consistently engage my classes and made the daily grind of university academics an absolute pleasure.  Some even had fan bases and referrals:  kids would bring friends in to sit in on lectures just for entertainment and enlightenment.  It made me want to become a Professor for a while (until I realized that my course of study, Psychology, was not for me… and neither was starting over in a discipline I might like more).

Well, Hans Rosling is in one of those rare equal splits between lecturer-entertainer-researcher.  And recognizes that the threshold to the obtaining, applying, and engaging of learning is a major impediment to broader learning and understanding.  And although it is a student’s job to learn, and a Professor’s job to teach, he makes sure he does all he can on his side (I wish I did the same on mine).

He engages his subject (misunderstanding of the relationship between health and wealth, at least in terms of the wealth of nations) with the enthusiasm of a horse race announcer during the last leg.  All the more impressive, coming from a 60 year old Swede, in English.  He accompanies his enthusiasm with an inquisitiveness perfectly matched, unbelievably, by his presentation material.

This is the first time in my life I have been impressed by a slideshow.  But that’s probably because I haven’t watched his second TED presentation yet.

Anyways, a fantastic presentation that I would recommend for anyone who cares about education.  And those who were in University, or teach, imagine if every lecture were like this one.  There’s no reason why every lecture can’t end with applause.  I had one professor achieve that distinction and there isn’t a single student of his who will forget his contribution and zeal.

… and the cow goes moo

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, found via Naked Capitalism. Beautiful sub-heading at the Post-Gazette.

Pittsburgh Public Schools may enact a pre-existing but not put into effect policy that requires the minimum grade given out to be 50%.  So if you get one answer right in a ten question fractions quiz, you receive a score of 50%.  Insuring you fail your next fractions quiz.

Some have already speculated that the Post-Gazette and the Pittsburgh Public Schools are confusing educational policy for the minimal grading of students with Treasury policy for the minimal rewarding of financial institutions.

My serious comment on the subject, besides how ridiculous it is in principle, is that this effectively scrubs away seriously deficient (in ability, effort, or comprehension) problem students from view.  If you are borderline effective addressing three-quarters (attaining, say, a 78% average) of the course curriculum, and absolutely inept-to-the-point-of-spectacle for the other quarter, you can easily get a Presidential ‘C’.  So you might not have even possess a vague understanding of what algebra, but you could end up with a C in your Grade 12 Math class if you have a fair understanding of geometry, matrices, and graphing. If a student with zero comprehension in a subject could effectively score zero, there would be almost no way they could pass the course.  And that is as it should be.

This policy effectively affords a student the ability to not understand a goddamn thing about an entire subsection or two of a course.  And it affords the teachers and the administrators a similar opportunity to pretend that isn’t a problem.  It would be nice if I could submit files at work that were empty and get paid half.  And my boss could pretend that wasn’t a problem.

… and the cow goes moo

Well, not quite.

I am very disappointed in myself for not coming up with idea of online modular textbooks (where a ‘textbook’ could be assembled from professional written modules as a course instructor sees fit) years ago.  Apparently I spent too much of my time as an undergraduate bitching about circumstances rather than exploring solutions.  Oops.  I’ll try to do better in graduate school.

The Connexions program described in the article is particularly impressive.  I remember courses requiring two to three books (each ranging from $45 to $180 dollars), where only a few sections of each book might be required for the course, perfectly suited for an online modular reader.  If you were unfortunate enough to take a course after the release of a new edition, the used book market was out of the question.  Sharing was possible, but difficult considering you and your friends all wanted to get drunk on Thursday and cram for the exam Friday morning.  The only viable option in this situation, besides paying full retail, would be braving the accusing stares of those at Kinko’s while you spent three hours photocopying textbooks for you and your friends.

PERSONAL ANECDOTE:

Some of my professors were fairly understanding and attempted to allow students to follow along in either the newest or previous edition whenever possible (generally the younger professors who may still have had student loans to be paid off themselves).  Nonetheless, I still ended up maxing out all my credit cards at the start of each semester, feeling very much a prisoner to my professor’s outdated and capricious academic resources.

