Well done to CM who passed first time this afternoon with 7 driver faults.
She was absolutely bricking it, and the warm-up session didn’t go too well as a result. But she was definitely capable of passing, so I wasn’t too worried when she drove off. And she did it!
The examiner was really nice about it and said at the debrief that on the left reverse her leg was shaking and she was revving it hard (she never does that on lessons), and that it was a bit messy, but it met all the requirements and wasn’t a problem. Our examiners all use common sense and I can’t fault them.
On another forum I just saw a discussion about how many hours it takes to learn to drive. This question crops up a lot in one form or another.
The DSA says (as of January 2011) that people who pass their tests have typically had about 47 hours of professional training with an ADI combined with about 20 hours of private practice. These figures vary a little from time to time as new data are added, and in any case are by no means absolute numbers.
Naturally, a thread such is this is the only prompt needed for some ADIs to start boasting how they did it in 10 or 12 hours – thus demonstrating why the pass-quick-pay-little mentality gets in the way of decent ADIs doing their jobs properly in the first place.
If the right person came along, they could take their driving test and pass it without having had a single second of tuition or practice for the driving test – but statistically, the odds of that happening are extremely low. And at the other end of the spectrum, you could get someone who is never, ever going to be able to drive – no matter how many lessons they have. These are not as rare as you might think, but many just give up when they realise they can’t do it and so never get to test standard.
So, the majority of people require SOME tuition and it averages out at about 47 hours for most of those who pass their tests in the end. Yes, some can do it quicker. Yes, some take longer. But we’re talking about that statistics thing most ADIs cannot understand: the meaning of the phrase ‘on average’.
I’ve had a few people pass in a little over 20 hours, having had no experience of driving at all before that, and in one case I can remember, no opportunity to do any private practice either. I’ve also had people pass having taken well over 80 hours with lots of private practice on top. It all depends on the individual.
I think I’ve mentioned in the past about how I am always uneasy when someone passes quickly – not because it means I can’t get money from them any more, but because they may go out on the roads thinking that they are better than they really are. One common conversation I have with pupils after they’ve emerged too quickly from a junction or on to a roundabout, and we’re analysing the fault, involves explaining that what their heads think they can do is not the same as what their bodies are actually capable of doing at this stage in their driving careers – and they mustn’t try to copy what their family or friends do.
Only last night, when I was talking to a pupil about her need to be 1mph over the speed limit all the time, to go hurtling into situations she’s incapable of handling quickly (so speed makes it even harder), and forgetting the speed limit until she’s accelerated over it, she said:
Well, the reason I do it is because I’m always out with people who drive like that.
Honestly, that’s exactly what she said. And later that evening when I raised it with her mum (who wants her to do Pass Plus when she passes), she said:
It’s her best friend who she’s talking about - she drives like that to show off and [Jane] is trying to copy her.
Can you imagine what someone like this would behave like on the roads – and what a mess they could easily get into – if they passed their test too quickly without gaining valuable experience?
What worries me even more is that some of the people who boast about fast learners are also selling the idea of fast cars to those learners. One poster comments that he knows of an ADI teaching people in a Subaru WRX, who takes learners to a race track to drive fast, and who is openly scathing of speed limits. So imagine:
you have a learner who attracted by the Subaru and so books lessons
he’ll already have a certain attitude towards speed and road behaviour, and even life in general, otherwise he wouldn’t be there
he’ll be further conditioned to be cynical of speed limits by the ADI
the ADI is merely showing off and behaving as immaturely as the person he’s teaching
the learner will be soaking it up like a sponge
being more porous than most (the Subaru attracted him, remember) he’ll soak up all the wrong things
This is a real scenario, and it is not going to produce a driver who has respect for the law or his own driving skills. It is not going to produce a driver who has consideration for others. It’s going to produce a driver who is the epitome of what the DSA wants to try and stamp out, and what no ADI should be within a hundred miles of teaching.
The GDE Matrix springs to mind here. If ADIs are to be expected to get involved in the so-called ‘higher levels’, how can they possibly do that effectively if they are doing it in prat bait?
Well done to Francis W, who passed first time with 8 driver faults yesterday.
Of course, this maintains my 100% pass rate (for 2011) so I can be super-smug.
Seriously, though, Francis had a full Chinese licence and his 12 months of UK driving was almost done. It was a case of dealing with the usual bad habits people acquire when they drive on their own, along with the also-usual difficulties more mature people have in changing their old habits!
It’s nice when you get people who you actually feel safe driving with.
The marking sheet they use for your driving test is called a DL25. When you take your test, pass or fail you will get a copy of it and an attached sheet which explains what is/was expected of you under all the headings. I wrote about this a little while ago. See this topic to download a copy.
On one of the forums, someone who goes through the DL25 with their pupils at some point prior to their test has asked if this might be seen as just teaching people to pass the test, instead of teaching them to drive.
I suspect that what he meant was that he goes through the DL25 including the explanations sheet that comes with it. Even if he doesn’t, if he explains exactly what is involved under each section then it amounts to the same thing.
The simple and obvious answer is that if you explain what the examiner is looking for in all those possible cases, and especially when something that the examiner wouldn’t be happy with occurs on a lesson, then you are not just teaching them to pass the test. You are giving them a complete picture of what is acceptable and what isn’t.
A prime example is the turn in the road (TIR), or three-point turn as some people still call it. At some stage the pupil will bump the kerb or not look around enough. Certainly if they touch the kerb, most of them will say “you fail if you touch the kerb, don’t you?” This is where the DL25 comes in and provides an ideal teaching opportunity.
I get them to read the part about the TIR, and show them how they are being marked for control and observation/safety:
Turn in the road
Keep a look out for traffic and pedestrians whenever you are turning your vehicle and be prepared to give way to them. Control your vehicle smoothly. Do not let the vehicle mount the pavement. Try not to touch the kerbs as this could damage your vehicle and endanger other road users and pedestrians.
Then the conversation goes something like this:
Me: See that part about mounting the kerb? Is that the same as just touching it?
Them: No.
Me: So what do you think the examiner would do if you just touched it gently as you were stopping?
Them: Well, if I don’t go on the pavement… it says TRY not to touch the kerb.
Me: Exactly! But what if you didn’t even try and stop and bumped the pavement hard?
Them: That’s different, though.
Me: Yes, it is. Because if you’re trying to stop you obviously know where the kerb is. But if you don’t, what does that say about your control?
Them: It’s bad.
Me: Yes. So you can see how the examiner might not look at it the same way you do.
And what about taking more than three moves to get it round? It isn’t called a “three point turn”, so you can take as many tries as you want in theory. But what if you could get it round in three but end up taking five or seven moves? Are you in control?
Them: Ummm. Well, no.
Me: Arguably, no, I agree. So it’s best to get it absolutely right. But it doesn’t say you MUST do it in three goes, and you can never be sure how the examiner sees it. If the rest of your drive is good then it might be viewed differently. One thing you must never do is assess yourself as you’re going along and assume you have failed. Focus on what is coming up and drive the way you can normally drive.
And what about your observations – that’s where they mark under “safely” – what does it say about those?
Them: Just that I’ve got to look for other people.
Me: And…?
Them: Oh, and give way to them.
Me: What does “give way” mean?
And so it continues as necessary, depending on the situation. You can use the DL25 to turn a potentially bland lesson into a turbo-charged one, complete with a bit of “coaching” (hack, spit). The whole thing only takes a few minutes, it dispels any myths they’ve heard, and it makes them think and work the answers out for themselves. It brings them out of their shells, and gets them involved.
We also shouldn’t forget that – like it or not – there IS an element of having to do things in a certain way in order to pass the test, even if under normal circumstances there wouldn’t be a problem with doing them slightly differently.
People who steer clear of the DL25 are missing a trick or two – but I’m sure they’re still Grade 1 Lifeskills Coaches in their own living rooms.
Cancellation of identity cards: changes to ID requirements
The government has passed legislation cancelling identity cards for British citizens. From 21 January 2011, those identity cards that have already been issued will no longer be legal forms of identification.
This means you’ll no longer be able to use the identity card as a valid document to prove your identity for a practical driving test or for Driver CPC periodic training.
If you don’t have a photo card licence and counterpart to prove your identity but have an old-style paper one, you must bring this and a valid passport.
For more information about the cancellation of identity cards visit direct.gov.uk/identity.
This Mickey Mouse government has got a few people angry at its petty cancellation of the ID card scheme (i.e. just because it was a Labour idea). People paid money for the things, and they aren’t happy that they are not to be compensated for the loss of the privileges the ID card brought them.
Well done to Mary E, who passed with just 4 driver faults this morning.
She also equals the record amongst my pupils for learning in the shortest time, from not ever having driven at all to passing first time – 23 hours.
I guess that this means I can boast a 100% pass rate… for 2011 (must keep that last bit in the small print).
I should point out that I am not in favour of people passing quickly (i.e. from start date to finish date), because experience is something that only comes with time and cannot be rushed. For that reason, I don’t like intensive courses. Mary has her own car and has done plenty of structured private practice between lessons with me. She is comfortable and competent when driving, and this pass was not one of those that could have gone either way: I would have put money on her passing.
The forums have been aglow over recent months on the subject of coaching. It’s quite funny how people think just substituting a word in their waffle suddenly makes them brilliant coaches. Suddenly “I teach people to drive” has become “I coach people to drive”. The irony is that many of them probably don’t do either very well, but it doesn’t stop them using the “C” word in every other sentence.
Some of them might actually be coaching very well, but for most I doubt that they’d recognise coaching if it came and cocked its leg against them.
If anyone asks me what I do, I tell them:
I’m a driving instructor
I teach people to drive
I refuse point blank to use the C word. I had a skinful of it when I was working in the rat race, and it makes my skin crawl now when I hear it. But am I right to feel that way?
A huge part of the problem seems to be that the same kind of people who used to make me hurl when I was in the rat race have started hijacking the coaching issue as it pertains to driving instruction. To that end, they are running around telling everyone what coaching is and what it involves:
communication skills
interpersonal skills
building relationships
create connections
psychological techniques
promoting change
expand contacts
clean language
emergent knowledge
unconscious resources
negative/positive self-belief
personality types
life coaching
performance coaching
self-marketing
body language
inner confidence
This just goes on and on, depending on who you listen to. Phrases like inner confidence and life coaching make me shudder. They’re pure bullshit.
EDIT 24/7/2012: I just want to add something I read recently where a trainer claims – in answer to the question about how to develop a lesson structure – that the following are essential for assessing how a pupil learns:
V.A.K.
Behaviourism i.e. Classical Conditioning
Constructivism – Piaget, Vygotsky
Humanism – Hierarchy of needs (Maslow)
Kolbs learning cycle
Co-operative learning
Cognitive acceleration
I’ve mentioned the rat race a few times. This is exactly the kind of total and utter bullshit we had to deal with. And make no mistake about it – that’s exactly what it is. It’s the equivalent of charging people to breath air. When someone starts spouting this nonsense, their true colours are suddenly and painfully exposed.
The person who quoted these cannot give any real world examples of their use. and application. Merely listing them is supposed to initiate the sharp intake of admiring breaths from those who read it. Or not, as the case may be.
The DSA hasn’t actually said what it expects by way of coaching, and all these ADIs who are allegedly “doing it all the time” – even when they’re in a coma – seem very reluctant to give examples of precisely how they coach when pressed to do so. The reason for that is simple: they haven’t got a clue what coaching is.
They also forget that the DSA is going to take the most direct route possible, and it isn’t likely to require ADIS to gain aromatherapy and crystallography diplomas from the local Clown College in order to remain on the register.
It goes without saying that the GDE Matrix is involved in this – purely because the Clown College life skills department has got hold of it, looked at the table in the back, and seen a way of making shedloads of money out of it. it. But does the Matrix actually agree with those Cuckoo Club Coaches, who seem to believe that levitation, time-travel, and healing hands are mandatory skills for someone who teaches – sorry, coaches – people to drive?
Well, the GDE Matrix Report everyone is referring to (download it by clicking the links above) says that driver behaviour follows this “hierarchical model” – or in plain English, when someone goes out driving their overall performance is governed by these things in order:
car control ability (speed, direction, position, etc.)
handling real situations (junctions, other cars, etc.)
purpose and nature of the journey
general attitudes towards driving and life in general
Just about any ADI will be handling the first three with every pupil they teach. If they aren’t, they shouldn’t be on the Register. We teach them how to handle the car, how to handle road layouts and various traffic conditions, and things which might cause distraction or increase the risk of an accident. Any ADI who isn’t covering these things simply isn’t doing their job properly.
Addressing the 4th item is the one which apparently needs a Clown College diploma in something which mankind has not managed to solve in all of recorded history, and which it is unlikely to solve anytime in the future. In plain English, it is the way the average person behaves generally in their life, and how this carries over into how he or she drives.
As an example, if you have someone who spent their entire time at school pretending to be black in spite of being a pasty white colour (i.e. wearing a stupid baseball cap), plus a shell suit or Burberry clobber, cheap bling, BMX bike, no taste in music, their whole evenings hanging around outside the chip shop smoking, spitting, and swearing at people who walk past, and who was known to the police from about 10 minutes after he was born because of who his parents were, well, that person just might be tempted to drive in an inappropriate manner when he passes his test and buys a Corsa with 4-inch exhaust pipe and blacked out windows. His whole life to that point has conditioned him.
[Some idiot from Manchester has taken issue with this analogy, and thinks it is offensive to black people. It’s supposed to be a swipe at youngwhite people! Slightly built, pasty white youths who dress like rap stars and have rubbish music blaring out of their stereos and who behave antisocially are already a long way away from likely being influenced by a bit of coaching from an instructor. Anyone who has to pretend to be something they aren’t (hence, a white person pretending to be black, when the cap just doesn’t fit) has already got issues. And like it or not, they exist in large numbers out there, which is why I used this example.]
Doesn’t that make you slap your head and go “Of course! It all makes sense now!”
But it gets better, because apparently the one thing that’s been missing from the equation – and which could prevent this unfortunate situation arising – is the role of the Driving Instructor!
Let’s get rid of the Clown College mystique a moment and remind ourselves that “GDE” stands for Goals for Driver Education. The following table is what many people refer to as “The GDE Matrix” or, as it calls itself, “The GDE Framework”. It is basically just a more complicated version of the 4 items listed above, using university-speak to make itself look important. Oh, yes! And it’s upside-down.
Knowledge and Skill
Risk Increasing Aspects
Self-assessment
Goals for life, skills for driving
Lifestyle, age, group norms, motives, self-control, values
Sensation seeking, group norms, complying with peer pressure
Risky tendencies, own preconditions, impulse control
Goals and context of driving
Modal choice, choice of time, trip goals, social pressure
Alcohol, fatigue, purpose of driving, rush hours, competing
A typical young driver who is being taught properly – and that isn’t just by his ADI, but through his schooling and via his parents and friends – will gradually progress across this, starting at the bottom left and finishing top right, but taking in all the other things along the way. Remember that at this stage of the report, all that this table is doing is telling you how someone who is being taught properly learns. It’s telling you something most people already know but which they never had to think about. It’s really just stating the obvious.
The report then goes on to make some recommendations:
An Integrated Driver Education Approach (IDEA) is recommended, where structured professional methods are combined with accompanied practicing.
Translation: We suggest that people should be taught by driving instructors and also get private practice to supplement what they are taught.
Training should start in a structured way from the lowest levels of the driving hierarchy and then continue to allow drivers to learn these skills automatic with an accompanying person.
Translation: We suggest that training should start with the basics, and then people can practice these basics privately with an accompanying driver.
Integrated approach is especially important for the youngest learner drivers before allowing them independent access to traffic.
Translation: Young drivers are at greatest risk.
Integrated approach increases the demands for professional instructors and thus, training of traffic instructors should be improved.
This is where it starts to get scary – and it’s the one the Clown College graduates have gotten hold of. It goes on:
Knowledge on motivational and social aspects of driving (not only technical skill)
Skills for dealing with lay-supervisors
Guiding lay-supervisors in efficient teaching
Translation: Driving Instructors should involve the supervising drivers.
Accompanied driving should include a minimum amount of driving and also a structure and methods to control it.
Translation: Private practice shouldn’t be pointless and allow bad habits to develop.
Interventions of professionals after the accompanied driving phase should support risk awareness and self-evaluation, rather than being technically oriented.
Translation: It’s attitude that leads to accidents.
The process of the integrated driver education approach does not necessarily have to exceed two years for example.
This is where that media story which has taken various forms over the last 5 years about the minimum driving age being raised came from.
Professional driver education should be available to persons who do not have the possibility to follow the integrated approach.
Translation: If someone can’t do private practice, ignore all the stuff we just said and just take lessons with an instructor.
Giving more structure to the training could effectively reduce unnecessary examinations.
Translation: Better training might result in better pass rates.
Although it comes close to the subject – worryingly close if you don’t understand it – it definitely stops short of suggesting that driving instructors should aim to repair inadequate parenting or schooling by turning hooligans into saints.
In fact, the only things the definitive GDE Matrix report does say are just blindingly obvious! It makes it sound all high-falutin’, but it is just stating the obvious.
The DSA is currently running a Learning To Drive study, where they are trialing a new syllabus for possible implementation in the next few years. Undoubtedly there will be some elements of coaching in it, but I suspect the main thrust will be the content. It isn’t going to require that instructors become psychoanalysts – that’s just the stupid interpretation that some have given to the GDE Matrix table.
Like most things in this industry, what some ADIs believe (or want to believe) will be light years away from what really happens.
In the meantime, the Life Coaches are having a ball persuading vulnerable instructors to attend pointless and expensive Clown courses.
Registration and non statutory test fee increases from 4 January 2011
The following registration and non statutory test fees have increased today due to the VAT change:
Registration for large goods vehicle instructors
Registration and test fees for fleet driver trainers
Registration to join the post-test register of motorcycle trainers
Please visit the Business Link website for a list of all fee increases effective from 4 January 2011, including the Cardington special tests for driving and motorcycle instructors.
This story has been covered in the press – I saw it in today’s Sunday Mirror, and it is also covered by Autoblog. It concerns various websites which charge a premium priced for booking theory and practical driving tests – apparently the AA has complained to the Office Of Fair Trading (OFT).
The thing is, some sites are definitely scams – they deliberately fool people into paying money and they provide nothing in return, not even a test booking in some cases.
The ones that charge a premium price and deliver what they offer aren’t really scams. What they’re doing is highly immoral, particularly if they conceal the fact they are not official sites (and most of them do), but they are still providing a service – albeit of questionable value.
I’m not defending them – I think they are wrong - but we need to be clear on what is actually happening and not just keep labelling things we don’t like as “scams”. After all, stealing money from someone is not the same as overcharging them. It’s similar, but not the same.
But the overall message is this…
BOOK YOUR TEST ONLY VIA THE DSA WEBSITE
DO NOT BOOK IT USING ANYONE ELSE
ALL YOU CAN GET IS A TEST BOOKING – THERE IS NOTHING “EXTRA”, SO DON’T PAY EXTRA IF SOMEONE OFFERS IT
THE THEORY TEST IS EASY - DON’T PAY SOMEONE TO HELP YOU
A SIMPLE DVD COSTING AROUND £6 WILL HELP MORE THAN THEY CAN
Use the DSA’s site, and only the DSA’s site – see the links on the Information page.
The DSA has introduced a CAPTCHA system on its booking pages, designed to inhibit automated test checking and booking.
Well done to Amy H, who passed her test with 6 driver faults yesterday. We had our fingers crossed that the weather wouldn’t interfere – I’ve had half a dozen tests cancelled since the snow started – and it didn’t.
I don’t care what you say: on the way back, we measured it and your workplace is about half a mile away from your house – so the taxis and buses you’ve been getting are just a sign of how lazy the younger generation is! It isn’t “just over a mile”, like you claimed.
Well done to CM who passed first time this afternoon with 7 driver faults.
On another forum I just saw a discussion about how many hours it takes to learn to drive. This question crops up a lot in one form or another.
The marking sheet they use for your driving test is called a DL25. When you take your test, pass or fail you will get a copy of it and an attached sheet which explains what is/was expected of you under all the headings. 
Well done to Mary E, who passed with just 4 driver faults this morning.
The forums have been aglow over recent months on the subject of coaching. It’s quite funny how people think just substituting a word in their waffle suddenly makes them brilliant coaches. Suddenly “I teach people to drive” has become “I 
It isn’t exactly new. The