Speed Awareness Courses - Do they work?

[singlecoil]

JNW1 said:

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

I understand you've got to judge a candidate's overall performance on a driving test but if they've driven slowly all the time, have caused a small queue as a result and have failed to recognise - or respond to - any changes in speed limits is that still likely to be a pass providing the rest of their performance has been satisfactory? Sounds like you're saying it is but if that's the case it's rather different from the message I was always given by my driving instructor (admittedly many years ago now!).

Surely it would depend on WHY they were driving slowly (as someone said a while back)?

My original assumption (clearly stated!) was that in my hypothetical example the individual was driving slowly purely out of choice (as opposed to a reduced speed being prudent due to traffic and/or road/weather conditions).

Yes, of course they are driving slowly out of choice, they are after all the driver. My point, also clearly stated, is that if they were simply choosing to drive slowly but were otherwise a competent driver then no problem. But if they were driving slowly because they were so bad at driving that it was only by driving slowly that they could cope at all, then problem.

[JNW1]

vonhosen said:

JNW1 said:

vonhosen said:

The examiner doesn't look at their whole drive or overall performance as a package & make a pass or fail assessment based on that. Throughout the whole drive they are measuring the drive against defined outcomes (for every circumstance they are in) & weighting circumstances/how far they are from those defined outcomes. Where the driver is falling short that weighting will result in essentially 4 grades 1) a fault that is not worthy of recording, 2) a driving fault, 3) a serious fault or 4) a dangerous fault. Where something is graded as a fault not worthy of recording due to it's nature/circumstances it will always remain a fault not worthy of recording (where the circumstances remain the same), no matter how much they do it. For it to move to becoming a driving fault the circumstances will need to be different demanding that upscale. If they then go back to the original circumstances in which they were falling short it goes back to being not worthy of recording.

Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 8th December 21:05

Ok, so if someone is driving at 30mph in a 30 limit and then move to a 50 limit but stick to 30mph, is that a 1) or a 2) on the above grades? They then move to a 60mph limit, still stick at 30mph and by this time a bit of a queue is forming behind; 1) or 2)? This pattern continues throughout the test and, while they haven't done anything dangerous or committed a serious fault, it's clear they're a bit oblivious to the changing speed limits and the effect their speed is having on other road users. Pass or fail?

As I keep saying the full circumstances in front of the examiner would have to be considered, not just what you visualise with your what if's (which I can't or may not be visualising from what you say). There is far more scope for speeds below the limit not resulting in recordable faults to speeds above it.

I now know how Jeremy Paxman feels when he's trying to get an answer out of a politician!

[vonhosen]

JNW1 said:

vonhosen said:

JNW1 said:

vonhosen said:

The examiner doesn't look at their whole drive or overall performance as a package & make a pass or fail assessment based on that. Throughout the whole drive they are measuring the drive against defined outcomes (for every circumstance they are in) & weighting circumstances/how far they are from those defined outcomes. Where the driver is falling short that weighting will result in essentially 4 grades 1) a fault that is not worthy of recording, 2) a driving fault, 3) a serious fault or 4) a dangerous fault. Where something is graded as a fault not worthy of recording due to it's nature/circumstances it will always remain a fault not worthy of recording (where the circumstances remain the same), no matter how much they do it. For it to move to becoming a driving fault the circumstances will need to be different demanding that upscale. If they then go back to the original circumstances in which they were falling short it goes back to being not worthy of recording.

Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 8th December 21:05

Ok, so if someone is driving at 30mph in a 30 limit and then move to a 50 limit but stick to 30mph, is that a 1) or a 2) on the above grades? They then move to a 60mph limit, still stick at 30mph and by this time a bit of a queue is forming behind; 1) or 2)? This pattern continues throughout the test and, while they haven't done anything dangerous or committed a serious fault, it's clear they're a bit oblivious to the changing speed limits and the effect their speed is having on other road users. Pass or fail?

As I keep saying the full circumstances in front of the examiner would have to be considered, not just what you visualise with your what if's (which I can't or may not be visualising from what you say). There is far more scope for speeds below the limit not resulting in recordable faults to speeds above it.

I now know how Jeremy Paxman feels when he's trying to get an answer out of a politician!

That's because just like in any trial it's the details that matter & there are so many more factors than you outline that would be a consideration.

[Digby]

vonhosen said:

1) Keep looking, don't just stop at the first hurdle, there's better.
2) Just because you do something already doesn't mean you do it well. You mean you can't improve on any of the things you already do (after all that's a large part of what advanced driving is, getting better at things you already in the main do by being introduced to slightly different approaches to it & keep reflecting/getting feedback in your constant strive to be better still)?

So which better CPC modules are there? Every link I can find list the same ones.

And again, why are there 'poorer' options given this is something required by law if as you suggest there's better out there.

As for better training, you think sitting in a classroom will make anyone better?

[Crackie]

singlecoil said:

Crackie said:

singlecoil said:

Crackie said:

singlecoil said:

It's the fact that there is so little enforcement that many do it.

Which fact do you mean ? So little enforcement ?????

Can you explain how many "do it" ??

I agree my post was ambiguous........I was trying to understand if you had any fact(s) to support your post. Was it just purely anecdotal ?

Are you serious? You want 'facts' to support my contention that many people speed? Or 'facts' to support my contention that they do it because they believe there's a very very good chance that they will get away with it?

I'll assume that you are not seriously suggesting that you need me to quote 'facts' to establish the above, and that you are attempting to set up a point of your own. I suggest you get on and do that and stop messing about.

I also think that many people exceed the NSL because of the relative lack of enforcement. Its my opinion, not a fact.

[vonhosen]

Digby said:

vonhosen said:

1) Keep looking, don't just stop at the first hurdle, there's better.
2) Just because you do something already doesn't mean you do it well. You mean you can't improve on any of the things you already do (after all that's a large part of what advanced driving is, getting better at things you already in the main do by being introduced to slightly different approaches to it & keep reflecting/getting feedback in your constant strive to be better still)?

So which better CPC modules are there? Every link I can find list the same ones.

And again, why are there 'poorer' options given this is something required by law if as you suggest there's better out there.

As for better training, you think sitting in a classroom will make anyone better?

There are poorer options because like anything else quality varies. Not all merchandise is of equal quality.
You have to look at lots of different providers.
Classroom has a place, knowledge can be gained that wasn't known prior & gained knowledge is an improvement.
Obviously if you do the same classroom modules 5 days running then you aren't going to be getting much out of it, but neither should you expect to. You wouldn't be in much position to claim it was a worthless waste of time though, because after all it would have been you that chose to do that & you that purchased it. Blame for getting nothing out of it would be squarely with you.

[Digby]

vonhosen said:

When did your Pop's examine?
Things have changed away from examiner's potentially prejudiced subjective wants/desires to a defined outcomes basis for greater consistency across examiners.

Late 90's. I mentioned prejudices, wants and desires a moment ago and he said "What on earth is he talking about?"

To see if things have changed, we asked a current friend who does the same.

He said being hesitant when driving and driving too slowly will result in a fail.

There you have it folks! Speed up or go home.

[drf765]

Crackie said:

singlecoil said:

Crackie said:

singlecoil said:

Crackie said:

singlecoil said:

It's the fact that there is so little enforcement that many do it.

Which fact do you mean ? So little enforcement ?????

Can you explain how many "do it" ??

I agree my post was ambiguous........I was trying to understand if you had any fact(s) to support your post. Was it just purely anecdotal ?

Are you serious? You want 'facts' to support my contention that many people speed? Or 'facts' to support my contention that they do it because they believe there's a very very good chance that they will get away with it?

I'll assume that you are not seriously suggesting that you need me to quote 'facts' to establish the above, and that you are attempting to set up a point of your own. I suggest you get on and do that and stop messing about.

I also think that many people exceed the NSL because of the relative lack of enforcement. Its my opinion, not a fact.

I think it is a fact, and that's my opinion.

[vonhosen]

Digby said:

vonhosen said:

When did your Pop's examine?
Things have changed away from examiner's potentially prejudiced subjective wants/desires to a defined outcomes basis for greater consistency across examiners.

Late 90's. I mentioned prejudices, wants and desires a moment ago and he said "What on earth is he talking about?"

To see if things have changed, we asked a current friend who does the same.

He said being hesitant when driving and driving too slowly will result in a fail.

There you have it folks! Speed up or go home.

A lot's changed since the 90s.
Your statements are way too simplistic.
What's driving too slowly? How long for? etc etc.
The answer is that it depends on the circumstances & if the current friend doesn't believe that's the case, perhaps they need a standards check or visit to Cardington.

