The future of Advanced Driving.

[25NAD90TUL]

WinstonWolf said:

Your attitude towards cyclists marks you down as a dangerous driver, prejudice has no place in advanced driving.

http://www.pistonheads.com/xforums/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Not the sharpest tool in the box are we?

See my post in response to johnao.

Btw Rob, my rhetorical post mentioned nothing whatsoever about my driving, it was completely unrelated to driving.

Given the statement you made in that thread regarding seven seconds, I wonder (with your great capacity for thought) if you'd considered what my gap might be regarding cyclists? Clearly adding two and two together isn't a strongpoint, despite your penchant for maths.

As I clearly need to spell it out for those with low-IQs, it was a rhetorical post that parodied the attitude I've seen displayed by drivers in those silly threads.

It worked both ways though, some of the cyclists showed their gullibility by not getting the irony, I mean how gullible are they? The thread is entitled 'Idiot Cyclists' ffs.

I've been cycling since 1973.

A word to the (un)wise, when you come across someone in life who says things that make you think 'is this person either very clever or very stupid?'...always err toward the former, it usually saves a lot of embarrassment. A clever adversary might have assumed I'd read that thread entirely and had seen you in there and saw an opportunity to bait you personally, It worked within less than an hour of my posting.

Now run a long boy, this thread isn't for you.

Edited by 25NAD90TUL on Saturday 8th February 16:29

[WinstonWolf]

Far sharper than you...

If it was so funny how come no one bar you noticed?

[25NAD90TUL]

WinstonWolf said:

Far sharper than you...

If it was so funny how come no one bar you noticed?

Clearly a legend in your own mind...See my earlier 'very smart or very stupid' comment.

Actually irocfan outted it pretty quickly, johnao...the hundreds who doubtless read it and didn't bother responding...

Anway much as I enjoy your 50 odd thousands posts, all useless, run along now, this thread is for adults.

PS: If you want to discontinue being Pawned in this fashion you might wanna abstain from responding to my posts in future.

Edited by 25NAD90TUL on Saturday 8th February 15:23

[WinstonWolf]

25NAD90TUL said:

WinstonWolf said:

Far sharper than you...

If it was so funny how come no one bar you noticed?

Clearly a legend in your own mind...See my earlier 'very smart or very stupid' comment.

Actually irocfan outted it pretty quickly, johnao...the hundreds who doubtless read it and didn't bother responding...

Anway much as I enjoy your 50 odd thousands posts, all useless, run along now, this thread is for adults.

PS: If you want to discontinue being Pawned in this fashion you might wanna abstain from responding to my posts in future.

Edited by 25NAD90TUL on Saturday 8th February 15:23

Remind us again which forums you got chucked off

I'll post where the fk I like Mr Seven Seconds...

[25NAD90TUL]

WinstonWolf said:

Remind us again which forums you got chucked off

I'll post where the fk I like Mr Seven Seconds...

Yes do continue.

I have never been 'chucked off' a forum, don't know where you got that from, I requested to be removed from ADUK and I let my membership expire from IAM so I don't know what tree your barking up there. Btw everybody knows this.

Best wishes Rob, and do keep in touch, I can almost feel the heat from your purple face as those veins throb wildly, watch your blood pressure buddy!

[25NAD90TUL]

SVS said:

Von, I agree. However, this thread was titled "The future of advanced driving".

Sadly I think we're all on the nail about this, very little we do or say is going to encourage many imo, plus the Sales & Marketing dept for IAM/RoSPA have very little success in this field either.

This thread hasn't evolved as I envisaged, even petty squabbles from other threads have spilled into here now, but if this is the area where the future of AD or just driving generally lies then it does have to be discussed here.

I agree the discussion will encourage very few, that is probably an over-estimation.

Best wishes.

[SVS]

vonhosen said:

Pass plus was just more 'telling' though.

Again I agree with you Von. I understand coaching well, because I was fortunate to have received training through work in coaching skills. However, why does almost every thread here turn into a 'conventional instruction' vs. coaching debate?

[vonhosen]

SVS said:

vonhosen said:

Pass plus was just more 'telling' though.

Again I agree with you Von. I understand coaching well, because I was fortunate to have received training through work in coaching skills. However, why does almost every thread here turn into a 'conventional instruction' vs. coaching debate?

Because things are moving on from pull/push V fixed input & to separate V BGOL.
There is a taste & impetus for change in the way training is delivered. This thread was about that very subject - 'the future'.

Edited by vonhosen on Saturday 8th February 18:43

[waremark]

vonhosen said:

There is a taste & impetus for change in the way training is delivered.

