Timothy King – Page 22 – Mechanical Sympathy

Refining Motorbike Fashion

Getting the Ninja had me going all in on the sport bike look. The full helmet and ballistic nylon riding gear makes me look like I came out of the future. When I’m all out on the Ninja it suits. But a sport bike was never the goal. I like the vintage look and as the bike evolves so will the gear.

I’ve watched It’s Better in the Wind a couple of times now and dig the vibe. Cafe racers, old Triumphs, all customized.

A couple of other things are making me rethink the gear. At the training course they talked about how the helmet doesn’t seriously mitigate the chance of injury. If you think that a helmet will make riding safe you’re not understanding the physics. Helmets help to minimize one kind of injury. If you can’t handle this truth then you shouldn’t be riding, helmets don’t make riding safe.

The fighter style open face helmet
is a modern take on the old open
faced helmet

They also said, during the same training session, that you should wear a full face helmet and full armored everything all the time. I get being as safe as you can be, but if the safety equipment gets in the way of the experience, or worse, makes you uncomfortable, it prevents you from doing the deed in the first place.

The Bell is a classic, though it made
me head look HUGE! It’d be nice
to get my Mondo Enduro on though

In Zen And The Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, Persig says he doesn’t like to wear a full face helmet because he finds it claustrophobic. If the point of riding is to experience that expansive sense of speed and openness then I think I want to try out an open faced helmet. This isn’t an expensive proposition, though the helmet might lead to a classic bike, which might be.

A variation on the classic by Bell,
the Pit Boss is a bit less
bulbous

Open faced helmets are popular and tend to focus on a specific style. The fighter jet style half helmet is a modern take on the classic open faced helmet, but you can still get vintage styled helmets. I’m partial to the Bell classic but it did make my head look huge.

The Bell pitboss had a nice look to it, but they didn’t have one in my size to try on, though I think I’d go with the over the ears cover for protection and wind reduction.

I’m helmet inspired by a couple of things. The family history sure plays a part in it, but so do movies. Picking up something that I can plaster a rebel alliance sticker on would be cool.

Here are a couple of other eye catching open face helmets I’ve been thinking about:

Bell Hurricane ~$100

ZR1 Royale Air Ace ~$127

Nolan Outlaw N20 ~$205

Thanks to http://www.canadasmotorcycle.ca and http://www.motorcycle-superstore.ca for letting me window shop.

The other day someone parked their original Thruxton next to the Ninja and I got the itch for that old bike once again.

What a lovely old machine, beautifully cared for…

Motorcycle Photography & Art

I usually toss anything graphically motorbike related that I find onto pinterest. Here is some motorbike bike art recently found mostly as is (but some photoshopped):

The photography in Performance Bike Magazine’s recent article on the Kawasaki H2 on the Isle of Mann was fantastic. After a bit of photoshop it became my current background wallpaper.

The new Triumph Bonneville with a Scrambler kit

The bonkers new Honda RC213R – the $140k Motogp 1%er collector bike

Riding in South East Asia with Adventure Bike Rider Magazine

H2 on the Isle of Mann

H2 wheelies in 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th…

Adventure riding in Oman with ABR

Adventure Riding into the Himalayas with ABR

Do you teach computer studies or computer studies?

Stay with me now, we’re going down the rabbit hole that is Ontario curriculum for computer studies, or as it’s also known, computer studies.

What was once computer science is now called computer studies. Shortly thereafter computer studies (same name) was created in the technology section of curriculum. These computer studies are so different that qualification in one doesn’t qualify you to teach the other (unless you happened to be already qualified in computer science ten years ago). The descriptions of each have so many similarities that you may be forgiven for wondering why a teacher of one isn’t a teacher of the other (computer studies).

Computer Studies (aka: computer science) defines itself as:
Computer studies is about how computers compute. It is not about learning how to use the computer, and it is much more than computer programming. Computer studies is the study of ways of representing objects and processes. It involves defining problems; analysing problems; designing solutions; and developing, testing, and maintaining programs. For the purposes of this document, the term computer studies refers to the study of computer science, meaning computer and algorithmic processes, including their principles, their hardware and software designs, their applications, and their impact on society. The major focus of these courses is the development of programming skills, which are important for success in future postsecondary studies.

