Category - Driving Tests

From the Kirriemuir Herald – the Prime Minister has been challenged over planned closures of the Forfar and Arbroath test centres.

I’m not exactly sure what the beef is.

Commenting on the closures Mr Weir said: “It is completely unacceptable that the Driving Standards Agency can act in this high handed and undemocratic way.

“They simply announced the closure of the centres in a letter about the opening of the new multi-purpose test centre in Dundee. There was no consultation with either the community or the instructors affected by the move.

So? That’s exactly what happened around here when West Bridgford and Gedling closed, and Colwick MPTC took over. Parking and access to both West Bridgford and Gedling TCs was appalling and moving to the MPTC has turned out to be great – although that’s not how ADIs viewed it at the time (big surprise there, then).

Arbroath, Forfar, and Dundee are each about 15 miles apart – so those who previously took tests in Arbroath or Forfar will simply have to travel 15 miles to Dundee. Compare that with the cost of maintaining two additional test centres and there’s no comparison.

The politician involved (Mike Weir) appears to have a much bigger issue on his mind. He talks of “localism” and “consultations” with the local community. And, of course, this is Scotland we are talking about – so the chances of positive discrimination in one form or another is a card he can play.

A quick look at the Google images for the three locations show that both Arbroath and Forfar TCs are located in narrow streets in residential areas – just like West Bridgford and Gedling were. A look at the Dundee image shows a wide open industrial area – just like the Colwick MPTC location. The Dundee MPTC opens on February 28th, which means it has been purpose-built: planned as a direct replacement for Arbroath and Forfar, and also covering the Dundee area.

Mr Weir has the additional lever in that Mickey Mouse – sorry, I mean the Prime Minister of this joke government – is hell bent on reversing everything that was ever decided under Labour.

They should all get a life.

EDIT 18/02/2011: An update to this story – a stay of execution is granted to Arbroath TC.

If Mike Weir gets his ridiculous way on this, I want West Bridgford and Gedling back – and the Colwick MPTC converting back to a fly-tipping site.

EDIT 22/02/2011: According to The Courier newspaper, a “one year reprieve” has been granted to the test centres. The wording allows all concerned parties to pretend that they have won.

Reading between the lines, though, and the test centres are still likely to close – it’s just that the government is going to take a year to “consider” it:

Mr Weir had been verbally assured by UK transport under-secretary Mike Penning that the centres would not be shut while the matter was being considered, and that promise has now been cemented.

That part I’ve emboldened is the key phrase. The article continues:

He said, “The DSA have assured me that the two centres will remain open for at least a year whilst all options are looked at for delivering the service in Arbroath and Forfar. The strong campaign, locally and in Parliament, has clearly forced a major rethink in how the DSA are looking at local test centres and I will be keeping up the pressure to try and ensure that we continue to have testing facilities locally.”

Mr Weir claimed the extension would provide “breathing space” and time for discussion.

It’s not quite the same as a reprieve, is it? And a tacit admisson, perhaps, that they are going to close at some point from Mr Weir? The DSA replies:

…”We will be continuing to use the test centres at Arbroath and Forfar for another year while we consider all options for service delivery in that area.”

Seeing as the new MPTC was due to open very soon (so has obviously been partly built, or at least planned to building point), the DSA has now been forced into a money-wasting situation by Mr Weir and those ADIs who couldn’t accept change.

And speaking of wastes of money, the following comparison of phrases in the article is interesting:

A campaign was mounted by a group of driving instructors who claimed they, and their students, stood to lose thousands of pounds if the centres were axed.

Arbroath councillor David Fairweather helped the instructors’ group to set up meetings and stage a protest outside the test centre in the town last month.

I wonder how much that cost? As much as keeping two small test centres open instead of moving to a single purpose-built one? It’s just a case of the tail wagging the dog. ADIs are experts at that sometimes.

Of course, the main protagonists hail it as “a u-turn”.

Here’s an interesting article forwarded to me by a reader of the blog. It’s from WalesOnline .

Apparently, the lowest driving test pass rate (Rhyl) during 2009/10 was 38.4%, but the highest (Llandrindod Wells) was 73.3%. The figures have been uncovered by a Plaid Cymru politician – Chris Franks – whose argument appears to be that the people in North Wales can’t possibly be half as good as those in South Wales. He says:

While the DSA say that pass and fail rates among individual examiners are analysed, there must be an issue when pass rates vary so much – from under 40% to more than 70%.

I don’t believe that learner drivers in North Wales are any worse than those in Mid or South Wales, despite the figures.

He has a point. But the DSA is damned if it does, and damned if it doesn’t.

They have recently introduced a new statistical model to their monitoring of examiner performances. I wrote about it in this article, and then in this further article. People on the forums were wetting themselves over the prospect of something else to snipe at the DSA with.

As far as the average ADI is concerned, variable pass rates are bad. Trying to make them consistent is bad, but leaving them alone is also bad. Making the test harder is bad, but making it easier is bad, too.

Confusing, isn’t it?

If you want to understand the thought process of the typical ADI, look no further than the image above. And then just extend it to politicians.

A reader who is currently training to be an ADI sent me this link to a website created by a retired driving examiner.

It’s about 12 years old, and the main updates seem to date from around 2001. Some edits are as recent as 2009. So some of it may be a little dated, but it makes interesting reading. Most of it is still relevant.

Anyway, worth a read just for information if nothing else.

In the past I’ve written specifically about the GDE Matrix, Coaching and instructors, the DL25 and how to use it for coaching purposes, and most recently about how you can use coaching in a variety of ways (which most ADIs can’t even begin to understand).

The last two attracted some smart aleck comments from one of the webforums. It made me laugh hard when one of the self-proclaimed experts said that the examples I had given weren’t coaching, and that they were “just Q&A” and “leading the pupil”.

The same forum has recently held an online session with a guest “coaching expert” speaker who was actually on the HERMES project, and it has made the transcript available. If you can sift through the 90% of the transcript which contains the usual “how r u” type comments, and ADIs trying to get one over on everyone and everything (“I already do that”, “I was using that 20 years ago”, and so on), there is one absolutely telling comment from the speaker:

An example of a coaching technique. Coaching techniques focus on questions and problem solving exercise.

Well, well, well. The HERMES expert says Q&A is part of coaching. As for the other guy – the “expert” in his own living room – I’ll just repeat that phrase I used at the beginning…

Most ADIs can’t even begin to understand what coaching really is.

These are the ones who need to spend some money on the right sort of CPD. The DSA is unlikely (well, it won’t. Period) to assume that no one is coaching – but just as there are some people who barely scrape a Grade 4 (and are happy with it). The reason they never achieve better is probably already due to them not using any coaching techniques anyway, and it is these who will be seen not to be training pupils properly once the new DSA syllabus comes in and Check Tests start (well, after the trials are completed, anyway).

I still don’t think that that last paragraph will get the point across, so I’ll say it differently:

Coaching is a skill that any good ADI should be using already anyway. The reason for the present focus on the subject is twofold:

• too many people are killed on the roads and the DSA et al wants to try and change that
• we have too many ADIs who are simply not good enough

Like it or not, although poor teaching isn’t the only cause of deaths on the road by a large margin, those two things above are closely linked. Bad ADIs are obviously not going to teach people to drive properly, are they? It is these deficient ADIs who need the coaching courses. However, those people also need to realise that paying £500 or more to go on one doesn’t automatically mean you are a suddenly a good ADI – coaching is a skill, not something you get off a shelf by paying a retail price.

And this is where the problem is. The people pushing coaching courses are trying to make a fast buck in an industry where many people are finding it hard to make money from simple driving lessons. So they are talking things up, and gullible ADIs are swallowing it hook, line, and sinker.

The big question is whose interests are they serving? The ADI’s? Or their own?

Coaching is something which is missing from a lot of ADIs’ toolboxes. A lot of ADIs are not teaching to a high enough standard. They may even be unsuitable to remain on the Register – who knows?

Coaching is not something brand new that everyone has got to go out an buy lots of. Unfortunately, this is exactly how some people are treating it.

Just going back to that post from earlier today, about learners being taught in fast cars.

I noticed on another forum that someone is likening ‘making adequate progress’ on test with ‘driving like a prat with no regard for anyone else’. It appears to be a contrivance, engineered to have a go at the DSA.

Let me just make something absolutely clear. On test, if a pupil is in a 30mph zone and they’re driving consistently at 25mph or less, then they are going too slow and are holding people up. In a 40mph zone, they need to be doing 35mph or more for the same reason. In a 50mph zone, 40mph at the least. In a 60mph zone, above 50mph. And in a 70mph zone, above 60mph. These figures are approximate and should not be interpreted otherwise.

Under absolutely no circumstances is this ‘speeding’ or an example of the DSA encouraging reckless behaviour. It does not ‘instill speed’ in peoples minds. Indeed, if the pupil doesn’t slow down for hazards and junctions, he or she will soon find themselves booking another test for another try.

In order to be a complete driver, you need to know how to drive at the speed limit – not to be afraid of it, with all the extra hazards such fear would introduce to someone’s driving style. Driving 20mph below the limit when there’s no need leads to road rage and increases the risk of accidents. It’s shocking that ADIs should be advocating such behaviour.