IAM Experiences/What put me/you off?
Discussion
The July issue of Ride magazine shows the impact of first class instruction. Reporting on BikeSafe in its news section, the headline is: "Safety shouldn't be this much fun". Hard to imagine a similar headline in Auto Express about an IAM day, but that's what's needed.
When the instruction is so good, word of mouth builds popularity over time. This year, more than 3,500 riders went to the national BikeSafe day in April. That's a lot of people engaged with advanced riding in just one day! Not to mention that it generated two pages of positive press in one of the larger bike magazines, which will drive participation in local BikeSafe days. That's a helluva virtuous circle, with good quality training as its foundation.
When the instruction is so good, word of mouth builds popularity over time. This year, more than 3,500 riders went to the national BikeSafe day in April. That's a lot of people engaged with advanced riding in just one day! Not to mention that it generated two pages of positive press in one of the larger bike magazines, which will drive participation in local BikeSafe days. That's a helluva virtuous circle, with good quality training as its foundation.
Edited by SVS on Thursday 23 May 21:21
SVS said:
The July issue of Ride magazine shows the impact of first class instruction. Reporting on BikeSafe in its news section, the headline is: "Safety shouldn't be this much fun". Hard to imagine a similar headline in Auto Express about an IAM day, but that's what's needed.
When the instruction is so good, word of mouth builds popularity over time. This year, more than 3,500 riders went to the national BikeSafe day in April. That's a lot of people engaged with advanced riding in just one day! Not to mention that it generated two pages of positive press in one of the larger bike magazines, which will drive participation in local BikeSafe days. That's a helluva virtuous circle, with good quality training as its foundation.
That might be because they are enthusiasts rather than instructors When the instruction is so good, word of mouth builds popularity over time. This year, more than 3,500 riders went to the national BikeSafe day in April. That's a lot of people engaged with advanced riding in just one day! Not to mention that it generated two pages of positive press in one of the larger bike magazines, which will drive participation in local BikeSafe days. That's a helluva virtuous circle, with good quality training as its foundation.
MC Bodge said:
I know, hence my suggestion the other day, and tonight, that a positive, "Car-Safe", defensive driving course, with no Advanced/superior/driving gloves-and-slacks connotations, with helpful tips about awareness, but without any dogma about brake-gear separation and the like, might be a good idea.
It could be run by the Police, or others.
Northamptonshire police used to do a scheme aimed at under 25s call Car Craft (or possibly Car Kraft?), it was a driving assessment by a traffic officer, then free training with IAM. I did the driving assessment, but wasn't able to do the IAM training due to working on Sundays, which was what the local group offered. The research I did into the IAM back then (speaking to a few members etc) really put me off as I got the district impression it wasn't for sports car drivers in their twenties.It could be run by the Police, or others.
I've only started looking at it again a I've heard the instruction on the Fast Track course is likely to be better than RideDrive.
vonhosen said:
johnao said:
vonhosen said:
I disagree, I believe the vast majority would admit there is room for improvement in their driving. Few would say that their driving is perfect.
Von, you have again avoided answering the actual question by answering a similar, but unrelated, question that was never asked.As you know, when I posted...
"... I think you would have difficulty in asserting that the first three items above do not apply to the vast majority of the 35 million UK licence holders."
Would you have difficulty, or not?
... I was referring to the undermentioned three items in the context of advanced driver training...
1. the person is not aware of the existence or relevance of the skill area.
1. I contend they are aware that skill sets exist outside their performance envelope.
2. the person is not aware that they have a particular deficiency in the area concerned.
2. I contend they are aware as they are aware there are skill sets outside their performance envelope.
3. the person might deny the relevance or usefulness of the new skill.
3. I contend they don't consider it a priority for them, which isn't indicative that they might not find it ultimately useful, it's just they consider other things of greater importance in their lives & therefore of greater benefit.
In many academic studies with regard to driver attitude it has been found that 80% or more of participants evaluate themselves as being above the average driver. Many would regard this outcome as indicative that most drivers can be regarded as falling into these three descriptive categories.