One of my favorite professors, David Welch, teaching a Politics course on International Conflict at the University of Toronto, actually came up with his own reader, not textbook, that could be printed on demand at a local copy shop for about $18.  He was a funny and engaging lecturer with direct experience in his field, able to capture the attention of the majority of the ~1,200 overprivileged brats attending his lecture, so he would have been one of my favorites either way.  His course just happened to be a bargain as well.

On the other side of the spectrum, another professor, whose name I choose to withhold as there is a fair chance he is no longer an asshole, for an introductory astronomy course I took not only selected a ~$150 textbook requirement for a course so basic that almost all the necessary information could be found on a single wikipedia page, but he had apparently ordered a vastly insufficient number of textbooks to be sent to the campus bookstore, requiring students to check in daily for new stock.  Approaching the time the first exam was scheduled, only 60% or so of the students had textbooks and the remainder were awaiting for the stock to be replenished.  As many students were bombarding Prof. Unnamed with pleading e-mails about the textbook shortfall, stressing at the possibility that the exam would be resplendent with tangential information likely to be found only in the textbook, designed merely to test a student’s abidance to the reading schedule rather than knowledge or comprehension of the subject (a common occurrence), he decided to open a lecture with a response [I'm paraphrasing from a six year old recollection here]: “Look, I know there aren’t enough textbooks and I’ve ordered some more.  But you are adults, not babies [he really did refer to us as babies].  You should have gotten to the bookstore earlier if you wanted the textbook”.

I was dumbfounded.  How does a man become a leader in his field, obtain a Ph.D. in ASTRONOMY of all subjects, become a professor in Canada’s pre-eminent institution of higher learning, and STILL NOT UNDERSTAND THAT EVEN IF WE ALL LINED UP OUTSIDE THE BOOKSTORE AS THE DELIVERY TRUCK ROLLED UP, 40% OF US WOULD BE WITHOUT TEXTBOOKS! I sent an angry e-mail to him and received a half-hearted apology about how maybe he shouldn’t have called us babies but still, we should have been able to come up with our own solution, that more textbooks were on the way, and that he would limit the textbook-specific content on the test.  I was fortunate enough to have obtained a used textbook early into the course, so I was not personally affected.  And I did score in the 85%-95% range in the exam.  But still, fuck this guy.

SECONDARY ANECDOTE:

For the final essay of the course, I wrote what I thought to be one of the strongest essays of my academic career on Nuclear Propulsion in Space Travel.  When it was marked and returned to me, there was a big red scratched out number on the front of the essay, and then a circled second number “89%” beneath it.  When I looked at the reverse of the cover page, due to the cheap low-weight computer paper I use, I could clearly see that, beneath the marker scratches, “98%” was written originally.  When I enquired with the teacher’s assistant why she opted to take 9% off my essay (as there were no, or virtually no, corrections or marks made on the essay itself), she explained to me that the second highest essay grade in the course was 84% so the professor told her she could NOT give me 98%.  Which raises two questions:

1. If I had scored 34%, and the 2nd lowest score was 65%, would they have bumped me up to 50%?
2. Is it a bad idea to send an angry e-mail to my professor at the start of a course from my personal e-mail, which contains my full name in the address?  Live and learn.

TERTIARY ANECDOTE:

I actually began to avoid buying textbooks until I realized I absolutely had to around this time, or buying them and abstaining from opening them until necessary.  I still have a 2nd year statistics text book, new and still shrinkwrapped with the companion CD and lab manual in my closet.  Anyone interested in an “Exploring Statistics – A Modern Introduction to Data Analysis and Inference – Second Edition” textbook?  All reasonable offers accepted!  I think I got 81% in the course, so it must be a pretty good textbook.

… and the cow goes moo

You’re reading the half-blog.

Mish and Naked Capitalism both have posts about the GDP numbers released for 2Q.  Largely overlapping, but Mish’s is significantly shorter (Naked Capitalism is a bit more for the hardcore, in my opinion).  Both are equally cynical about its accuracy or relevance.

Mish criticizes the value of the measurements, period.  Naked Capitalism has a very poignant post title, certainly, about the broader implications of what (if their criticism proves correct) is little more than domestic propaganda.

I actually felt fairly similarly towards the stimulus package(s).  It seems to me like a clear non-solution to an economic problem, but a great way of heading off a political problem.  If they can target the technical basis for a recession, and be able to argue there was no (technically) recession at the tail end of Bush’s administration, does that put more pressure on Obama’s administration to continue the fudge?

Broader issue: The importance of statistics, taking away from the importance of what is supposedly BEING measured, and the recognition by those whose performance is supposedly being measured.  Why teach a student, with all their individual tendencies and idiosyncrasies, when you can teach a test, standardized and the same every time it’s given?  Teaching students is HARD.  Why take the unpopular, painful, and near-impossible procedures to try to head off a recession (if you’re still making money), when you can have people stop describing it as a “recession”, and let the next sucker deal with the ethical issues?  Managing national economies is HARD.

… and the cow goes moo

The wonderfully cynical (and fairly accurate) Mish posts in his blog about the constructions of boom-busts prior (of companies and suburbs more than national or global economies).

I have very little to add to his post.  It is fascinating to me though, based on the descriptions of the failed attempts to rejuvenate the derelict Motorola supercampus (his first subject, described directly at The Chicago Tribune) and the condition of the long-abandoned shopping mall, Dixie Square, in Harvey, Illinois.

It pains and confuses me that these multi-million dollar investments should be allowed to decay and fall to ruin rather than be utilized in some constructive way.  Could a mall be refitted to be a volunteer-run community center?  Could utilities be convinced to allow for free energy and water use for such a facility?  Would it save the community money for building a needed center elsewhere?  Would it save the decay and preserve the structure, so the mall could continue to provide some objective value, even in an asset/market sense?  Would it help involve young people in their community through volunteer opportunities that directly enrich their neighborhoods?  Would there be more need than just a few full-time (or even part-time) public administrators to provide an anchor for these projects?  Would it help improve property values by keeping young people engaged in healthy pursuits (engaging in training, or helping train other young people)?

Will this issue rise to import in that minor, oft-ignored, community-level once the current recession consumes the shopping malls peppering our current sprawling suburbs?

These are one of the many issues that benefits from my nerd’s imagination:  How would elitist, liberal, snobby space invaders (you know they’re out there, watching… judging…) evaluate our culture based on how much we allow bureaucratic and administrative impedance to stop us from making a rejuvenated shopping mall, the setting of so many happy memories for the community, a place for the rejuvenation of those in the community who suffer from the same inflictions that brought down the mall?

There can be poetry even in bureaucracy, sometimes.  But someone killed all the poets.

… and the cow goes moo

This is going to be a VERY LONG review of my experience this past weekend on a motorcycle training course. PLEASE IGNORE if you don’t have any interest in the subject, as it will have absolutely no value to anyone else.  I hope to provide a lot of value for this who intend to take it or a similar course, without actually rigging your knowledge to provide you with an unfair advantage over other students.  The test is criterion and not percentile-based, so it should not be to anyone else’s disadvantage if you benefit from this review.

INTRODUCTION

CEMO-801 – Motorcycle Rider Training

It, as the course calendar describes, is a training course primarily for new riders seeking to obtain their graduated M2 motorcycle license and who currently hold the M1 training license (part of our excellent Ontario, Canada graduated licensing system).

You get a HUGE insurance drop for having completed/passed the course for about three years or so, to the best of my knowledge, and you can use the certificate as proof of qualification for an M2 license after you have held your M1 for 60-90 days.  For the insurance drop alone, this course or an equivalent pays for it self.  And in my case, I learned a ton and enjoyed myself immensely as well!  It helps that there was a very affable and congenial skilled rider in my group that made things much more relaxed, while providing great advice as well.