[Digby]

vonhosen said:

There are poorer options because like anything else quality varies. Not all merchandise is of equal quality.
You have to look at lots of different providers.
Classroom has a place, knowledge can be gained that wasn't known prior & gained knowledge is an improvement.
Obviously if you do the same classroom modules 5 days running then you aren't going to be getting much out of it, but neither should you expect to. You wouldn't be in much position to claim it was a worthless waste of time though, because after all it would have been you that chose to do that & you that purchased it. Blame for getting nothing out of it would be squarely with you.

Show me these good courses! I don't know anyone who has been on one and even if found, you still have to take four of the poorer options I assume? Or are you suggesting their are different quality modules across the entire range?

So just to be straight, we have very poor, legally required lessons costing a small fortune for companies which teach you things you HAVE to know to be able to do your job in the first place and also things which you will have had to do to pass your test.

Then, apperently, we have far higher quality modules, costing even more of a fortune that teach you.....well, what exactly?

On top of all of this, you can take any module you like five times over and that, in the eyes of the law and all those behind this scheme, is still a 'pass'

I'm really struggling to see any benefits here other than people getting rich.

How can all of the above be allowed unless the only interest is financial gain?

[JNW1]

vonhosen said:

Digby said:

vonhosen said:

When did your Pop's examine?
Things have changed away from examiner's potentially prejudiced subjective wants/desires to a defined outcomes basis for greater consistency across examiners.

Late 90's. I mentioned prejudices, wants and desires a moment ago and he said "What on earth is he talking about?"

To see if things have changed, we asked a current friend who does the same.

He said being hesitant when driving and driving too slowly will result in a fail.

There you have it folks! Speed up or go home.

A lot's changed since the 90s.
Your statements are way too simplistic.
What's driving too slowly? How long for? etc etc.
The answer is that it depends on the circumstances & if the current friend doesn't believe that's the case, perhaps they need a standards check or visit to Cardington.

Why has something like the need to make proper progress changed since the 1990's? Absolutely no reason whatsoever why it should have done and frankly a lot of this new stuff sounds like inventing solutions to problems that never existed and making something complicated which fundamentally isn't. Probably a cottage industry running off the back of it mind you....

[Digby]

vonhosen said:

The answer is that it depends on the circumstances

He said if you can't get up to speed quickly and show you can maintain that speed (assuming no rain etc etc) you will fail.

So the answer is, yes, you need to get up to speed and bet at or very close to the limits.

Sitting at ten or twenty MPH+ below a limit for no reason will be looked upon as not being confident enough to pass. (and it will ps off other drivers)

[cmaguire]

drf765 said:

Crackie said:

singlecoil said:

Crackie said:

singlecoil said:

Crackie said:

singlecoil said:

It's the fact that there is so little enforcement that many do it.

Which fact do you mean ? So little enforcement ?????

Can you explain how many "do it" ??

I agree my post was ambiguous........I was trying to understand if you had any fact(s) to support your post. Was it just purely anecdotal ?

Are you serious? You want 'facts' to support my contention that many people speed? Or 'facts' to support my contention that they do it because they believe there's a very very good chance that they will get away with it?

I'll assume that you are not seriously suggesting that you need me to quote 'facts' to establish the above, and that you are attempting to set up a point of your own. I suggest you get on and do that and stop messing about.

I also think that many people exceed the NSL because of the relative lack of enforcement. Its my opinion, not a fact.

I think it is a fact, and that's my opinion.

Marvellous, NSL so chance of a retort about no limits at all.

I think many people exceed the NSL (and although this includes rural 60's we all know what we're talking about here) because 70 is artificially slow and they feel comfortable doing more than that. They feel neither at risk to themselves or to others. And they're right. It feels easy and it is easy. What's the problem? Oh yes, the Law. You're breaking the Law. Boo-hoo, the Law is making a nuisance of itself in this case.
Because it (the speeding) is ultimately so trivial in real terms, to many the enforcement is nothing more than a nuisance that only becomes an issue if caught. I suspect the majority of those caught on Motorways at 80-something speeds have no genuine remorse at all, and why should they?

[Crackie]

drf765 said:

Crackie said:

singlecoil said:

Crackie said:

singlecoil said:

Crackie said:

singlecoil said:

It's the fact that there is so little enforcement that many do it.

Which fact do you mean ? So little enforcement ?????

Can you explain how many "do it" ??

I agree my post was ambiguous........I was trying to understand if you had any fact(s) to support your post. Was it just purely anecdotal ?

Are you serious? You want 'facts' to support my contention that many people speed? Or 'facts' to support my contention that they do it because they believe there's a very very good chance that they will get away with it?

I'll assume that you are not seriously suggesting that you need me to quote 'facts' to establish the above, and that you are attempting to set up a point of your own. I suggest you get on and do that and stop messing about.

I also think that many people exceed the NSL because of the relative lack of enforcement. Its my opinion, not a fact.

I think it is a fact, and that's my opinion.

So do I.......

[vonhosen]

JNW1 said:

vonhosen said:

Digby said:

vonhosen said:

When did your Pop's examine?
Things have changed away from examiner's potentially prejudiced subjective wants/desires to a defined outcomes basis for greater consistency across examiners.

Late 90's. I mentioned prejudices, wants and desires a moment ago and he said "What on earth is he talking about?"

To see if things have changed, we asked a current friend who does the same.

He said being hesitant when driving and driving too slowly will result in a fail.

There you have it folks! Speed up or go home.

A lot's changed since the 90s.
Your statements are way too simplistic.
What's driving too slowly? How long for? etc etc.
The answer is that it depends on the circumstances & if the current friend doesn't believe that's the case, perhaps they need a standards check or visit to Cardington.

Why has something like the need to make proper progress changed since the 1990's? Absolutely no reason whatsoever why it should have done and frankly a lot of this new stuff sounds like inventing solutions to problems that never existed and making something complicated which fundamentally isn't. Probably a cottage industry running off the back of it mind you....

The assessment process has changed in order to make examining consistent between different examiners, so that it less subjective & open to the vagaries of personal prejudices.
i.e. You should get the same result whatever examiner you had (which wasn't always the case).

[Digby]

vonhosen said:

i.e. You should get the same result whatever examiner you had (which wasn't always the case).

Driving too slowly and not making progress resulting in a fail seems to have changed very little.

Apparently it was one of the top ten listed reasons for fails!

[vonhosen]

Digby said:

vonhosen said:

i.e. You should get the same result whatever examiner you had (which wasn't always the case).

Driving too slowly and not making progress resulting in a fail seems to have changed very little.

Apparently it was one of the top ten listed reasons for fails!

Wrong!
Not any more

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...

Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 8th December 23:34

[cmaguire]

vonhosen said:

Wrong!
Not any more

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...

Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 8th December 23:34

'Not any more'?
Was it at one time?
I suppose failing people for driving to slowly when the State is endeavouring to justify slowing everyone down would be somewhat counter-productive to their objective.
Surely it is incompetence much as your top 10 are, wherever it appears in the list.

[vonhosen]

cmaguire said:

vonhosen said:

Wrong!
Not any more

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...

Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 8th December 23:34

'Not any more'?
Was it at one time?
I suppose failing people for driving to slowly when the State is endeavouring to justify slowing everyone down would be somewhat counter-productive to their objective.
Surely it is incompetence much as your top 10 are, wherever it appears in the list.

What's too slowly though? Simply being below the limit isn't, the limit being the legal maximum not identifying the minimum you should travel at.
What else has to satisfied to take it from one of the 4 fault grades to the next level?
As I said, examiners used to act far more on their 'feeling' for a driver which is all very subjective & open to prejudice.
It's far more evidence/outcome based now which makes it consistent & justifiable. It's not on the whims of the examiner & their DL25s are scrutinised to identify patterns with fault identification (also for route analysis).

[cmaguire]

vonhosen said:

What's too slowly?
As I said, examiners used to act far more on their 'feeling' for a driver which is all very subjective & open to prejudice.
It's far more evidence/outcome based now which makes it consistent & justifiable. It's not on the whims of the examiner & their DL25s are scrutinised to identify patterns with fault identification.

There's absolutely no need to be doing 45 in a 60 yet I see this all the time now. And all it takes is a few others of similar speed or lack of gumption and there is a queue of these idiots. This makes getting past the instigator of this nonsense a major problem. They are effectively inflicting their shortcomings on everybody behind them. I might like to be doing 100+ in that 60 but that is not an expectation but merely a desire, I don't get irritated by people doing 60 in a 60 because I want to go faster. But 45? C'mon, what the hell is that about?