Considering yourself above average (accurately or not) doesn't equate with viewing there is no developmental potential for you.
As an aside, you know full well that you have deliberately and mischievously taken my use of the word "incompetent" completely out of context for reasons of your own personal agenda. Stop it! you're being a very, very naughty boy.
Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 23 May 19:26
Edited by johnao on Friday 24th May 00:47
johnao said:
vonhosen said:
johnao said:
vonhosen said:
I disagree, I believe the vast majority would admit there is room for improvement in their driving. Few would say that their driving is perfect.
Von, you have again avoided answering the actual question by answering a similar, but unrelated, question that was never asked.As you know, when I posted...
"... I think you would have difficulty in asserting that the first three items above do not apply to the vast majority of the 35 million UK licence holders."
Would you have difficulty, or not?
... I was referring to the undermentioned three items in the context of advanced driver training...
1. the person is not aware of the existence or relevance of the skill area.
1. I contend they are aware that skill sets exist outside their performance envelope.
2. the person is not aware that they have a particular deficiency in the area concerned.
2. I contend they are aware as they are aware there are skill sets outside their performance envelope.
3. the person might deny the relevance or usefulness of the new skill.
3. I contend they don't consider it a priority for them, which isn't indicative that they might not find it ultimately useful, it's just they consider other things of greater importance in their lives & therefore of greater benefit.
In many academic studies with regard to driver attitude it has been found that 80% or more of participants evaluate themselves as being above the average driver. Many would regard this outcome as indicative that most drivers can be regarded as falling into these three descriptive categories.
Considering yourself above average (accurately or not) doesn't equate with viewing there is no developmental potential for you.
As an aside, you know full well that you have deliberately and mischievously taken my use of the word "incompetent" completely out of context for reasons of your own personal agenda. Stop it! you're being a very, very naughty boy.
Advanced driving is much broader & is not some dark art, it is just extending (or doing better at) what you've been doing from the start of your time driving.
'Why would anyone want to do that' has been the point. That is not a surprise with the image (word of mouth) of the IAM.
The more (unnecessarily & irrelevantly) narrow you make it, the more unattractive it is.
Not liking the image of, or not being aware of the IAM does not mean people are not aware that there is scope to extend, or do better with, their driving.
Edited by vonhosen on Friday 24th May 06:59
I'm all in favour of it, even in it's current form it would benefit a lot of drivers. When I mentioned the word 'professional' I meant that a 'professional volunteer' could at least not have broken rims and tyres that would fail an MoT. It was well worth doing. It's not something that will ever be a 'catch all' for drivers. I personally feel that the IAM or whatever should be compulsory say every 5 years. I would not wish it to be used as a punishment for errant drivers either. What political party in their right mind would introduce compulsory driver further training?
The IAM and RoADAR are good news by default, because they're there. The Roadcraft system I find excellent, for me.
It's strange how a certain type will want to go on learning and improving at driving, in the same way as a sport or similar activity, where to another type driving is a ball-ache, a bitter twisted rage of an experience on the 15 minute drive to work. How many otherwise law-abiding citizens come close to committing suicide or close to eliminating someone? On a daily basis? Just because they got into the car.
So I'm all for it, sometimes though it could do with a bit of improvement with it's image.
The IAM and RoADAR are good news by default, because they're there. The Roadcraft system I find excellent, for me.
It's strange how a certain type will want to go on learning and improving at driving, in the same way as a sport or similar activity, where to another type driving is a ball-ache, a bitter twisted rage of an experience on the 15 minute drive to work. How many otherwise law-abiding citizens come close to committing suicide or close to eliminating someone? On a daily basis? Just because they got into the car.
So I'm all for it, sometimes though it could do with a bit of improvement with it's image.
vonhosen said:
The IAM does not own advanced driving, it is merely a sub set of it.
Advanced driving is much broader & is not some dark art, it is just extending (or doing better at) what you've been doing from the start of your time driving.
'Why would anyone want to do that' has been the point. That is not a surprise with the image (word of mouth) of the IAM.
The more (unnecessarily & irrelevantly) narrow you make it, the more unattractive it is.
Not liking the image of, or not being aware of the IAM does not mean people are not aware that there is scope to extend, or do better with, their driving.
I said... drivers who have never heard of the IAM and who say things to me like... advanced driving? Why would anyone want to do that?Advanced driving is much broader & is not some dark art, it is just extending (or doing better at) what you've been doing from the start of your time driving.
'Why would anyone want to do that' has been the point. That is not a surprise with the image (word of mouth) of the IAM.
The more (unnecessarily & irrelevantly) narrow you make it, the more unattractive it is.
Not liking the image of, or not being aware of the IAM does not mean people are not aware that there is scope to extend, or do better with, their driving.
Edited by vonhosen on Friday 24th May 06:59
Can't imagine why you always bring the argument back round to the IAM? I'm not writing about what the IAM does or doesn't do, I'm writing about about the seemingly impossible task of persuading the vast majority of the 35 million licence holders, only a fraction of whom have ever heard of the IAM, to improve the standard of their driving. I doubt that even you would argue that 34,900,000 licence holders have been deterred from further driver training because of the IAM's poor image!
johnao said:
vonhosen said:
The IAM does not own advanced driving, it is merely a sub set of it.
Advanced driving is much broader & is not some dark art, it is just extending (or doing better at) what you've been doing from the start of your time driving.
'Why would anyone want to do that' has been the point. That is not a surprise with the image (word of mouth) of the IAM.
The more (unnecessarily & irrelevantly) narrow you make it, the more unattractive it is.
Not liking the image of, or not being aware of the IAM does not mean people are not aware that there is scope to extend, or do better with, their driving.
I said... drivers who have never heard of the IAM and who say things to me like... advanced driving? Why would anyone want to do that?Advanced driving is much broader & is not some dark art, it is just extending (or doing better at) what you've been doing from the start of your time driving.
'Why would anyone want to do that' has been the point. That is not a surprise with the image (word of mouth) of the IAM.
The more (unnecessarily & irrelevantly) narrow you make it, the more unattractive it is.
Not liking the image of, or not being aware of the IAM does not mean people are not aware that there is scope to extend, or do better with, their driving.
Can't imagine why you always bring the argument back round to the IAM? I'm not writing about what the IAM does or doesn't do, I'm writing about about the seemingly impossible task of persuading the vast majority of the 35 million licence holders, only a fraction of whom have ever heard of the IAM, to improve the standard of their driving. I doubt that even you would argue that 34,900,000 licence holders have been deterred from further driver training because of the IAM's poor image!
johnao said:
Can't imagine why you always bring the argument back round to the IAM?
Really?Back on topic, look at the thread title.
Edited by vonhosen on Friday 24th May 17:29
MC Bodge said:
I know, hence my suggestion the other day, and tonight, that a positive, "Car-Safe", defensive driving course, with no Advanced/superior/driving gloves-and-slacks connotations, with helpful tips about awareness, but without any dogma about brake-gear separation and the like, might be a good idea.
It could be run by the Police, or others.
Advanced is a relative term, the test is advanced compared to the DSA test, so it's reasonable to call it that, and the institute takes it's name from the test.It could be run by the Police, or others.
As for 'driving gloves and slacks', WTF?
Dr Jekyll said:
As for 'driving gloves and slacks', WTF?
The stereotypical IAM driver, for some reason, is an old man with a flat cap who puts his driving gloves on for his fairly beige car, with an adenoidal kind of voice.I decided to do the IAM course mainly because I figured that, while I'm not a total pillock, there might be some extra tips to make me less likely to end up with the car in a hedge or ditch. So far, so good.
The local IAM group posts me stuff every few months detailing previous quarter's meetings and stuff and a joke page torn straight from emails with "FWD: fwd: FWD: FWD: RE: Ha ha" as the topic. I might go to a meeting one day just to see if they're as boring as their quarterly makes 'em out to be.