Though many of us are concerned that you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

[vonhosen]

waremark said:

vonhosen said:

There is a taste & impetus for change in the way training is delivered.

Though many of us are concerned that you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Not at all.
They might go there if they wish & find it works for them. There is always likely to be some overlap, but it's what works for them that is important & they choose that path.

[Martin A]

25NAD90TUL said:

SVS said:

Von, I agree. However, this thread was titled "The future of advanced driving".

Sadly I think we're all on the nail about this, very little we do or say is going to encourage many imo, plus the Sales & Marketing dept for IAM/RoSPA have very little success in this field either.

This thread hasn't evolved as I envisaged, even petty squabbles from other threads have spilled into here now, but if this is the area where the future of AD or just driving generally lies then it does have to be discussed here.

I agree the discussion will encourage very few, that is probably an over-estimation.

Best wishes.

I recently asked on another thread (New Discoveries?) if anyone has had any novel insights through self-coaching. No-one else, even proponents of Coaching, has come up with anything, or even bothered to comment. If even enthusiasts, who take time out of their lives to answer the questions of strangers, can't come up with anything then the evidence suggests that the answer is no.

If no-one has any new insights then, from my point of view, the future of Advanced driving looks pretty stagnant, but that doesn't mean it can't be of some benefit in it's present or coaching inclusive form.

Unsurprisingly, from the tone of some of the posts on this very thread, I thought that there was also a desire to improve take up of the delivery of advanced driving.

Yet when I suggested earlier on in this thread, a way forward by improving what is on offer to Learners, once again people bypassed it without comment.

Perhaps the feeling is that I'm so stupid or obviously ironic that my comments are not worth your wasting your time over. I think that's a shame, as I can assure you that there was no stupidity or irony intended in either of the posts, just a desire to move things forward.

So my question now is: Is there anyone who thinks that advanced driving will have a greater take up and non stagnant future, and if so, why?

[trashbat]

Why should it matter that anyone discovers something independently novel?

I've learnt lots through AD, but it's all old news to any expert.

GDE and AD in general isn't really about advancing the technical state of the art, is it? It's about getting more people to more significantly improve their driving with more permanent effect.

[trashbat]

waremark said:

Though many of us are concerned that you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Can you expand on this? I've seen the concern before but I don't really get it. What's 'the baby' - Roadcraft technical content, or how AD is taught?

[vonhosen]

Martin A said:

I recently asked on another thread (New Discoveries?) if anyone has had any novel insights through self-coaching. No-one else, even proponents of Coaching, has come up with anything, or even bothered to comment. If even enthusiasts, who take time out of their lives to answer the questions of strangers, can't come up with anything then the evidence suggests that the answer is no.

Perhaps that's because they don't believe the personalised tweaks they have introduced are enormously significant for others or perhaps the tweaks they make are in an area of driving that aren't likely to be accessed by the vast majority of drivers. The silence doesn't mean that they don't have them, perhaps they see their effect more as lots of fairly small additions that in themselves are perhaps viewed as insignificant, but only when combined produce a marked change on the total output. Much of mine will be about what I visualise to help me achieve what I want or the analogies I use for myself when thinking about the output I am trying to achieve.

Martin A said:

If no-one has any new insights then, from my point of view, the future of Advanced driving looks pretty stagnant, but that doesn't mean it can't be of some benefit in it's present or coaching inclusive form.

Unsurprisingly, from the tone of some of the posts on this very thread, I thought that there was also a desire to improve take up of the delivery of advanced driving.

Yet when I suggested earlier on in this thread, a way forward by improving what is on offer to Learners, once again people bypassed it without comment.

We all have a vested interest in the general standard of driving (less so what advanced driving clubs do) & therefore what is on offer to learners, but what we are personally prepared to do in relation to it will differ because of our personal circumstances. I personally have a pretty short future in driver education & have nothing to do with advanced driving organisations. My views are primarily therefore as an outsider looking in with some past experience in driver education.

Martin A said:

Perhaps the feeling is that I'm so stupid or obviously ironic that my comments are not worth your wasting your time over. I think that's a shame, as I can assure you that there was no stupidity or irony intended in either of the posts, just a desire to move things forward.

Not at all on my part Martin I assure you, just some difficulty in addressing the questions with some value because of my personal circumstances.

Martin A said:

So my question now is: Is there anyone who thinks that advanced driving will have a greater take up and non stagnant future, and if so, why?

The issues for me are the label, image, access & (some content) method of delivery.
It needs to appear less egocentric, start at the learner stage & be a natural progression/extension of that (particularly in the method of delivery) IMHO.

