If the DVSA want more professional ADIs, they need to give us the log books, allow us on motorways, ensure everyone does CPD.
I was recently told by an examiner about a test candidate who, at the end of their test, was asked to complete a reverse bay park in the test centre car park. The candidates’ reaction to the request was odd as he looked taken aback. In practice he could not complete the manoeuvre and failed the test for that alone.
It turned out that the ADI had not taught that manoeuvre as he always took candidates to another test centre that did not have a car park, and he did not know the centre he used for this test had a car park until he arrived.
The examiner said to me: “A classic example of an ADI just teaching their pupils to pass the test and not preparing them for real-life driving not a good advert for the profession!”
Every examiner that I have known could have/would have written that sentence and I think all of them believe it. However, it is in my view, a most unfair declaration. If you can just bear with me for a moment while I fetch my soapbox… and climb on…
If examiners, the DVSA and the Government feel the driving test does not prepare those who pass for the real world of driving, change it so that it does. I know the latest driving test trial seeks to do some of that but I would suggest that to be complete it also needs to include: Use of fuel pumps; fast food drive-thru; national speed limit single and dual carriageway roads; city centres; rural environment; multistorey car parks; that awkward little one-way system just off the High Street; motorways; tunnels; level crossings; fords; sharing the road with trams; sharing the car with friends; sharing the car with hip-hop funk at 90 dB, etc.
If that is impractical then the regulator needs to introduce a compulsory syllabus with the demand that all those items should be covered pre-test.
We could call this record of achievement a Log Book – some of you may remember that idea was carefully researched about 15 years ago and agreed as a great idea by most – but that never materialised.
I would suggest that teaching people to pass the driving test is a great advert for the profession. Least ways as far as the public are concerned. The fact is most professionals are judged by results. People don’t say: “He was a great lawyer, really helped me to understand the law appertaining to my litigation and I think represented me really well.
“Unfortunately, I lost the case.”
Or, “My maths teacher was brilliant, really covered the GCSE syllabus well, gave us loads of extra homework and taught us extra stuff not covered in the exam.
“Unfortunately I got an F.”
And they certainly won’t say: “My driving instructor was fantastic; he sold me loads of extra lessons to cover things that are not in the driving test. He taught me how to fill the car up, how to drive through KFC without hitting the posts, we went all round the city centre and out in the country. He made me drive with the radio on and took me in a multi-storey car park for the extra experience.
“Unfortunately, I have just failed my second test.”
People do say: “I won the case, my lawyer was the best;” or “I got an A* in my maths GCSE, my teacher was brilliant,” and definitely “I passed my driving test first time. I recommend the instructor who taught me.”
I think it is really unfair to suggest that a driving instructor who teaches people the skills to pass a driving test is not professional. It is perfectly fair to suggest that in an ideal world they should do a bit more but in most cases the cost restraints of the customer make that increasingly difficult.
Of course, when we have compulsory CPD we can perhaps cover that in the continuing training for ADIs. When is that happening? I was there when the professional civil servant Rosemary Thew, then CEO of DSA, said in 2007 “The DSA is committed to overseeing the introduction of mandatory CPD for driver trainers.”
Of course, allowing learners on motorways will make it easier for ADIs to cover that subject introduction of that must be due soon.
I was there in 2011 when professional politician Mike Penning MP, the then Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Transport, said it would be possible for learner drivers to undergo some training on a motorway, accompanied by a qualified driving instructor, within the next 12 months.
We’re still waiting on this one, too.
That’s enough from me: I am just putting my soap box away – for now.
These words first published in MSA Newslink September 2015
Don’t Blame the ADI’s
I have to disagree with you so if I can borrow the soapbox for a moment… I think a lot of the blame for poor driving does indeed lie with ADI’s and the sooner we take responsibility for it, the better.
“If examiners, the DVSA and the Government feel the driving test does not prepare those who pass for the real world of driving, change it so that it does.”
It is not the responsibility of these to prepare candidates for the real world of driving; it is simply their responsibility to check that they are. I would argue that it is the responsibility of the ADI to do the preparation. Of course this excludes candidates who have never had a lesson from a professional but that is a whole other discussion.
“Use of fuel pumps; fast food drive-thru; national speed limit single and dual carriageway roads; city centres; rural environment; multistorey car parks; that awkward little one-way system just off the High Street; motorways; tunnels; level crossings; fords; sharing the road with trams; sharing the car with friends; sharing the car with hip-hop funk at 90 dB, etc.”
This list, which I understand is by no means exhaustive, covers some absolute essentials but others are questionable. No-one has ever been killed by a drive-thru. The reason we teach manoeuvres is so that pupils learn to put the car where they want in an efficient and safe manner. If they are taught this skill properly, they will be able to negotiate a drive-thru without causing havoc; they do not need me as a professional to teach them that as a specific skill. Likewise, with some of the other items you have listed, if the pupil has been taught to a high level of skill they will be able to read the road and understand the intricacies of many of the items you mention. For example, level crossings. If the pupil is used to looking at what is ahead and evaluating it, they will have an appropriate approach speed, they will ensure that the crossing is kept clear and if they understand that an amber light means stop, they won’t try to jump it. It should not need specific instruction on the dangers of level crossings to provide them with the skills they require.
Conversely, some of the things you mention are absolutely essential, such as motorways (a ridiculous omission currently), NSL single and dual carriageways, rural roads and in-car distractions but any good ADI will be doing these anyway because rather than preparing a test candidate they understand they are preparing a real world driver.
If the Government want to change the test to make it more realistic then how about doing a parallel park in a busy high street in a small gap between two parked cars rather than in a relatively quiet side street alongside a single car. Have I ever seen a learner trying to park outside the local high street McDonald’s? No. Have I ever seen a learner trying to park between two cars? Rarely. Drive around any local housing estate and you will see a lot of cars whose owners clearly can’t park properly. Is this because they weren’t taught at all or because they weren’t taught to do it when it really matters? It is also interesting how many people seem to think that doing a turn in the road is absolutely fine wherever you happen to be, busy road, just round a bend, right next to a junction. Have they been taught how to do it or have they been taught to do it properly?
“Of course, when we have compulsory CPD we can perhaps cover that in the continuing training for ADIs. When is that happening? I was there when the professional civil servant Rosemary Thew, then CEO of DSA, said in 2007 “The DSA is committed to overseeing the introduction of mandatory CPD for driver trainers.””
I’m a relatively young ADI, only qualifying in 2009 and I have been independent ever since. I have not had the benefit of on-hand advice from senior instructors. However, I constantly review what I do, take advice when I can (assuming I can find it of course) and try to improve. Most drivers I know of my age drive really well because they were taught well. I don’t know what CPD was in place in the late 70’s but I suspect there is vastly more now than there was then. If driver trainers back then taught people well why is there this relentless drive now to improve the quality of driver training? If standards have slipped that much I suspect it is simply in line with the rest of the education sector where the method is tested and evaluated on an ongoing basis and the trainers are trained more but the end product simply doesn’t get any better.
CPD does not make better drivers; ADI’s doing their job with diligence, care and uncompromising professionalism does. The answer may lie in CPD but it may not and we are kidding ourselves if we believe that CPD alone is going to fix the problem. The responsibility for safe drivers lies first and foremost with ADI’s who are in the best place to train people properly. If that doesn’t happen, then most certainly, the blame lies squarely with the ADI.