RE: Good driving's a matter of learning
Discussion
Ride Drive said:
True will always get the hardcore of people who refuse to make any advancement in their skills, and those who will just drive badly for ever, but these would be far outnumbered by those that would benefit. That being the case you could make a serious dent (pardon the pun) in the collision statistics.
I agree that training will still help, though I do feel that attitudes are changing towards driving. It's almost seen more and more as a given right to be able to drive, and that even if your not the best you still have that right.
Seeing more and more people being flippant with the responsibility that driving entails worries me... There is surely a widening gap of people who simply don't see driving as a task that needs to be completed well, but rather a task that just needs doing as part of daily life, and now and again a sloppy half arsed job is acceptable!
In a way, getting in a car and driving on the road is like taking the shotgun out of the cupboard to go blast some clay pigeons. Both instantly leathal, but perfectly safe in considerate hands! I think it's that realisation that is missing, and I'd hope training re-invigorated that point. Though ideally it should be obvious to anyone who took the original driving test and had a competent instructor!
Dave
flooritforever said:
So let me get this straight.
As far as I can see the basic gist of the article above is:
'Drivers who recieve extra training become better drivers for it.'
Really? Well knock me down with a feather!
I never would have guessed that was the case!
No, the point is that without coaching drivers don't get better and probably get worse.
Over time we all develop bad habits and start to get sloppy with our procedures, observation, control and perhaps get over confident, less considerate and overestimate our knowledge and the benefit of our 'experience' behind the wheel. I have sat other driving tests in the past few years (HGV Class 1, Bike, IAM) and have realised all of the above. The scariest was stepping astride a bike and heading into traffic among all of these 'experienced' drivers. Perhaps all drivers, or at least those disqualified looking to regain their license, should be made to sit the bike test to understand vulnerability in potential accident situations - a knock as light as a 'feather' could well knock you down!
Doesn't the British have something called Pass Plus, which includes motorway driving and other skills not covered in the normal driving test? Why don't the DSA make Pass Plus the standard driving test, rather than the lousy one they have now?
Even the QSAFE test (the standard practical driving test in Queensland, Australia) that I did seems more involved that the standard British driving test.
It might also be a good idea to divide the car licence into two categories according to power-to-weight ratios: the standard one for up to 200bhp/ton, and a high-performance licence for more than 200bhp/ton.
The high-performance licence could be similar to the standard of the Diamond Advanced test, but with added criteria of emergecy skills, such as emergency braking, brake-and-steer, and high-speed lane change. A test based on IAM or RoSPA criteria would be unnecessary and even considered too archaic by many drivers wishing to get the licence.
Even the QSAFE test (the standard practical driving test in Queensland, Australia) that I did seems more involved that the standard British driving test.
It might also be a good idea to divide the car licence into two categories according to power-to-weight ratios: the standard one for up to 200bhp/ton, and a high-performance licence for more than 200bhp/ton.
The high-performance licence could be similar to the standard of the Diamond Advanced test, but with added criteria of emergecy skills, such as emergency braking, brake-and-steer, and high-speed lane change. A test based on IAM or RoSPA criteria would be unnecessary and even considered too archaic by many drivers wishing to get the licence.
From my point of view more tests would be a bad thing, my brain cannot cope with any type of test situation, my mind goes blank and nerves take over, Hence why it took me five attempts to pass my driving test, over a year and a half (probably more of lessons) and it’s also the reason why I screwed up my A-Levels. With me, I needed experience not tests to build my confidence to the level I have today. I do agree with making the Pass Plus Mandatory though as some people, and coaching before people are allowed to drive cars such as TVR's Porsche’s etc, but to me having more tests and legislations would take the fun out of driving.
As for restricting people on what cars they can drive I believe this is also wrong to a certain point, I passed my test and bought a 1.6L Mondeo off my dad for £200 it set me on the right stead until I got my first proper car a 1.6L focus Zetec now two and a half years after passing my test I'm happily driving around in a Focus ST170. When I rang my insurance company up to insure this car, they said to me, that you have to be 21 to drive this car (A group 15 insurance) so anyone on my policy under that age would be excluded from driving it. So I guess that you are restricted anyway, and allot of insurance companies won't insure you on a group 20 high performance sports car until you are 25 anyway.
Matt
As for restricting people on what cars they can drive I believe this is also wrong to a certain point, I passed my test and bought a 1.6L Mondeo off my dad for £200 it set me on the right stead until I got my first proper car a 1.6L focus Zetec now two and a half years after passing my test I'm happily driving around in a Focus ST170. When I rang my insurance company up to insure this car, they said to me, that you have to be 21 to drive this car (A group 15 insurance) so anyone on my policy under that age would be excluded from driving it. So I guess that you are restricted anyway, and allot of insurance companies won't insure you on a group 20 high performance sports car until you are 25 anyway.
Matt
Jungles said:
Doesn't the British have something called Pass Plus, which includes motorway driving and other skills not covered in the normal driving test? Why don't the DSA make Pass Plus the standard driving test, rather than the lousy one they have now?
Pass Plus would be fine if the system was policed better. We are currently working with a local authority to help them do something about the appalling death and serious injury rate among young drivers. The council’s old system was to part-fund youngsters to do the Pass Plus scheme. What they discovered after some time was that the system was being abused. Instructors were telling these kids that they didn’t have to do the lesson just so long as they handed over their forms having signed them to say they had done it. That way the young driver saved his or her money from their part of the would-be payment and the instructor was then claiming the council grant money for doing nothing. What stinks even more is that insurance companies buy into this scheme and give discounts on insurance and yet by comparison to what else is available the input is quite poor.
So as to make a comparison, the council concerned put 3 youngsters, who had actually done their Pass Plus properly, through what we were offering and these kids were blown away. They were raving about it saying that by comparison the Pass Plus input was no more than an extension of a learner lesson, whereas the proper advanced skills they felt were more real life preparation that they could actually use to keep themselves safe..
I know this sounds like a trumpet blowing session, but you have to ask what does your average ADI learner driver instructor have in the way of driving skills? The majority have neither the training nor the background to know the first thing about anything beyond the learner teaching scenario, and that is not meant with any disrespect. What I am trying to say here is that Pass Plus could be a heck of a lot better and would stand a chance of actually making more of a difference if it was administered properly and by properly trained people. Give the job to the IAM, for example. They have Government funding, so build that organisation up with more people and who get paid for their work rather than having to do it voluntarily.
>> Edited by Ride Drive on Friday 24th March 08:43
Ride Drive said:
I know this sounds like a trumpet blowing session, but you have to ask what does your average ADI learner driver instructor have in the way of driving skills? The majority have neither the training nor the background to know the first thing about anything beyond the learner teaching scenario, and that is not meant with any disrespect.
Yet on another thread it was pointed out that the courts can only legally accept a qualified ADI as an expert in driving standards, whilst a force driving instructor cannot be so considered an expert, simply by virtue he/she doesn't have an ADI certificate as the law specifically says they do not have to have one in order to do their job.
That situation continues with the forthcoming Road Safety Bill.
Screwed up or what?
Ride Drive said:
I know this sounds like a trumpet blowing session, but you have to ask what does your average ADI learner driver instructor have in the way of driving skills? The majority have neither the training nor the background to know the first thing about anything beyond the learner teaching scenario, and that is not meant with any disrespect.
Having had to do the 'standard' ADI, I can only agree. Having had the advanced skills first and the ADI second made it easy to adapt to the slightly nonsensical system that the DSA employ as the 'correct method' for driving. Coming from that background you can see how Part II (the test of driving ability) is derived (or should that be bastardised?) from Roadcraft, but from the other direction you can't.
I had an underwriting director as a client who let me know in no uncertain terms how unsuccessful Pass Plus had been in lowering his claim rate - the insurance industry has lost faith in the system by now, but there is no decent replacement available. Proper advanced instructors are few and far between and there would never be enough to go around to do the extra training nationwide, and both IAM and RoADAR are staffed by volunteers (and when you consider some of the biggest groups only train around 150 people per year) and they couldn't manage a large influx without a dilution in the standard either. So we are left to rely on the ADI 'novice driver' trainers to provide remedial training.
I don't think there is a cure - at least not in the short term - you could throw a huge amount of money at the problem (aim it in my direction please) and there still wouldn't be the number of people required to give training everywhere to those who would want or need it.
carreraplanes said:
In addition all civil servants and transport ministers should also be made to pass an advanced course.
Many Road Safety Ministers in recent years under both Labour and Conservatives have passed their advanced (IAM) driving test. This has become something of a tradition. The current Road Safety Minister, Stephen Ladyman MP, hasn't done so yet. However, he had some coaching from his local IAM bike group when he returned to two wheels, as well as a day's advanced training from Drive & Survive before he was in Parliament. Not to mention his tuition from the Stig on Top Gear!
Even Margaret Thatcher passed her RoSPA advanced driving test some years ago.
However, it's the civil servants in the Department of Transport who are equally important. I've no idea how many, if any, civil servants have taken advanced training.
I've long espoused a five year retest to all those around me, and no-one's yet disagreed with the principle. Trouble is, we're all kind of preaching to the converted, aren't we?
I've yet to come across an insurer who is interested in any form of advanced training, and I don't think finance should be a barrier to implementation - surely the re-test fees would cover the cost? Even if it cost a couple of hundred quid to take, that's less than a tankful of fuel every year...
And an added bonus would be that there's bound to be more than a few drivers who would feel it's all too much trouble, so not bother. An instant reduction in congestion too!
I've yet to come across an insurer who is interested in any form of advanced training, and I don't think finance should be a barrier to implementation - surely the re-test fees would cover the cost? Even if it cost a couple of hundred quid to take, that's less than a tankful of fuel every year...
And an added bonus would be that there's bound to be more than a few drivers who would feel it's all too much trouble, so not bother. An instant reduction in congestion too!
It's quite hard for young drivers after their test to get more coaching. My 17yr old has done some IAM runs, but the timing on a sunday morning doesn't work and the experience was somewhat patchy. She was a member of the Under 17 Car Club for 3 years and the methods of coaching used there were much more encouraging than the IAM observers.