[waremark]

Martin A said:

Yet when I suggested earlier on in this thread, a way forward by improving what is on offer to Learners, once again people bypassed it without comment.

I thought I responded by making a few suggestions and asking you about yours???

[waremark]

trashbat said:

waremark said:

Though many of us are concerned that you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Can you expand on this? I've seen the concern before but I don't really get it. What's 'the baby' - Roadcraft technical content, or how AD is taught?

I am referring to the method of delivery rather than the content. I am all for a bit of asking, but I cannot come to terms with the suggested refusal to do any telling - at the very least tell the candidates what to try, and ask them to notice how they find it. I cannot accept the VH argument that students are never convinced unless they have found solutions for themselves.

[vonhosen]

waremark said:

trashbat said:

waremark said:

Though many of us are concerned that you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Can you expand on this? I've seen the concern before but I don't really get it. What's 'the baby' - Roadcraft technical content, or how AD is taught?

I am referring to the method of delivery rather than the content. I am all for a bit of asking, but I cannot come to terms with the suggested refusal to do any telling - at the very least tell the candidates what to try, and ask them to notice how they find it. I cannot accept the VH argument that students are never convinced unless they have found solutions for themselves.

That's not what VH is saying.

You can offer options for them to try, after they have exhausted options they can think of & at their request. Of course your options carry no extra weight than theirs. The choice of which they try is theirs as is what they'll stick with in the end. The increased value is in them taking responsibility for the choice & the outcome of it.
They can also of course be convinced by solutions offered by others, but they won't necessarily be convinced because it has been offered by others. At the end of the day they'll use what they believe offers them the best compromise irrespective of where the idea emanated.

Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 9th February 21:07

[waremark]

vonhosen said:

That's not what VH is saying.

You can offer options for them to try, after they have exhausted options they can think of & at their request. Of course your options carry no extra weight than theirs. The choice of which they try is theirs as is what they'll stick with in the end. The increased value is in them taking responsibility for the choice & the outcome of it.
They can also of course be convinced by solutions offered by others, but they won't necessarily be convinced because it has been offered by others. At the end of the day they'll use what they believe offers them the best compromise irrespective of where the idea emanated.

Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 9th February 21:07

We guys who have been practising, thinking and talking about different approaches for several decades can surely save students so much time by explaining the advantages of approaches which we have found to work well.

By the way, if you don't 'tell' your students to ignore the 'this is the way to do it' bits of Roadcraft, what do you say to them about how to use Roadcraft? Don't they still get examined on Roadcraft?

[SK425]

waremark said:

vonhosen said:

That's not what VH is saying.

You can offer options for them to try, after they have exhausted options they can think of & at their request. Of course your options carry no extra weight than theirs. The choice of which they try is theirs as is what they'll stick with in the end. The increased value is in them taking responsibility for the choice & the outcome of it.
They can also of course be convinced by solutions offered by others, but they won't necessarily be convinced because it has been offered by others. At the end of the day they'll use what they believe offers them the best compromise irrespective of where the idea emanated.

We guys who have been practising, thinking and talking about different approaches for several decades can surely save students so much time by explaining the advantages of approaches which we have found to work well.

Does the way vonhosen describes it cost much time? I imagine the average IAM associate, for example, has not been practising, thinking and talking about different approaches for several decades - far from it. If you took vonhosen's approach to helping them with whatever it was they were trying to improve, would it take very long for them to exhaust options they can think of and request suggestions from you?

[vonhosen]

waremark said:

vonhosen said:

That's not what VH is saying.

You can offer options for them to try, after they have exhausted options they can think of & at their request. Of course your options carry no extra weight than theirs. The choice of which they try is theirs as is what they'll stick with in the end. The increased value is in them taking responsibility for the choice & the outcome of it.
They can also of course be convinced by solutions offered by others, but they won't necessarily be convinced because it has been offered by others. At the end of the day they'll use what they believe offers them the best compromise irrespective of where the idea emanated.

Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 9th February 21:07

We guys who have been practising, thinking and talking about different approaches for several decades can surely save students so much time by explaining the advantages of approaches which we have found to work well.

By the way, if you don't 'tell' your students to ignore the 'this is the way to do it' bits of Roadcraft, what do you say to them about how to use Roadcraft? Don't they still get examined on Roadcraft?

You are missing the importance of them learning to take responsibility for their choices & the consequences of them. Telling them undermines levels 3 & 4 & that's where the root cause of their collisions are, poor irresponsible choices. That's why work on levels 1 & 2 has to be done so that 3 & 4 are also explored/developed.