*If you want to speed through this thing, and don’t need the descriptions of the course or the basic guidance but just want the tips, search for “BEEF” or “ADVICE” or scroll down until you see them.

DISCLAIMER

For the sake of journalistic accuracy, please understand that I will try to be as accurate and complete as possible, including providing alternate explanations for areas where I am uncertain or subject to likely personal bias, being at the center of my own review and all.  I do apologize for a) offending or forgetting anyone that was involved in the course; and b) for that person actually wasting their time on my blog.  Wow.

Also, please understand that I don’t feel comfortable giving the whole course away, as I believe it could interfere with the intention of the instructor’s program design, so I will purposefully omit substantial chunks of information especially in regards to the final test.  Feel free to request for elaboration in the comments, but I will likely be limited in some of my replies.

ON WITH THE REVIEW

The course I took was a Friday-Sunday course, with a short 2.5 hrs (turned out to be 3 hrs) classroom session on Friday evening, which provides some valuable information for beginners but is most valuable just as preparation.

ADVICE: BRING IN ALL YOUR GEAR SO THE INSTRUCTORS CAN APPROVE OF THEM.  Otherwise, you won’t have the appropriate gear for the weekend riding and you’ll end up having to borrow someone’s stinking shoes, at best.

The Saturday is almost a full day of riding, from 8am (too early) to 5pm (just when it’s starting to get cool!).  An hour of video/classroom work is completed until 6pm.

The Saturday is where you will learn the most if you are an absolutely inexperienced rider, like I am/was.  I had no motorcycle experience, so even the initial basic instrumentation lessons were interesting to me.  I was not familiar with the startup procedure of the motorcycle (I’ll leave that to the instructors to teach you as it’s just an issue of memory and seeing the bike), or the characteristics of a clutch and foot gearshift.

In my opinion, which could be very biased, perhaps the most important act that will be the foundation for your success in testing and enjoyment of the whole weekend will occur in your first 30 minutes on the training grounds:  MOTORCYCLE SELECTION.

Centennial had these options (availability) when I attended:

• Honda CBR125R (6) – small sportbike – so new it’s not even on the course description, all white/black, sorry to those who find that colourway effeminate
• Honda Rebel CMX250cc (7-10) – very low-seating cruiser, my selection (more on that later…)
• Honda CFR150 (6+?) – smaller but fairly tall, light dirt bike
• Suzuki GZ250 Marauder (3-4?)- newer and slightly larger cruiser than the Rebel, by my visual approximation, but probably very comparable
• Buell Blast 500cc (5-6?) – dirt bike / dual purpose – large engine, very quick (relatively), heavier and a bit higher than the CFR150 but still with a fairly short wheelbase
• Mysterious Honda 160cc (2?) – dirt bike – I could have sworn I saw a few that weren’t quite CFR150s and I vaguely remember an odd displacement like a 160cc, but perhaps I am mistaken.

In total, my class was full with 30 students, and 6 course trainers (not including the classroom instructor).  We were divided into 6 groups of 5 students, with our own instructor attached to our group for the most part of the weekend.

Students will be told to choose their bikes in groups, as in group #1 will get first pick, and group #6 will get whatever is left over.

(***BEEF #1***) They provide no guidance on motorcycle selection (perhaps unless they’re asked directly? However there’s a good chance the bike you want will be taken if you do take the time to ask).  This is a very important point for those who might not be considered the prototypical motorcycle rider (which I believe is a male, between 20 and 50, about 160 lbs and around 5′5″ to 5′11″… I’m not sure why I tend to see slightly shorter to average height riders around mostly).

ADVICE: Bring plenty to drink (a cooler with a few bottles of water/sports drink/juice works well. You’ll have ample opportunities to visit your car or bring the cooler near the bikes), a small lunch (or buy a small, light lunch… riding and really needing to poop are bad combinations), and SUNSCREEN.  Even with my modular helmet on in full-face mode, with the shield open to let in the air, I suffered pretty serious sunburn on my nose and cheeks.  I did apply sunscreen before going to class, but the torrent of sweat from about 8 hrs of riding in jeans, zipped up leather jacket, compression shirt, helmet, 26 degree heat, and beneath the high sun, took it’s toll.

CHOOSING YOUR BIKE

Many of these bikes are not meant for very large riders (and I mean large very liberally, say greater than 5′9″ or 200 lbs).

For taller riders,the cruisers can be a major concern.  Even at the very average height of 5′9″, I could not maneuver the Honda Rebel through tight chicanes without standing on my footpegs a bit and sliding my ass up to near the passenger seat.  The cruisers possess an angled handlebar configuration that has the ends pulled in very near the tank on the sharpest turns, and the knees of my jeans are still stained with black rubber marks from the handle grips, even despite my conscious effort to narrow my knees as much as possible.  One alternative, which I don’t recommend unless you absolutely have to, is to ride with knees out when in turns to give a bit more room.  My instructor in a hush-hush manner suggested it to me and it works, partially.  I was able to turn the handlebars in on a sharp turn with substantial concentration being wasted on my own body-awareness, but managed to get a wrinkle in my jeans caught in the handlebar when straightening out, causing the very dangerous situation of having my right knee thrown off the footpeg (and the rear brake pedal).  Not a ton of fun.  If you can do the splits on a motorcycle, perhaps it won’t be an issue for you, but I would HIGHLY RECOMMEND gripping the tank with your thighs at all times for stability’s sake.  Standing on your footpegs or riding with knees angled as obtusely as my limited flexibility allows, through SHARP TURNS AND CHICANES no les, is only meant for idiots intent on failing the course.

The CBR125R and the CFR150 will be difficult to ride for anyone who falls on the heavier side, I suspect. I am about 150lbs so can only guess, but the bikes are very small and the rider will be very nearly the weight of the bike (the CBR125R is 280lbs wet). I suspect that will substantially effect it’s handling characteristics, suspension loading, and it’s acceleration/braking performance.

If you are on the shorter side (once again, very liberally, say under 5′5″), try to make sure you can get both feet on the ground flat-footed while straddling the bike seat.  The lowest bikes will be the cruisers, probably the Honda Rebel in particular.  The smaller dirt bikes (the mystery phantom 160cc, or the Honda CRF150) would be my first choice, if I were in this category.  If I could not stand comfortably, then I’d consider the cruisers.

For women (sorry to stereotype, but … c’mon) in particular, the cruisers can present a challenge.  They are heavy and very difficult to maneuver at low speeds, though they provide FANTASTIC ass support.  The ass-fatigue savings will likely be offset by the extra effort required to push and steer the bike, as well as (hopefully not too often) when picking the bike up off the ground.  Women who are taller than 5′5″ should try to find one of the high-demand CBR125Rs, or the CRF150.  Since the CBR125Rs will be by far the most popular, use any feminine wiles you may command (not a bad idea to make sure you look hot before the first day of riding) to bikejack a CBR125R from one of the more desperate-looking guys.

See which motorcycle is best for your height, weight, and gender *Thank you, Christopher Hueston, for the input!

Table 1. Handy chart to make life easier.  Please note that I have abided to the “My baby is a ****” colour keying system.

Please understand that not choosing one of these bikes doesn’t make it impossible to pass the course (many of my classmates didn’t fit my matrix, but did pass the course), but it does make things more difficult and more frustrating, which impugns upon your ability to attend to the appropriate lessons and enjoy the ride.

(***BEEF #2***) I don’t see why the instructors can’t foresee this problem and make sure that certain odd-sized people (taller, shorter, heavier, and weaker) get first dibs on bike selection, and guide them through the process.  A 5′6″ 140 lb male will have no trouble with any of the bikes available, however there might only be one or two bikes a 5′0″ 100lb tall female or a 6′2″ 205 lb male could possible ride.  Just seems strange to have bike choice priority be granted arbitrarily rather than with some fairly obvious needs in mind.  I would have personally selected the CBR125R (as I intend to buy one anyways), however I was in group #4, hence the 16th-20th person to select a bike.  All the CBR125Rs were selected my the younger males in the first two groups (naturally).  I believe my poor bike selection effected my performance in the course, but I cannot say I have nearly as much reason to complain as others.  There are certain body types that will be at a huge disadvantage, as my chart shows.  I think the course could really use a smaller dirt bike for short/light women.  It is almost impossible for them to navigate with the weight of a cruiser or touch the ground on any of the other bikes.  I do not know if there is an active attempt to filter out participation by those who fit this description, but North American motorcycle manufacturers are getting better at accommodating smaller riders and female riders (just seems like a very neglected demographic and really unfair oversight); I don’t see why a bike or two couldn’t be purchased to make passing the course even close to fair for a small female rider.

ADVICE: Try to choose the lightest bike you can stand comfortable on and avoid cruisers unless you really have to.  Sport bikes look cool, but they’re not all that different to ride than the mountain bikes.  And the Buell has many advantages, however be aware that it’s throttle will be a bit more sensitive due to its greater engine displacement (twice that of the next largest bike despite being likely lighter than the cruisers).  Cruisers are really built for highway ‘cruising’, andyou will be at a SIGNIFICANT disadvantage during low speed maneuvers, the entirety of the course.

BASIC LESSONS

The course’s first goal will be to familiarize you with the bike’s controls.  Learn a good sequence of initializing the bike and turning it off.

Next will be working on the balance.  This will involve walking the bike along (standing to the left of the bike with both hands on the handlebars, and pushing the bike along) and riding with the engine off and the gearing in neutral while a fellow student pushes you.  I believe I was the onyl one who was unable to even accurately complete a turn in this section, which says a lot about how low my initial skill level was.

ADVICE: Concentrate on understanding the balance required at different speeds, and the amount of force needed to turn at low speeds.  Make sure you keep your knees tight to the bike as it helps stabilize it, as well as communicate the bike’s movement to your body, and also make sure not to overgrip or lean your weight on the handlebars.  It is  easier to maintain stability through maneuvers without communicating every movement through a tense grip, and it is much easier to move the handlebars with precision absent your weight on them.

FIRST GEAR

After you have felt the bike roll through a turn, they’ll teach you how to start the engine.  You will remain in first gear, so you should be able to alternate entirely between fully depressing the clutch and rolling in first gear.  These will just be straight-line maneuver at first, where you walk your bike to turn it around and go again, but eventually low speed 90 degree right and left turns will be rehearsed

ADVICE: Concentrate on improving your clutch control.  Try to find a good friction point (where some energy is being transferred to the wheels, while the clutch is still depressed slightly).  This is very important in starting the bike without stalling, gear shifting, and certain braking maneuvers.  Also attend to practicing braking with precision, coming to a complete stop just after some sort of landmark/line on the ground (so that your wheel is over it, but not actual in contact with it).  The most difficult act worth practicing at this point would be starting your bike without stalling.  Try to find a quick way to get your bike from a resting stop in first gear (with the clutch fully depressed and rear brake engaged) to a nice rolling speed with smooth throttle-propelled acceleration.  Remember to always keep your head up and looking towards your objective, perhaps except when you’re braking into a target spot on the ground.

SECOND GEAR AND UP

Here’s the fun stuff.  You will be instructed on how to shift gears (very easy lesson, I felt… the only lesson my slow ass picked up immediately).  When up to speed in second gear (usually low- to mid-second gear), you will have enough speed to really feel a difference in the handling and stability of the vehicle.  After some time. they will let you practice leaning. Leaning, or “push steering” as the instructors call it (since you are effectively pushing with against the handlebar on the side you wish to turn towards), is simply just tilting your body towards the INSIDE of the turn and letting the gyroscopic forces keep you and the bike up while using your changed center of gravity to point the bike towards the turn.  It sounds complicated, and probably is if you were to build a robot to do it, but feels extremely intuitive and is easy to grasp.

Then they’ll let you go up to third gear and practice downshifting/engine braking.  As the RPMs quickly escalate after a downshift, as the wheel rotation is higher through the gears than the engine speed, the engine’s high-compression will cause resistance at the wheels, slowing the wheels down.  This is an excellent way to slow down to a more controllable speed without making as sudden a move as a nervous braking might lead to.

Quick stops will be practiced as well, utilizing both downshifting, the rear brake, and (if you misjudge), your big left shoe.  Try to brake quickly without causing wheel slip, and accurately.

ADVICE: Practice shifting gears quickly with a confident, hard toe-kick to the gear shift.  When you are rolling at a good speed, it is usually safe to ‘drop’ the clutch (as in release it abruptly) after hitting the foot gearshift.  This way you don’t end up coasting on the clutch, wasting time when you could be accelerating or engine-braking.  To practice accurate braking, try to do the emergency brake within the space provided, repeating until the instructor says you are braking quickly enough, then trying to find a landmark at roughly that location and stopping at that landmark every time. REMEMBER, if you’re having trouble leaning, get a bit more speed and just trust your bike. Look at where you want to go, straighten your elbow just a little bit, on the same arm as the direction in which you intend to turn, and go.  Probably over-thinking about it is the only way to mess up a lean.  In reality, you’re only leaning <10 degrees though it feels like 30 degrees, so don’t feel afraid.

ULTIMATE COMBO!

Now that you can do everything, can you do them at the same time?  I believe this lesson began on Sunday (the last day of instruction) for me, and was a tremendous amount of fun.  They will now conduct you through maneuvers that require multiple actions to be strung together, such as a quick upshift, then downshift, then turn, then stop.  Or even executed at the same time, such as an emergency stop (using the front brake in addition to the rear!) while in a lean.  The most difficult maneuver to execute for most riders will be the chicane, requiring you to make a sharp turn one way, then a sharp turn the other.  It can be very difficult to do so in a controlled manner, within a specified ‘roadway’ approximately 3.5 ft – 4 ft wide.

ADVICE: Don’t be too dismayed by your performance in the chicane.  It is a difficult maneuver that is heavily reliant on a small wheelbase motorcycle.  I saw very few cruisers complete it flawlessly, and I only managed to do so once while standing on my pegs.  Just concentrate on making moves instinctively and fluidly, and planning ahead before you even get going so that you have your feet and hands at the ready.  Also remember to keep your hands off the clutch unless you’re using it: It helps stability to have your hand on the actual handgrip entirely, especially if you run over a bump. AND TRY NOT TO UNLEARN ANY OF YOUR PREVIOUS LESSONS! (Like I did…)

NEXT… THE TEST!

The test is not very hard, and approximately 22/30 people passed it in their first attempt in my group.  The others will mostly take the single allowed retry for an additional $50 fee this coming weekend, and probably 3-4 more will pass for something approaching a 90% course pass rate (including the allowed retry).  And the makeup of the test is… SECRET! Sorry, I won’t disclose it just because it may affect the way you approach the lessons of the instructors.  After all, the instructors are teaching you to become good riders, not to pass a test.  This isn’t high school where they’re just trying to hit a quota; I honestly believe the instructors care that you don’t get killed out there.  In my class, and probably for all of them, the last group (riding the dregs of the lot) got to test first, and the CBR teams went last.

ADVICE: Most people seem to fail because they are too cautious and go to slowly (as I did), do something stupid (as I did:  I popped it into neutral on an upshift by accident, my third time the whole weekend out of a hundred upshifts sadly had to occur on the test) , or had an argument with their motorcycle (as I did, in regards to my distracting incompatibility with the machine… I let it bother me a bit too much during the final hours of instruction working on the chicane).  The test does provide ample room for error and even with my poor performance, I was within a missed-upshift from passing it.  Sadly, I did fail, and I do largely blame the bike choice for it, but I think I definitely should have passed it regardless.  I just spent too much time trying to ride with my knees open or my weight shifted entirely off the seat, wasting time I should have been actually practicing proper riding techniques.  So: Relax, ride fast, make confident movements whether with the gearshift, clutch, or brakes, and PLAN OUT YOUR ACTIONS BEFORE STARTING THE TEST COURSE. There’s no need to panic if you know what you’re going to do.  And remember to keep your heads up and eyes at your objective.  There’s no point trying to adjust the bike to things that are beneath you as it’s too late, and it will cause you to lose speed and stability.

Most of all: HAVE FUN! Everyone else will be.

Full disclosure:  I failed the course my first try, sadly, but just a bit.  I, and most others, it appears, expected me to pass but I made 2-3 errors I really didn’t think were characteristic of me (going too slowly, and kicking my bike into neutral rather than 2nd).  I believe a large part of my poor performance was my slow rolling starts.  As I was overly cautious about stalling my bike, I tended to leave my clutch in the friction point without applying much throttle for far too long.  Had I not done that, or had I not hit neutral, I believe I would have just passed.  As is, since I absolutely need the large insurance break the completed course would provide (about 25% off), and since there’s only one re-attempt allowed without having to re-take the course entirely, I’ve decided to take no chances and just buy a CBR125R for myself, acquaint myself to it for a week in parking lots and empty roadways near my home, and re-take the test the weekend after expecting a perfect score.  As much as I believe I can pass the course on the Honda Rebel CBX250cc, I still feel there’s too much uncertainty in it.  I could easily totally lose my line in a slow turn on the Rebel, and then have to re-invest $400 into a much-less-interesting second go-around for the course.  I’ll just practice a bit on my own CBR125R, and then re-take the test on one of their’s.

Now the sexy stuff:  STATS!

Though I am a firm believer that statistics are frequently (and easily! as I may show here) abused, and that my memory is imperfect — nor was I even actively trying to record these details — I do think there’s a fairly poignant message in some of these stats.

Numbers Passed by Bike, Gender, and Group (Total Pass Rate 73.3%)

Please note that this based on a very small subject pool, and furthermore, is all from memory, unlike those fancy schmancy ‘accurate’ stats, but I do suspect it might mean a few things (***FINAL BEEF***):

1) Bikes DO matter, though anyone can pass the course on any bike.  I just wouldn’t bet a 5′0″, 95 lb girl passing on the CBR125R without being able to put her feet flat on the ground.

2) Ladies have it tough.  An average-sized woman can easily pass the course on a CBR125R or either of the smaller dirt bikes (I wouldn’t recommend the Buell as much due to it’s higher engine power), however if a woman is on the shorter side, and doesn’t have great strength to make up for it, I really wouldn’t recommend she even take a course with this motorcycle selection.  It would be frustrating, educational, but it’d be an uphill ride to licensing.  Anyone who would require riding the cruisers would also be at a fair disadvantage, as the stats (and my experience, and general conceptions about cruisers at low speeds) would suggest.

3) Groups/instructors may matter.  There was certainly a fair bit of displeasure within my group (also known as “the group that contributed to half the fails for the entire course”, or “The Shitty Group”, for short).  I felt that I learned more high-value information from the few  minutes of consultation with another instructor than the two days I spent with my instructor, as harsh as that may sound, but I still think I should have passed.  One girl in my group I thought should have passed and did do better than me, but it seems her nerves may have gotten the better of her.  Another gentleman in my group failed but had a chance had he been on an easier to steer bike (he was on a Rebel, as was I).  Being on the Rebel seemed to kill his confidence and he never seemed brave enough to attempt higher speeds or confidently enter a low speed sharp turn.  Not to mention some very frequent stalls (I stalled many times during practice as well, however I had no idea if that was characteristic of the Rebel and it’s high weight/power ratio).  The only person that did pass in my group was a very gregarious gentleman who I believe had been riding dirt bikes for three years already (and selected a dirt bike for the course).  We definitely had a chance to have zero passes in my group, had it not been for our prodigy, however we easily could have had three passes as well.  Also, the order of bike choice and testing was dependent on your group number.  My thoughts on bike selection have been stated earlier however I do not believe the testing order made a huge difference, as every had to wait at least an hour and as many as three hours between practice and testing.