I'm going to get some paid for coaching for her over the coming months to keep her on her toes! [and me too come to that]
GRaham
I'm going to get some paid for coaching for her over the coming months to keep her on her toes! [and me too come to that]
GRaham
Ride Drive said:
Well, perhaps if anyone in any position of authority was actually genuinely interested...[edit], but they aren’t. I just wish for once we could get a meaningful dialogue going where ego’s, personal gain and politics were left outside the room and the work done was really about making things better – better in a positive way instead of all the negativity that does nothing but boil up resentment.
Sorry Mr Ride Drive, I couldn't help but edit your reasoned and totally common sense comment, but take out the 'in improving driver standards' bit, and you have the reason why this country is sliding swiftly down the toilet... no one in a position of so called authority cares about making genuine improvements, just getting that latest sound-bite on the news to make it look as though they're doing something. Sadly, ego's and personal gain seem to be what politics is all about nowadays.
I'll get off my
, sorry! BTW, this is the first thread I've seen where I totally agree with everyone (and everyone seems to agree with everyone else!
) - driving (or riding) properly is a skill, and needs to be taught as such. Being able to do a three-point-turn does not a driver make! gridgway said:
I'm going to get some paid for coaching for her over the coming months to keep her on her toes! [and me too come to that]
My local RoSPA (and IAM come to that) does associate runs at times to suit the candidates, it doesn't have to be Sunday mornings. Some are police officers and police instructors, cost is the price of entry to the local group, ie not much
Sorry to be an MR nerd but... Do we know how the research was done?
Did they compare drivers after courses with a random (or 'matched') sample of those who hadn't done a course?
If yes, the results may only show that people who care enough about driving to go on a course are generally better drivers. Only if you test them before and after (or have a sample who've done the course compared to a group who have signed up but haven't yet done it) can you be sure it's the course itself (rather than their attitude to driving per se) that had the effect !
Did they compare drivers after courses with a random (or 'matched') sample of those who hadn't done a course?
If yes, the results may only show that people who care enough about driving to go on a course are generally better drivers. Only if you test them before and after (or have a sample who've done the course compared to a group who have signed up but haven't yet done it) can you be sure it's the course itself (rather than their attitude to driving per se) that had the effect !
Hi Liner,
I suspect that the IAM course improves both skill and attitude. My own experience of coaching advanced driving was that both improved substantially through the right coaching. Indeed, I can well imagine that the change in attitude makes more of a difference than the improved skill levels.
You make a very good point about comparing like with like in this sort of study. Professional researchers, such as the Transport Research Lab, would take great care to minimise confounding factors. It was the TRL who undertook the first study to show the improvements made by advanced training, demonstrating the oft-quoted 50-75% accident reduction in advanced drivers.
Cheers
I suspect that the IAM course improves both skill and attitude. My own experience of coaching advanced driving was that both improved substantially through the right coaching. Indeed, I can well imagine that the change in attitude makes more of a difference than the improved skill levels.
You make a very good point about comparing like with like in this sort of study. Professional researchers, such as the Transport Research Lab, would take great care to minimise confounding factors. It was the TRL who undertook the first study to show the improvements made by advanced training, demonstrating the oft-quoted 50-75% accident reduction in advanced drivers.
Cheers
Flat in Fifth said:
I still favour the carrot over stick approach.
Rather than getting points for being naughty you get additional points for being good, accident and claim free, advanced training and so on. Lose the points for transgressions.
What do points make?
Well not exactly prizes but certain privileges as in entitlement to drive higher powered vehicles being just one example. What else? Badges? :cringe:
The British being the anally retentive "one up on the Joneses" nation that we are it might make more people enter into learning a life skill that truly is a life skill.
Might also get rid of the cardigan and slippers image too.
Preach it, brother!
CommanderJameson said:
I've promulgated the idea of "experience points" for drivers before, but I can't find my original post, so here it is again:
Cars are divided by some metric into categories. For example, a 1L Punto is a category 1 car, and anyone can drive that. A 2L Mondeo is a category 2 car, and you need 5 XP. A 3.2L BMW M3 is a category 3 car, and you need 20 XP to drive that. A 360 Modena is a category 4 car, and you need 30 XP for that.
You get XP by doing good things, like not crashing or being nicked. So for every uneventful year of driving, you get (say) 1 XP. You can add to your XP by doing advanced driving courses - say for 10 XP at a time. New drivers could gain, say, 3 or 4 XP by doing Pass Plus.
If you're at-fault in an insurance claim, or get points on your licence, you lose some XP. This may mean you are no longer entitled to drive your current car, and have to downgrade. If you're really unlucky, you might have to swap the TVR for a Saxo, but them's the breaks. Stop crashing!
Insurance companies could do an enormous amount to help, too, by giving discounts related directly to XP. So if you've been driving for 30 years and have done some advanced driving courses, you might have 50XP and therefore be regarded as a much better risk on the basis of your actual driving record, rather than on the demographic you belong to.
This way, there's actually a positive reward for good driving - it will save you money, and people who drive badly will pay more.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff