My IAM Experience

[waterwonder]

I've read this with interest thanks.

I've just paid for my SfL course so hope to be starting very soon.

With regards to the later points sparring between the local groups and HQ does nothing for public perception. The organisation does appear (perhaps understandably for the obvious reasons) to be a bit ameuterish.

My own experience so far is that I contacted my local group and was advised I could only book with HQ/online. I did so and was then contacted by the local group to confirm my details, fine but unessecary/shows the distrust of the system. After that the promised call from the instructor has never materialised. None of this is really a problem but this kind of stuff detracts from the goal.

I'm sure if the OPs local group had explained the funding situation but offered to do the extra training for a sensible fee they'd have another member now.

[7mike]

When I first became a fleet trainer, about nine year ago I thought it would be just like being an observer for the local RoSPA group but getting paid Unlike some, I bit the bullet & jumped through the various hoops at considerable personal expense and now have a rewarding and diverse career. Now advanced test prep represents probably less than 10% of my work and the more I get into the job the more I think it's an irrelevance to the goals of my clients, almost a hindrance in some cases.

One thing I do know; there's a huge difference between telling willing (and paying) volunteers how to do it and influencing unwilling, begrudged drivers to be safer drivers. Having completed both the ADI process and the RoSPA dip I'm not convinced either fully prepares someone for the job.

Just one final thought, for those who think the RoSPA dip should suffice; should dip holders earning a living as fleet trainers be subject to DVSA standards checks the same as those also holding ADI/fleet licences?

[SVS]

I've no experience of being a fleet trainer, so can't comment whether a RoSPA Diploma should suffice. I suspect not, given your comments are based on practical first-hand experience. Also, I imagine you could get sent the odd client for fleet training who's a new driver; in this case, ADI experience would be more useful than a RoSPA Dip.

7mike said:

One thing I do know; there's a huge difference between telling willing (and paying) volunteers how to do it and influencing unwilling, begrudged drivers to be safer drivers. Having completed both the ADI process and the RoSPA dip I'm not convinced either fully prepares someone for the job.

In that case, neither is fully fit for purpose! Though I doubt anybody's able to get the DVSA or RoSPA to change their instructor training syllabus.

[vonhosen]

SVS said:

I
In that case, neither is fully fit for purpose! Though I doubt anybody's able to get the DVSA or RoSPA to change their instructor training syllabus.

The DVSA have been changing it, hence the new standards check.

[Strangely Brown]

7mike said:

Just one final thought, for those who think the RoSPA dip should suffice; should dip holders earning a living as fleet trainers be subject to DVSA standards checks the same as those also holding ADI/fleet licences?

If a RoSPA Dip (car) were to be judged sufficient to earn a living teaching AD, and it is for motorcyclists, then I see no reason why a periodic check test by the same issuing body should not be sufficient to maintain the entitlement. I am not convinced that the check need be made by DVSA since they had no involvement in the testing process in the first place. I do believe that check tests should be required for any qualification of this type - just because you met the standard once, it doesn't necessarily mean that you still do.

[7mike]

Strangely Brown said:

7mike said:

Just one final thought, for those who think the RoSPA dip should suffice; should dip holders earning a living as fleet trainers be subject to DVSA standards checks the same as those also holding ADI/fleet licences?

If a RoSPA Dip (car) were to be judged sufficient to earn a living teaching AD, and it is for motorcyclists, then I see no reason why a periodic check test by the same issuing body should not be sufficient to maintain the entitlement. I am not convinced that the check need be made by DVSA since they had no involvement in the testing process in the first place. I do believe that check tests should be required for any qualification of this type - just because you met the standard once, it doesn't necessarily mean that you still do.

There are a lot of drivers out there who hate driving! Motorcyclists who no longer enjoy the activity generally give up. Drivers tend to plough on because their work/lifestyle requires the mobility. I'd agree, a qualification such as a RoSPA Dip (motorbikes) is generally acceptable as a means of helping a biker achieve their goal in what, let's face it, for most is a hobby.

Periodic checks are, of course necessary and I'm checked by the DVSA, RoSPA and most of the training providers I work on behalf of at regular intervals not to mention feedback gathered by those companies from their clients. Interestingly my last three yearly RoSPA retest was conducted by an examiner who (by his own admission) knew nothing about the Dip and therefore no test of my instructional ability was assessed (so take heart IAM, you're not the only one who's HQ can't get their act together ). Personally, remembering how this thread started (apologies for my part in taking it of track) I very much doubt the ability of the main AD organisations to fulfil a regulatory role.