ADI - Diary Of An ADI

New Drivers and Texting–They Just Don’t Get It

31/01/2012

I was driving down Ruddington Lane in Nottingham. Just outside the old Becket school (currently being demolished because the school has moved) there is a chicane and speed bumps. We can only guess at whether the chicane/humps will be removed now they’re no longer needed.

I was on the side where you give way to oncoming traffic. Coming the other way – way beyond the last hump on that side (70m down the road if you measure it on Google Maps) – there was a car. On my side, a blue Corsa (reg. R493 OAU) had already stopped while I was 10-20 car lengths away from it. It could easily have gone (so much so, that it SHOULD have gone), but at this stage it was just “tut-tut-tut” and shaking your head territory.

When I pulled up behind I noticed it was occupied by two young girls. They were having a great old time – the driver was obviously texting and discussing the text with her passenger. She wasn’t aware of me behind – and she certainly didn’t see the other car flash its lights at her to go while it was STILL on the other side of that final speed bump.

The Corsa driver was of the ink-still-wet-on-licence age. Either she or her passenger live off that road, and one would hope neither of the pair’s parents condone this sort of behaviour – being significantly responsible for it in the first place.

The Corsa driver had stopped in the middle of the road predominantly to text. It was her only interest at that point. She was not aware of anything happening around her. And it is a precise illustration of what is wrong with many young drivers today, and shows why they have more fatal accidents than older drivers.

The insurance companies talk of “black box” supervision to get premiums down. Would it pick up this sort of attitude to driving? Absolutely not, and yet it is the biggest danger on our roads today.

Women Park Better?

31/01/2012

DOAADI

ADI, News

As recently as September last year, they were reporting how women were not better at parking than men. Official data suggested that women were 7% less likely to pass their driving tests than men, and that parking appeared to be a major issue.

But you can forget all that, as that well-known source of factual information – NCP carparks – provides ~~definitive evidence to the contrary~~ (dead link). Of course, perhaps we shouldn’t ask how they can afford to commission such pointless studies, whilst charging exorbitant fees for their services.

NCP’s “study” (and they’re calling it “research” again) was “designed” by a driving instructor, Neil Beeson – is there no limit to our skills? – who already had an agenda, it would seem, when he said:

The results also appear to dispel the myth that men have better spatial awareness than women.

It isn’t a myth, Neil. At best, the source of the problem is not agreed, but there is a lot of circumstantial evidence that spatial awareness is better in men than in women. Driving instructors should be working around such problems and dealing with them – not trying to deny that they exist. To quote Wikipedia:

Men on average have a standard deviation higher spatial intelligence quotient than women. This domain is one of the few where clear sex differences in cognition appear.

Beeson also says:

I was quite surprised by the results, because in my experience men have always been the best learners and usually performed better in lessons.

I can assure you that MY experience is the exact opposite. Female learners have by far the better attitude (and personal hygiene) than male pupils towards lessons. My fastest ever learner was an 18-year old female, and my slowest a 21-year old male. If someone is obviously going to drive too fast and buy a Corsa or Audi once they pass, it is nearly always the male pupils.

But putting all that to one side, I would NEVER suggest that all women and all men conform to my own experiences on this – especially those I’ve never met, several hundred miles away, and being taught by other instructors! And I would NEVER try to create a scoring system which tried to do so, because it simply wouldn’t work.

I can think I know all there is to know about one sex, one culture, and so on… and the next pupil I get from one of those groups proves me totally wrong.

The story doesn’t go into details of how the scoring system was developed, or how subjective it was in use. One telling comment is that men…

…took an average of 16 seconds to park, compared to 21 seconds for women – and they were happier with the result, spending less time repositioning the car.

But women were quicker at finding a spot, a result attributed to the fact that men often missed spaces by driving through car parks too fast, and more of them chose to reverse in, the method preferred by instructors.

If that’s a fair summary of the results, it’s hard to see how the conclusion that women came out of it better can be drawn with any degree of certainty.

Successful parking is about getting in and getting out, and not inconveniencing others. Unsuccessful parking is about not being able to get in and get out, and getting in other peoples way. Reverse parking (as opposed to forward parking) is irrelevant. The “study” appears not to have considered these things at all.

If instructors want to do this sort of thing, then fine. But to proffer it as “research” – or in any way definitive – is wholly wrong.

Northern Ireland Black Box Scheme

31/01/2012

DOAADI

ADI, Bad Drivers, News

The Co-op launched its “black box” scheme in the UK mainland almost a year ago. A week later, Scotland was confusing the issue with ifs and buts about its own teenage crisis.

This story just came through on the news feeds. Northern Ireland is now considering black box technology to try to curb its own problems. Apparently, insurance in NI can be up to 70% higher than in the UK – which I’m sure is a meaningless statistic, since I doubt that this refers to the difference between the highest quotes in the UK and the lowest in NI (more likely, the lowest UK quote and the highest NI one).

What gets me about all these “initiatives” is that the stated target is to reduce insurance premiums.

What then happens is that once the insurance has been brought down, the little morons switch insurers (one without a black box requirement), and start driving like complete prats again.

Just like Pass Plus – when it still brought insurance down – people were doing it ONLY to get the insurance benefits. After that, they just drove like they would have done without having done the course at all. You even had “fit and proper” instructors signing it off without doing the driving, and even now you see instructors (and recently passed drivers) boasting that they “didn’t need to do much for Pass Plus because they’d already done it on their driving lessons”.

The Pass Plus syllabus is quite clear: it is additional training. Driving lesson experience cannot be included on it.

It’s also strange that NI is only “considering” doing it – and a year after everyone else. And that’s in spite of no legislation being needed to implement it.

It isn’t just the bad drivers who have got hold of the wrong end of the stick.

Instructor Guilty Of Sexual Abuse

31/01/2012

DOAADI

ADI, News

This is an old story, However, it had a run of hits in 2017. DSA is now DVSA, of course. Note that links originally referred to are now dead and have been removed.

I noticed last week that on one forum posters were beside themselves over the case of a driving instructor who had raped a girl 25 years ago and only recently been brought to justice through DNA evidence. Not that it matters, he wasn’t an ADI at the time of the offence, and he has been rightly punished. However, it seems that the man was known personally to some of the correspondents and they are therefore connecting it with being an ADI.

This story is far more current, and relates to someone who was an instructor at the time of his crimes – in fact, using his position as an independent ADI as a staging post for his crimes.

Thomas Cook, 59, has been found guilty of sexual assault on two women aged 20 and 17. Both were his pupils at the time of the incidents.

Investigating officer Det Con Darren Street, of Milton Keynes CID, said: “Cook acted in a predatory fashion and targeted young women he was teaching to drive for his own gratification.”

I would hope that it goes without saying that Cook will no longer be deemed “fit and proper” to practice as an ADI by the DSA.

I’ve not seen any comments from other instructors on this story. Undoubtedly, if they latch on to it, it will be another slight on the “profession” – that’s the usual way of showing their anger. However, in my opinion, I think the public are used to seeing scumbags like Cook from all walks of life, and they’re not going to single out driving instructors just because of this case and stop taking lessons as a result.

We can wring our hands and demand that things like this must “never happen again” all we want. The unfortunate thing is, they WILL happen again, because the world has more than its fair share of scumbags like Cook.

Train-As-You-Scrounge

31/01/2012

DOAADI

ADI, News

This is a new one – or it would be, if you were likely to get away with it.

Reginald Garden was “off sick” from work with a “bad back” for 7 months. He used the sick period to train as a driving instructor. His company sacked him two weeks after he qualified as an ADI.

Garden was originally paid £8,000 for unfair dismissal, but that has been overturned on appeal. The appeals Judge said that Garden had “lied to his employers… and continued to take lessons even after being warned.”

Garden just wants to “move on” from the ruling.

Two things pass through my mind. The first is how someone so “ill” they couldn’t work could manage to complete the necessary ADI training. Sitting in a car is absolutely one of the worst things for a “bad back”, so it raises obvious question about the genuineness of the original reason for being off sick.

The second thing is one of the criteria for becoming an instructor (and remaining one). Being a “fit and proper” person, and all that.

I always assumed that lies and dishonesty would be included in that.

Bad Weather Driving

29/01/2012

DOAADI

ADI, DSA, General, News

The DSA has sent out reminders to people affected by bad weather about how to prepare for any journey they might need to make. I’m copying the whole text here, because it is certainly timely advice.

Highway Code reminder: icy and snowy weather

Highway Code rule 228

In winter check the local weather forecast for warnings of icy or snowy weather. DO NOT drive in these conditions unless your journey is essential. If it is, take great care and allow more time for your journey. Take an emergency kit of de-icer and ice scraper, torch, warm clothing and boots, first aid kit, jump leads and a shovel, together with a warm drink and emergency food in case you get stuck or your vehicle breaks down.

Highway Code rule 229

Before you set off

you MUST be able to see, so clear all snow and ice from all your windows
you MUST ensure that lights are clean and number plates are clearly visible and legible
make sure the mirrors are clear and the windows are demisted thoroughly
remove all snow that might fall off into the path of other road users
check your planned route is clear of delays and that no further snowfalls or severe weather are predicted

[Laws CUR reg 30, RVLR reg 23, VERA sect 43 & RV(DRM)R reg 11]

Highway Code rule 230

When driving in icy or snowy weather

drive with care, even if the roads have been treated
keep well back from the road user in front as stopping distances can be ten times greater than on dry roads
take care when overtaking vehicles spreading salt or other de-icer, particularly if you are riding a motorcycle or cycle
watch out for snowploughs which may throw out snow on either side. Do not overtake them unless the lane you intend to use has been cleared
be prepared for the road conditions to change over relatively short distances
listen to travel bulletins and take note of variable message signs that may provide information about weather, road and traffic conditions ahead

Highway Code rule 231

Drive extremely carefully when the roads are icy. Avoid sudden actions as these could cause loss of control. You should

drive at a slow speed in as high a gear as possible; accelerate and brake very gently
drive particularly slowly on bends where loss of control is more likely. Brake progressively on the straight before you reach a bend. Having slowed down, steer smoothly round the bend, avoiding sudden actions
check your grip on the road surface when there is snow or ice by choosing a safe place to brake gently. If the steering feels unresponsive this may indicate ice and your vehicle losing its grip on the road. When travelling on ice, tyres make virtually no noise

A Circular Argument

28/01/2012

DOAADI

ADI, Bad Drivers, General

I saw a story in the newsfeeds today which raises a lot of questions, but provides no real answers. It concerns the death of a young boy, knocked down by a delivery driver who was speeding.

I’m not going to link to the story, because what I’m going to say is in no way intended to apply to just this case – and it will be taken the wrong way by anyone involved with the specific story involved.

The driver was driving at least 20mph over the speed limit and, according to experts, he would have stopped many feet short of the child if he had not been doing so. Irrespective of how much of a nice guy he is, he deserves everything the Law can throw at him. It was HIS choice to speed – a behaviour which is apparently normal for his age group.

As usual in such cases, all the mothers who even vaguely knew the dead child are swarming in the manner normal to them. There are demands for speed bumps and 20mph speed limits. No doubt calls for the Death Penalty and various forms of castration or dismemberment were left on the cutting room floor.

The death is tragic, naturally. Any such death is – no matter who the victim might be. But what I’m interested in is why these women don’t actually do something which is a little more in their power and far more effective. Namely, to teach their bloody kids to keep off roads, and to put the fear of God into them for poor road safety behaviour. It seems like parental responsibility is officially non-existent from some time between conception and birth these days.

On a lesson today, I witnessed a kid – who must have only been a couple of years older than the victim in the story – riding his bike the wrong way around a busy roundabout, and then in the middle of the wrong side of the road up a hill. Unless he had escaped from a secure unit, he was doing it consciously and deliberately.

And the frightening thing is that, in maybe 5 years time, he will be in a bloody Corsa or Audi with precisely the same attitude. Less than ¼ mile from where he was doing it, I’ve had pratmobiles overtake me on the wrong side of another roundabout more than once. It is NOT isolated behaviour.

Other times, I’ve had kids of similar ages lying down in front of the car. One time – and this was on Firs Road in West Bridgford – a group of Sloaney teenage girls decided it was funny to walk in front of the car when they saw it coming. Firs Road residents live in houses valued at anything up to £1m, and they hate learners with a vengeance – something which obviously rubs off on to their little darlings.

The irony is that if these little prats don’t get killed first, there’s an increased likelihood of them killing someone when they grow up and get cars of their own because of the upbringing they’ve had. It’s getting worse by the generation, and that’s why idiots like the driver involved in the original story end up doing what they do.

So, in cases like the one mentioned, the child’s death is quite probably as much the responsibility of the parents as it is anyone else’s. And the driver’s behaviour is as much his parents’ responsibility as it is his.

Don’t Judge A Book By Its Cover

26/01/2012

DOAADI

ADI, Driving Tests, Training

Something I saw on a forum reminded me of the simple fact that you should never judge a book by its cover!

The discussion in question revolves around instructor training – teaching people to become ADIs. It’s a hot topic in the industry, because virtually no ADI who is currently on the register believes that anyone else should be allowed to join it. They have the same opinion of the trainee (“pinkie”) system – they may well have utilised that route to becoming an ADI themselves, but woe betide anyone else who tries it!

A couple of comments centre around the issue of whether someone is “cut out to be an instructor”.

As I write this, I’m trying hard to think of any job out there – I hate calling this one a “profession” when I see and hear some of those who do it – where it is a closed shop, and no one else is allowed to do it because admission to the Hallowed Halls is blocked.

If you are prepared to do the training, and to fight to grow your subsequent career, you can be anything you want to be – and I mean that in both the absolute sense (i.e. no one can stop you), and the relative sense (i.e. try hard enough and pass the tests, and you’re in). It doesn’t have to be a Divine Calling any more than it should be a Divine Right. This is precisely the way it should be.

Teaching people to drive isn’t rocket science. And, whether ADIs like it or not, the sole responsibility of an instructor is to teach new drivers enough to pass the test and to be safe enough to go out and gain more experience on the roads. It’s always been like that and, unless the minimum age for driving is raised to 35, it always will be!

In the end, all it is is a job. A simple, day-to-day job.

It is NOT the ADI’s responsibility if the newly-qualified driver chooses not to continue to learn or drive safely. It is NOT the ADI’s responsibility to change someone’s fundamental behaviour or character. And – extreme cases notwithstanding – it is NOT the ADI’s responsibility to decide if someone should be allowed to learn to drive or not.

This is where an ex-pupil of mine comes to mind from some years ago.

He was a really nice lad, and he had a good job with good prospects. But he was not a natural driver. Sometimes, I despaired at how I would ever get him to test standard and – in all honesty – in my own mind I was often hoping that he’d realise for himself that for his own sake, and everyone else out there on the roads, he’d give up the idea of learning to drive and stick to buses.

But I was totally wrong. You see, my feelings were based purely on my own enjoyment of the lessons sometimes (i.e. frustration) and my awareness of how much it was costing him (i.e. what I though his perception of me might be). He didn’t see it that way at all – he was always upbeat and was adamant that he was still learning, even when I was convinced we’d not moved forward at all when I compared my lesson notes from previous weeks.

In the end, he was with me for over two years, and he spent more that £4,000 on lessons. But he passed at the third attempt. I know for a fact that he is happily – and safely – driving every day now.

So, taking all this one step further back, and considering the trainee instructor rather than the trainee driver, does anyone have the right to declare who can and who can’t do this job? No!

It doesn’t matter if someone has been made redundant from their job and is now considering becoming an ADI. As long as they know the risks, the choice is theirs – certainly not mine. They don’t have to be über-dedicated, or be hand-picked by the Heavenly Host because all they’re doing is a job. They’re trying to support themselves financially. And if they don’t provide a good service then they’ll fail – which is simply part of the risk they assume when they decide to become ADIs.

The people who are always blaming new ADIs and trainees for their own predicament, and who believe that this job is a calling of some kind, should perhaps take a step back and look at their own position in a little more detail..

Many are so disillusioned and bitter – and have been for so many years now – that they come across as considerably less dedicated to the job than the people who’ve just been laid off from the local coal mine and who want to become instructors. And until a couple of years ago, they blamed Red Driving School for everything.

Now it appears to be anyone who is offering instructor training.

Yes, it would be nice if we could make it a closed shop, and have the ultimate say in who gets kicked off the register just because we’re having a tough time at the moment (as though the rest of the world isn’t). But that isn’t going to happen. Nor should it.

DSA: Better Testing for Better Drivers

23/01/2012

DOAADI

ADI, DSA, News

An email alert has just been sent out by the DSA. You can view it here.

It reminds everyone that from Monday 23 January, the Theory Test will not consist of questions that have previously been published anywhere else. This change has been introduced to stop people memorising the answers, and to make them at least try to understand what it is they are supposed to be learning.

Until now, the questions would have been easily available in the exact form they would be asked on the Theory Test itself. However, as of today the only questions published will be practice questions – not the actual ones.

The email quotes Mike Penning, the Road Safety Minister:

“By bringing a stop to publication of theory test questions we aim to encourage candidates to prepare by learning each topic area thoroughly rather than just memorising the questions and answers.

“The intention is to improve candidates’ knowledge and understanding of driving theory, so that they are more able to retain and apply it when they are on the road.”

Bearing in mind Penning’s involvement so far – and the fact that his “in-depth knowledge” of the driver training industry apparently comes form his daughter, who Penning considers to be the only young person in the entire universe ever to have taken driving lessons, and who fed him a few stories about her training – I doubt that the change will have quite the outcome he thinks it will.

There are around 1,000 questions in the question bank. I can absolutely promise you that the number of people out there who, since the Theory Test was introduced, memorised them all can be counted on the fingers of one hand!

Most young people don’t do anywhere near enough revision for the Theory Test, and they only pass because it is so bloody easy. I know several of mine who have passed it without a single minute of revision – and certain web forums, where immature student types hang out, are rife with childish advice along the lines of “don’t revise or buy any study materials – you’ll pass it easily without them”. Passing is all that matters to them.

The problem with the Theory Test is that it is dumbed down. For example, there are a load of questions in it all about whether you can use a mobile phone when driving. The answer is “no” – but the questions are just convoluted re-wordings of the same fundamental question with the same fundamental answer. The only thing that is going to change is that there will be a heap of different re-wordings for the test itself, and another heap for the “practice material”, where there was only a single heap before! Big deal.

Don’t get me wrong – I’m all for turning the test into something which actually requires learning in order to pass it, but it was never that in the first place. To be worthwhile, it has to be challenging. And to be challenging, it needs to be relatively difficult to pass. But there are too many bleeding hearts out there who wouldn’t want that – and that includes ADIs as well as politicians anxious to secure votes.

This change is just fiddling with an item which, in the context of the proposed “benefits”, was already faulty. No one has the guts to throw the baby out with the bathwater and introduce something which is better.

Hands-only CPR

15/01/2012

DOAADI

ADI, General, Movies & TV, News

I expect you’ve seen that advert with Vinnie Jones, advertising “hands-only CPR” for the British Heart Foundation. It’s quite amusing. But the thing that caught my attention is that – yet again – first aid procedures are being changed.

This used to happen regularly when I was in the rat race, and I’m convinced it was a ploy to make sure that anyone who’d received first aid training (at significant expense) would have to do it again for his or her skills to remain valid in a legal sense.

Any large company with first aid staff who don’t have up-to-date training may well as just burn all their money and shut up shop right now. And by “up-to-date”, that means “the latest fads”.

The “compression-only” variant appears to be of American origin, where (according to Wikipedia):

It is recommended as the method of choice for the untrained rescuer or those who are not proficient as it is easier to perform and instructions are easier to give over the phone.

Obviously, you need some scientific backing for such dumbing down, so it adds:

In adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, compression-only CPR by the lay public has a higher success rate than standard CPR.

My first thought would be “why”. But, it does appear to be quite specific. But then it adds more:

The exceptions are cases of drownings, drug overdose, and arrest in children. Children who receive compression only CPR have the same outcomes as those who received no CPR. The method of delivering chest compressions remains the same, as does the rate (at least 100 per minute). It is hoped that the use of compression only delivery will increase the chances of the lay public delivering CPR. As per the American Heart Association, the beat of the Bee Gees’ song Stayin’ Alive provides an ideal amount of beats-per-minute to use for hands-only CPR. For those with non cardiac arrest and people less than 20 years of age standard CPR is superior to compression only CPR.

That last sentence interests me. Those “under 20” appear to be “children” as far as this account is concerned. The UK is simplifying the whole affair by advising “hands-only” for everyone!

And we have to face facts, here. The fact that traditional CPR frequently involves mouth-to-mouth resuscitation (where the lips of one stranger have to meet those of another) definitely has something to do with this. If nothing else, people resuscitating when the casualty is actually already breathing may have a part to play – not to mention the simple physical contact involved.

It looks like the evidence (clearly based on statistics) that “hands-only” CPR is better is a lot more confused than they’d have you believe. In the meantime, company execs in the UK will need to start shovelling money into wheelbarrows to take round to the local First Aid Training groups. Again.

Category - ADI