When you compare the computer studies curriculum outline with the computer studies curriculum outline you may notice many similarities. Both begin with an emphasis on how they aren’t about teaching users to use computers, and neither are limited to programming. Both go on to emphasize a course of study focused on how computers operate, including how computers are able to create and manipulate objects and run processes. The computer studies (comp-sci) document then goes on to state that computer studies actually means computer science, which doesn’t really help clear anything up since computer studies (tech) calls it computer and information science, which may or may not be the same thing.

The computer studies (tech) curriculum is pretty much interchangeable with the computers studies (comp-sci) curriculum, but it also offers engineering focuses on electronics and computer hardware, so it might be argued that this is a more complete ‘computer studies’.

The ‘other’ computer studies found in technology studies defines itself as:

Computer and information science is more than running application programs and programming. Rather, it relates to the ways in which computers represent conceptual objects and how computer systems allow those objects to interact. Computer and information science is the study of ways of representing objects and processes. It involves defining problems, analysing and designing solutions, and developing, testing, and maintaining programs. Computer and information science education is relevant for all students because it incorporates a broad range of transferable problem-solving skills and techniques. It combines logical thinking, creative design, synthesis, and evaluation, and also teaches generically useful skills in such areas as communication, time management, organization, and teamwork. Computer and information science will prepare students for an increasingly technological world. A foundation in this discipline will introduce students to the excitement and opportunities afforded by this dynamic field and will begin to prepare them for careers in information technology.

As you can see, not only is the language used similar, but even the explanation of the scope of the subject seems the same. I suppose computer and information science are so completely different from computer science as to make this a no-brainer.

If this wasn’t muddy enough for you, there is also the issue of computer science teachers (because they were here first) getting grand-fathered in as computer studies-tech teachers, even though they may have no engineering background at all and may be as familiar with the inside of a computer as your grandmother. This results in computer science teachers (theoretical mathematics majors) attempting to teach how to solder a circuit or build a functioning network. More often than not, in my experience, they simply ignore this part of the subject.

If you want to be computer studies (tech) certified now-a-days you have to produce years of industry experience and professional certifications in order to even be considered qualified to begin the certification. If you were hanging out in a math class ten years ago it landed on you. I’m having trouble doing the pedagogical calculus with that one.

Between the confusion in subject area titles, almost identical descriptions and the right-time-in-the-right-place-with-no previous-experience history of computer studies qualifications, it’s little wonder that Ontario Education in this area is, at best, confusing, and not particularly effective. When you meet a computer studies teacher that doesn’t know how to open up a computer, you have to wonder where we went wrong.

I just threw together a quick venn diagram of computer studies to try and straighten out my thinking around this. Now, I’m not a curriculum expert at the ministry or anything, but it seems to me that arbitrarily dividing a subject into two camps isn’t very pedagogically helpful, let alone logical.

I’m just spit-balling here, but wouldn’t a coherent course of computer studies
that recognizes how all these parts integrate into a whole make some kind of sense?

If you consider the basics, computers run code on hardware. If you’re going to teach computer studies, I would suggest that it makes sense to recognize this and form your curriculum around this simple truth. Rather than grand-father in one extreme end of the computer studies curriculum (computer science), why not form a coherent, single department that studies the subject in all its glory?

If you’ve got previously computer science focused teachers, make it easy for them to expand their knowledge of the subject into the more practical side of computing, but don’t expect it to magically be there. If you have people coming at it from the more practical side (as I did from information technology), make it easier for them to bone up on coding and the theoretical side of things. You’d end up with a curriculum of computer studies that not only addresses the extreme ends of the spectrum (computer science up one end, electronics up the other), but also creates a sensible, interconnected and relevant understanding of computers in both staff and students. Best of all, you’d never run into a computer studies teacher who says things like, “Oh, I don’t touch computers, I have no idea how to fix one.”

Until we recognize computer studies as a single, coherent course of study and integrate curriculum to support this truth, we’re going to continue to limp along producing radically undertrained graduates who aren’t remotely ready for what faces them. I often meet teachers in other schools who are surprised to learn that we teach computer engineering – or that it exists at all. When I was in high school we ran two full teachers worth of computer studies (12 sections). The school I work at now is about the same size and runs 7. Are computers really about half as relevant now as they were in 1986? Students numbers would suggest this is the case. Instead of creating a modern, adaptive, complete curriculum, Ontario has created a divisive, broken one that students ignore.

I’d like to think we’ll stop the bizarre divisions currently going on in Ontario computer studies curriculum, but I get the sense that there is some history in this that won’t go away. We need a clean sheet on Ontario’s approach to computer studies (starting with just one computer studies that incorporates the entire field of study), or we won’t be doing this emergent and vital 21st Century subject justice.

***

Follow-up: Doug Peterson pointed out what each curriculum document is supposed to be replacing on G+, so I’ve been trying to trace the process. Here’s what I’ve got so far:

There are three curriculum documents that come up for computer studies.

The year 2000 Technology Studies document that contains computer studies as a complete field of study, from engineering to computer science.
The 2008 Computer Studies document (revised) that looks like it is separating computer science from computer studies but took the computer studies name with it (implying, I think a complete study of computers, not just computer science)
and the 2009 Technology Studies document (revised) that contains “Computer Tecnhology” and has stripped any computer or information science material out.

The 2008 Computer Studies (science) revised document states:

This document replaces the Computer and Information Science component of The Ontario Curriculum, Grades 9 and 10: technological Education, 1999, and of The Ontario Curriculum, Grades 11 and 12: Technological Education, 2000. Beginning in September 2009, all computer studies courses for Grades 10 to 12 will be based on the expectations outlined in this document.

The 2009 Tech-studies document (revised) states:

This document replaces all but the Computer and Information Science component of The Ontario Curriculum, Grades 11 and 12: Technological Education, 2000. Beginning in September 2009, all technological education courses for Grades 11 and 12 will be based on the expectations outlined in this document.

From the original 2000 Tech-Studies document:

This document replaces the sections of the following

curriculum guidelines that relate to the senior grades:

– Broad-based Technological Education, Grades 10, 11, and 12, 1995

– Computer Studies, Intermediate and Senior Divisions, 1983

– Computer Studies, Ontario Academic Course, 1987

– Technological Studies, Intermediate and Senior Divisions, Part C: Ontario Academic Courses, 1987

I still can’t help but think that the ‘computer studies’ title is at best confusing and at worst misleading. I wonder at the politics that played around that course of study being created with such an expansive (and previously used) title but such a specific focus. It would be like renaming the “biology” department “science”, taking one part of a larger course of study and implying that it is the whole subject. Computer Studies (the study of computers?) is not just computer science, or just engineering, or just information technology. Trying to understand it in such a fractured way leads to confusion in the general public and students who then aren’t taking the course.

Just to throw a wrench in things, if you’re curious and look up
Ontario’s technology curriculum you get the old curriculum
document first every time. If you’re not up on the secret
war between comp-sci and comp-tech in Ontario, you’ll
remain ignorant looking at the old document.

If you were teaching computer studies prior to September 2009, that meant computer studies (from end to end). If you were teaching computer studies after September 2009. it means only computer science. I’m beginning to see why computer science is atrophying in modern high schools. At a time when computer studies should be offering population wide access to digital literacy, one of the foundational areas of computer studies in it has taken its toys and gone home.

Another question (that Doug probably knows the answer to) is those early computer studies courses, were they computer science based on more general in their approach to all aspects of computing. My own memory of taking computer courses in the 1980s was very comp-sci/math based, and the teachers who were qualified to teach computer studies were computer scientists in university. Yet in 2000 it looks like technology education took over computer studies (including computer science), yet the amalgamation doesn’t appear to have worked (hence the 2008/9 revisions). I wonder why not.

The division seems to have happened over the past fourteen years, starting in 2000 with a failed attempt to place computer studies in technology education. It’s no better today, and I get the sense that the attempted fixes have caused more problems than they solved.

XS1100: Steps Toward Resuscitation

Snow last night, the XS got some mechanical
attention today as a result.

After looking over some internet advice (sic) on how to start a long dormant motorcycle engine (and ignoring never ending discussions on it), I got the XS1100 to the point where it would crank over (with spark plugs removed). The plugs look brand new, but sooty. Cleaning them up and regapping should be all that’s needed. It’s nice to know it isn’t seized, the electrics aren’t pooched and the starter motor sounded solid.

I also have the airbox off and the carbs cleaned (though they look pretty clean before I did them).

The gas tank is a rusty mess, it was left outside and empty for a length of time. I’m thinking about doing some instructables chemistry on it, just to try it. Failing that, I think I’m going to try Evapo-Rust.

Here’s what it looked like today:

Makes you wonder how many motorcycle tires don’t get worn out before they need a change.

With the airbox removed, the wall-o-carbs is easy to get at.

Carb internals look to be in good shape. Only the throttle cable is suspect.

The air box has cleaned up nicely

The Third Way

I was at Skills Canada’s National Competition in New Brunswick last weekend and had a rainy Sunday morning in Moncton to listen to Michael Enright on the Sunday Edition on CBC radio. His piece on bicycles versus cars stressed the enormous gap between coddled, cocky cagers and the noble, spiritually empowered bicyclist.

As someone who doesn’t live only a bicycle ride away from everything I need (because I live in the country), I felt somewhat excluded from this urban (urbane?) discussion. As someone who stays out of cars whenever possible and doesn’t ride a bicycle, how can I possible survive? I’ve found a third way ignored by both cagers and the messianic bicyclist.

What is this magical third way? It’s the motorcycle of course. You enjoy that feeling of flying that the bicyclist on the radio refers to, but you do it without forcing a third lane of traffic everywhere you’re going. Motorcycles actually reduce congestion and improve traffic flow and do so without demanding bike lanes in already overcrowded urban centres. You don’t see motorcyclists riding into opening car doors like you see bicyclists. Though they thrive in that environment, motorbikes aren’t only suitable for urban use. People in suburbs and rural areas can still use them to cover useful distances quickly. You don’t produce the spontaneous righteous indignation that bicyclists seem to be able to generate at will, but you also don’t show up to work smelling like sweat and spandex.

For less than the price of an economy car
you can buy a Yamaha R1 that accelerates
faster than anything you’re ever likely to
meet and still gets better than 40 mpg.
Cutting edge Italian style can be yours in a
Vespa that costs about what a fancy road
bicycle does but can run at highway speeds
while getting 100 miles to the gallon.

You aren’t suffering for choice when it comes to two-wheeled motorized transportation. Want to buy a Canadian built, Canadian owned company’s bike? The Can-Am Spyder offers older riders a stable, efficient platform to enjoy being out in the world. Love Italian exotica? Italy has more than a dozen current manufacturers of motorcycles producing everything from race ready Ducatis to stylish Vespas. The Japanese produce an astounding range of bikes from the ground-breaking super-charged Kawasaki H2r to the futuristic Honda NV4 which manages to look like the off-spring of the batmobile and a stealth fighter while still getting better than 60mpg.

If you like the traditional look you can find modernized classic Triumphs and evolutionary Harley Davidsons that all use fuel injection, have anti-lock brakes and are both dependable and efficient ways of getting there in style. There is a motorbike for every taste from subtle to gross.

The third way means you are paying road taxes to help build and maintain the roads you’re using (bicyclists don’t), and you’re not asking for your own lanes because you have no trouble flowing with normal traffic. You never see a motorcyclist take to the sidewalk and abuse pedestrian space like you will with bicyclists because motorcyclists consider themselves road going vehicles all the time and not just when it suits them. That kind of responsibility happens when you’re paying for the infrastructure you’re using.

The police officer redirecting traffic just told me to pull into
the full parking lot – you can fit bikes in without needing new
infrastructure to fit them. All those unused triangles suddenly
have a function.

The third way means that, like bicyclists, you have to share the road with distracted, idiotic cagers who barely pay attention to what happens beyond the air conditioned box they find themselves in, all while they burn copious amounts of gasoline moving themselves, four empty seats and a couple of tonnes of vehicle around with them. It’s a dangerous business sharing space with these vain-glorious, self obsessed tools.

What do you get in return for that vulnerability? You are present in the places you pass through, alive in the world. You smell every smell, feel the sun on your back and arrive feeling like to you travelled through the world to get there instead of feeling isolated, superior and more than a little clueless. The first time you lean into a series of corners and feel like you and your bike are one is a magical experience. You can’t take on the spandex righteousness of bicyclists, but you can take comfort in knowing that you’re using way less of everything to get where the cars are going, and you’re doing it with a much bigger smile on your face.

The kind of defensive riding you learn on a motorbike (who is at fault doesn’t matter, you need to be responsible for the ineptitude of those around you) can’t help but make you a better car driver. I’ve been unable to squeeze the statistics out of the Ontario MoT, but I’ll bet you a coffee and donut that if you compare any age group with G class car licenses and G and M (car+motorcycle) licenses, you’ll see a significant drop in collisions when they drive four wheelers. You can’t help but internalize that kind of defensive mindset if you’re going to ride motorbikes for any length of time. Bicycling isn’t a parallel to driving a car because you aren’t held firm by the same traffic flow and right of way issues, so bicyclist paranoia doesn’t translate to driving like motorcycle paranoia does.

For most who can’t afford the excess
that is the automobile, the motorcycle
offers real mobility.

You’d be hard pressed to find a more democratic vehicle than the motorcycle. As a means of economic, efficient transportation, there is nothing better. If you don’t believe me, look at any developing country. The motorcycle is what allows many people who can’t luxuriate in the first world isolationism of the automobile a chance at mobility in the modern sense.

While urban cyclists find god and battle the soulless commuting automobilists on The Sunday Edition, I’ll enjoy my third way. I only wish it was a consideration in the misery that is most urban commutes. Rather than chasing utopian dreams of bicycle lanes in a car free city, why not consider a compromise that lets us immediately reduce gridlock? Ontario could start by following the examples of more motorcycle friendly jurisdictions by allowing filtering, reducing insurance, offering more parking (easily done in unused areas of parking lots designed for three ton SUVs) and easing access into motorized two wheeling by supporting and encouraging training. We’d see an immediate uptick in the efficiency of the roads we have now.

LINKS
Commuting by Motorbike is Better for Everyone
Mega-Mileage Scooters

Motorcycle Media: Ride with Norman Reedus

A well made piece of motorcycle documentary!

I’ve been watching Ride With Norman Reedus on AMC over the past few weeks. What you have here is an incredibly approachable celebrity who is obviously a giant bike nerd doing all the rides in the continental U.S. that he’s never gotten around to doing.

This isn’t some Harley-or-nuthin kind of biker exercise either, Norman throws his leg over everything from a Rolands Sands BMW R9T Special to a Zero electric bike, and that’s just in the first episode! By the end of the season you’ve seen over a dozen machines from half a dozen different manufacturers. Norman obviously loves his bikes and he isn’t particular about the flavour.

He likes his customs, but you’ll also find him riding
everything from state of the art Ducatis to 1950s
BMWs, often in the same episode.

Another nice touch is that this isn’t a boy’s own/Charlie & Ewan masculine and manly bike trip. Norman goes out of his way to find motorcycle subcultures when he’s riding, and that often includes female riding groups and partners. You don’t notice what a change this is from the usual testosterone charged motorcycle media until you see it done this differently.

The production values are excellent. With aerial establishing shots and a wide variety of atmospheric images used throughout the ride, it doesn’t feel like you’re following a map so much as actually being where the ride is (much like you would on a bike). Norman himself has directed film and published a book of photography, and he’s frequently stopping to take photos of his own or bragging on the nice little SLR he’s using. A camera geek after my own heart!

In stark contrast to the hard man he plays in Walking Dead, Norman has an easy going Californian vibe that makes him both approachable and a joy to watch. When a woman at Deal’s Gap says he looks like Darryl from Walking Dead he shoots right back, “yep, that’s me!” with a big smile on his face.

This show is going to get a lot of people interested in trying out motorcycling. I hope to goodness AMC is already planning for another season (though calling five episodes a season is a bit much). This show can’t cost that much to produce and it has a ready and expanding audience. Ducati and Triumph should both get a nod for obviously ponying up new bikes for use in this, but it was money well spent. The others should be lining up to provide bikes for the next round. A surprise riding partner or two (Valentino Rossi?) would be most excellent. Having Vale show Norman around Tavullia would be epic.

In case it isn’t clear, I’d highly recommend this if you enjoy travel documentaries. If you’re into motorcycles at all you’ll love it. Norman in Europe? Norman in Japan? With so many motorcycle subcultures to explore, this could easily become a world wide phenomenon.

Finessing the Ride

I’ve been on the bike every chance I’ve been able to get the past few days. My longest ride was an hour and ten minute look over to where I used to live and back again. Yesterday, making use of our last warm, rain free day before the temperature drops and frozen mud returns, I was out and about north of town. I’ve been trying to get my shifts smoother. When I’m gearing up I’m finding the bike plunging going up gears because the revs are so high and the engine drops off revs so quickly. You need to give it a touch of throttle between bringing the clutch in and engaging it again to match engine revs to road speed. It’s tricky.

I’ve gotten out of the habit of dropping the clutch in the middle of a corner, making those much smoother, and I’m remembering to turn off the signals much more. Only once or twice did I forget and have to do it after the fact (usually after tearing up a road after a good turn). The roads are cleaner and less sand covered, so I’m less worried about washing out in corners. I’m still startled by how much power the bike has. You have to hang on tight if you wind it out.

On my way back home the gas light finally came on. 162 miles on that tank (261kms?). It took $16 to fill it with the highest grade gas I could find. After I’ve done the plugs and cleaned the fuel system, I think I can get that over 300kms to a tank.

The real excitement came when I pulled into the gas station for my first fill up. The premium pump was empty so I went to pull in. Just then a woman in an old Taurus started backing into the same lane, so I stopped quickly. So far so good, except her angle is all wrong and she’s driving right for the curb the gas pump is on. She starts to pull forward so I assume (wrongly) that she is doing a 3 point turn and leaving. Instead, she starts backing up again. I haul on the brakes hard. This time I can’t get my legs down in time and drop the bike, still running, my hand locked on the front brake and clutch. Rather than hit the kill switch (and because I’m in embarrassed shock), I try to dead lift a 400lb Ninja back onto its feet. I didn’t do it the first time, the adrenaline did it for me the second time (I’m a big guy). I got her back on her wheels, still with the front brake and clutch in. The woman in the Taurus has since backed up again because she went up on the curb and is trying to back into the slot again, except she goes over the curb a third time, then a forth time. She finally backs it up into the slot back from the one I was trying to pull into.

The guy filling his truck makes eye contact with me and shakes his head.

I walk the bike up to the pump only to discover it doesn’t work. Excellent. I end up walking it over to the next lane and the other premium pump and finally get to fill up my new bike for the first time. The ride home had me second guessing everything I was doing. After a nice ride I was shaky. Later that night my right arm feels tight, I think I pulled something deadlifting a 400lb Ninja out of the way of the most incompetent driver I encountered on that ride. On the upside, at least she didn’t kill me driving down the road, and I can now say I’ve dropped my bike, picked it up and gone on. Thank goodness the guy before me put frame sliders on it, no damage done (other than to my pride).

The Value of Losing

Originally published October, 2013 on Dusty World.

I’m currently teaching two grade nine classes of introduction to computers and coaching the senior boys soccer team. In both situations I’m trying to understand and develop their response to failure. This is something we’re singularly bad at in education. Instead of developing resilience around failure we try to mitigate failure entirely.

The soccer team has shown such a lack of resilience that they are essentially in tatters. When given opportunities to recover from failure they have responded with dishonesty, poor sportsmanship and a lack of character. Continually trying to coax them into right action has been exhausting and ultimately a failure on my part as a coach which I find very distressing. There is a culture on this team that I’m finding impossible to overcome.

The grade nines, while tackling Arduino for the first time, are also running into failure though they are handling it much better than the soccer team. When they realize that they won’t be made to suffer for failure (this involves overcoming years of training by our education system), they begin to play with the material in a meaningful and constructive way. Removing fear of failure from the equation has been successful in both classes and the confidence that results is based on real, hands-on, experiential learning.

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.04/genX.html

So much of what we do in a classroom is artificial. Artificial challenges in an artificial environment producing artificial assessments while working on artificial timelines. The same can be said of those epic wins players think they own in video games.

This brought me back to an article I read in WIRED a long time ago called Generation Xbox wherein they talked about the culture of gaming in such a forthright way that it stuck with me. Anyone who has been teaching kids in the last ten years will see a lot of truth in these observations.

One of the reasons gamification has connected with education so comfortably is that the two things deal in artificialities. Both focus on engagement and subvert realism in order to ensure continued attention. Being in a classroom is much like being in a game complete with rules to follow and points to be scored. We grade students in much the same way that a game gives out points – we award players for willingly submitting themselves to the rules of the game; submission is a prerequisite for victory and victory is given rather than taken.

When you win in a video game or in a classroom you aren’t experiencing success in a real way. It is an artificial environment designed to breed success, you are in a place designed by committee to appeal to the widest range of people. The attention and engagement of the student/player is the goal, everything else is in support of it. Yet people develop very real senses of themselves around these false victories. Our self image is molded around what we think we’re good at and many digital natives consider themselves masters of the universe because they have played games successfully. Many academics believe that they are masters of the universe because they were able to submit to education successfully.

If social constructs like games or education or economics are designed to focus entirely on inclusive engagement then the result is a population with no ability to think outside of these social constructs. They don’t develop meaningful meta-cognition or resiliency. When you’ve been beaten badly it shows you something about yourself. When you’ve been beaten badly it knocks you out of habitual response and into a new and potentially more successful means of overcoming your failure. In that scenario even a less painful loss could be seen as an improvement, but we are doing all we can to remove pain from everything.

One of the reasons gamers migrate to multi-player versus games is because you can test your ability against someone who isn’t a benign agent of the game’s mediocrity engine. As in sports you are able to test yourself against your peers. You can bet that the human being on the other side won’t bell-curve their play to suit your level. That’s how you end up with 9-1 soccer games, or getting pwned online. It’s in these extremes that gamer culture and sports seem most alien to educators. It’s in these extremes that my soccer players have nothing in their vocabulary to respond honestly and constructively to failure.

When starting the circuit building unit in computer studies the grade nines were overwhelmed by something completely new to them. I gave them detailed instruction and support but would not do it for them. I did stress that if they weren’t paying attention to what they were doing they would find this impossible and when one would ask for help while simultaneously looking at their smartphone or with an error I’d already helped them with once I’d walk away. Circuit building wouldn’t bell-curve for the class, it wouldn’t simplify things to make it easier if students didn’t get it. They had to respond to reality and reality wasn’t interested in making it easier.

At one point a colleague from the English department wandered in and watched them working on their circuit building for a few minutes. He said, “it’s nice to be in a classroom where the students are actually doing something.” then, after a pause he added, “you really don’t have to worry about engaging them do you? They’re all right into it…” Reality can do that to people, it’s a genuine challenge. My job as a teacher is to give them the time and materials to figure it out for themselves.

If you’re excited about gamification then you’re excited about what is simply a new layer of artificiality around an already artificial situation. Not everyone should see success in every endeavor. It’s good for you to fail every once in a while, it makes you more compassionate, humble, creative and self aware; all areas I see the digital native struggle with because their virtual wins have more to do with entertainment than they do with reality.

If you’ve seen success in a system designed to provide it you’ve got to question the value of that success. If you want to earn success look for a challenge that wasn’t designed by committee mainly to keep you engaged. Whenever what you’re doing has engagement at its heart you’ll find the victory to be false because it was designed to ensure it for you in order to keep you playing.

Finally Putting The Ninja To Bed

That’s one clean Ninja! And the water isn’t solid outside today.

We got swamped with snow and very cold weather early this year, but we’re enjoying a thaw now. It’s finally given me the chance to clean up the Ninja and put it to bed for the winter. I fear I’ve been neglecting the Ninja while the Concours demands attention, but leaving it goopy over the cold months wouldn’t do it any good, and it really cleans up pretty.

Once I get a bead on the oil cooler situation, I’m hoping to get the Concours back in shape and then begin working on the fairings and paint.

I picked up a metal, vintage Triumph sign for the garage.

After a wash and some lubrication, the Ninja’s ready for bed.

Meanwhile the Concours is still oil cooler-less. I’m waiting to
see if our machine shop teacher can seal the crack in the banjo bolt housing.

The Always On Motorcycle, or: to scramble or not to scramble, that is the question!

Time to put the bike away, right? Not so much… it’s 10°C and sunny out today!

I was all proud of myself for pushing into late November on two wheels this year. When they finally laid down salt and sand after the first real snowfall I put the Concours away and stripped it down for winter maintenance. I like having a twenty year old motorbike, but it isn’t a hop on and go kind of machine, it needs TLC.

A bigger mistake was putting away the KLX even before that. A newer machine with no need for heavy maintenance, it would have made sense to keep it handy just in case. The past week I could have ridden in to work several times, but I’m finding myself bike-blocked by too early hibernation habits and a single purpose motorbike.

Riding into the frost line is a good time!
Next year I’m going to keep an iron horse
saddled just in case.

I coulda been riding in this!

I wouldn’t be going on any long rides, just commuting, but that means 2-up with my son to drop him off at school. I got the Concours because it does this job well while still letting me fly when I want to. The KLX just manages the job of carrying me (it struggles to run at speed on the road with my 250lbs), but with storage and a second passenger? I think it would be fairly miserable. Perhaps that’s what’s stopping me from hauling it out of the shed again.

It’s away too soon! Too soon!

The Concours isn’t going anywhere, but the KLX, while a good introduction to off road riding isn’t the Swiss Army knife of a bike I was looking for. Come spring I’m going to liquidate some biking assets and go looking for a more multi-functional alternative.

I think I’ll clear $1000 on the XS1100 I’m currently fixing up, and I think I’ll be able to get what I bought the KLX for ($2000). Getting the $600 back I spent on the little Yamaha should also be possible. With $3600 on hand I have some interesting choices when it comes to a Swiss-Army knife bike I can keep handy for multi-surface riding while also being able to ride 2 up while commuting. The 650cc dual sport class of bikes has three contenders worth considering…

$1700 sitting in Kingston. an ’01 with 55K, well maintained,
KLRs are cheap and plentiful. It’d also be more generally
usable than the KLX.

I’m thinking once again about a Kawasaki KLR650. A tank of a bike. Not fast, but fast enough, able to carry two up, and rugged. If looked after it’d hammer along for a long time. The KLR is the darling of the cheap adventure rider and has an awful lot of after market accessory clobber as a result.

$3400 over in Waterloo. Top of the price range, but it’s an ’05
in immaculate condition with 24k on it. Nice photography too!

Honda makes an equivalent bike, the XR650. It looks more off road focused, and it’d be my first Honda. Other XR650s hover around $3000 with low kilometres. They seem a bit more expensive than either the KLR or the Suzuki, but Hondas are famous for holding value like that.

An ’05 with 33k out in Brockville going for $3200…

I looked at a DR600 last year, but shied away from such an old bike (this was an ’89 in poor condition). The DR600 evolved into the DR650 which is still in production today.

All three of these 650cc dualsports have enjoyed strangely long production runs with minimal changes. That gives them a deep and well supported parts availability though.

I could creep into the adventure bike genre proper for about twice what I’ve got. At under ten grand I’d consider the current crop of mid-sized adventure touring bikes, especially the ones with some off-road capability. The Honda NC750x rolls out for just under $10k. Suzuki’s V-Strom 650 is five hundred bucks cheaper, and the Kawasaki Versys 650 is a grand under that, though it isn’t much of an off-road machine. The Honda CB500x rolls out for seven grand, making it an even cheaper option. These bikes tend to put on the airs of an adventure bike without delivering any real off-road abilities. Being new they’d all handle the job of an always-on/Swiss army knife bike better than the venerable Connie though.

Triumph’s new Bonneville Scrambler is a pretty thing.

Yep, we look good on that!

At just over ten grand I’m into Triumph Scrambler territory. This would scratch both the classic itch as well as the multi-surface riding itch. I’m not interested in MX riding. My off roading would be dirt roads and light trail riding. Staying away from the brightly coloured, long shocked dirt bikes would be OK with me, especially if I were on a classic looking Scrambler.

My kind of off-roading… very civilized!

The Scrambler genre has picked up as of late, with Ducati and BMW both entering the fray. Yamaha is also doing it (though overseas), and Scramblers have long been a favourite of the custom crowd. But unless I can make more space, a home made custom isn’t the dependable always on machine I’m looking for… though that hasn’t stopped me before.

Rather than just jumping into another dual sport that puts function before everything, maybe I should just start working toward the Scrambler I’d rather have.

However, the adventure bike rabbit hole goes all the way to the 1%er land. On the way to Silly-Rich World you’ve got some multi-faceted mid-level adventure machines that are both stylish and capable.

With much disposable income I could go with the new Triumph Tiger 800cc XCx (about $16k). With more cash on hand I’d be onto the new Triumph Tiger Explorer (north of $20k) or perhaps Honda’s newly re-released Africa Twin (maybe $17k?). In this territory you can get a stylish, long-distance able, off road capable machine.

Once you get into the high end adventure market things get silly quickly. Suddenly you’re thinking about Ducati Multistradas and superbike fast KTM Super Adventures. Bikes with more computers than a moonshot. Every time I read an article about these bikes they are described as fantastic, followed by a long list of all the things that broke on them but were covered under warranty. I guess that’s an adventure of a sort.

These kinds of bikes wander into more than just disposable income. If I’m buying a bike like that I’d better be at my leisure. Dropping upwards of $30k on a motorcycle that can handle dirt roads (but needs expensive TLC every time you do) should mean you’ve also got a stable of a dozen other bikes and lots of time to ride them.

Back in the real world I’m motivated to expand my riding season and have a machine on hand that can do more than one thing if the Connie is feeling her age. Come spring I’ll be considering options to scramble or dual sport, but it’ll be scrambling unless I can afford an actual adventure bike. If I’m going to look for a multi-purpose always on bike, I’d also like to get one that tickles an aesthetic itch.