R0G said:
In the last few years the IAM has been erring towards the DSA way of doing things at HQ which could be giving off the wrong vibes
Many have said that losing the word institute and keeping to the core of driver improvement would be better
Driver improvement for the mass audience would be more beneficial overall, but that would surely require more resources than the IAM could muster; and I don't see the government being interested in tackling the task of improving road safety in that way. Their (dismal) approach seems to be confined to introducing more rules for road users to fall foul of, and devising new ways of catching people when they break those rules.Many have said that losing the word institute and keeping to the core of driver improvement would be better
Best wishes all,
TripleS.
wst said:
Dr Jekyll said:
As for 'driving gloves and slacks', WTF?
The stereotypical IAM driver, for some reason, is an old man with a flat cap who puts his driving gloves on for his fairly beige car, with an adenoidal kind of voice.wst said:
I decided to do the IAM course mainly because I figured that, while I'm not a total pillock, there might be some extra tips to make me less likely to end up with the car in a hedge or ditch. So far, so good.
Again, exactly. A lot of people might learn something from it. As I pointed out earlier, it's good to have somebody observe and eventually assess your driving, even if you are aware of, and already try to implement, much of the content of Roadcraft and other driving books.Edited by MC Bodge on Saturday 25th May 08:12
MC Bodge said:
As I pointed out earlier, it's good to have somebody observe and eventually assess your driving, even if you are aware of, and already try to implement, much of the content of Roadcraft and other driving books.
Yes, observe and eventually assess your driving, when they've given themselves a chance to properly evaluate what it really amounts to, taking account of whatever good qualities there may be, and not merely criticising on the basis that things are not being done the IAM way.Best wishes all,
TripleS.
Hi Triple S,
In fairness, most good IAM Observers would do this. IAM Skills for Life courses should start with an evaluation of what people are already doing well. The issue is variability of Observer quality: many are good, but there's a minority who aren't. The IAM uses volunteer Observers for its Skills for Life programme: it's cheaper, but you get what you pay for.
This is where IAM Fast Track and Ride Drive are much better: the instructors are generally excellent, because they are professional (with police Class 1 or fleet trainer qualifications). Well worth the money!
In fairness, most good IAM Observers would do this. IAM Skills for Life courses should start with an evaluation of what people are already doing well. The issue is variability of Observer quality: many are good, but there's a minority who aren't. The IAM uses volunteer Observers for its Skills for Life programme: it's cheaper, but you get what you pay for.
This is where IAM Fast Track and Ride Drive are much better: the instructors are generally excellent, because they are professional (with police Class 1 or fleet trainer qualifications). Well worth the money!Edited by SVS on Saturday 25th May 07:13
wst said:
I might go to a meeting one day just to see if they're as boring as their quarterly makes 'em out to be.
It's probably useful to think of IAM (and RoADAR) local groups as serving two purposes with two distinct audiences.The first is the obvious one of helping people to improve their driving using the Roadcraft book as a basis.
The second is essentially a team building exercise for people who have passed the particular advanced driving test and who then have the time and desire to help others do the same. The chances are quite high that many who disdain local meetings as boring, (as do I), have not got to know others in the group.
The meetings are almost certainly less boring when it is an opportunity to meet up with people who over time have become friends, where the friendship is based on the common interest of first having made some attempt to be a better driver and then having the desire to help others with the same goal.
SVS said:
Hey guys, I'm starting to get a nagging feeling that you're not going to live together happily ever after How about a truce?
How about a truce?johnao said:
I love you.
vonhosen said:
I love you too.
Of course we can still love each other
. Our disagreements haven't gone thus far, yet...“My only love sprung from my only hate!
Too early seen unknown, and known too late!
Prodigious birth of love it is to me,
That I must love a loathed enemy.”
― William Shakespeare, Romeo and juliet
“And yet, to say the truth, reason and love keep little company together nowadays .”
― William Shakespeare, A Midsummer Night's Dream
What I don't understand is that having experience of the under 17 car club which has very similar aims to IAM albeit from a quite different starting point (13 years olds that can't yet drive). Both populated with volunteers, the experiences and image seem very different indeed.
Why should that be?
Bert
Why should that be?
Bert
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff