Category - Training

CGI HPT – Impressive

27/02/2012

An email alert has just come through from the DSA with a link to some early-stage computer generated imagery (CGI) clips they’re working on for the Hazard Perception Test (HPT).

I can see this one dragging the rats out of the sewers (at the time of writing, ten votes, three of them negative on the YouTube site).

The quality is very impressive.

Some of the negative comments seem to have completely overlooked the fact that these are EARLY-STAGE clips, and not the finished article. That’s why there’s no sound.

Clip #1

Clip #2

As the DSA says in the email:

The clips are early prototypes. DSA aims to bring these computer-generated clips into the theory test by the end of 2013. It means DSA can introduce hazards that would be hard to film safely – particularly those involving vulnerable road users.

It’s a brilliant idea. Just a shame that technology moves forward faster than the thinking of some ADIs.

Looking at some of the comments, one thing that is repeatedly overlooked by those who are anti-HPT from the outset and saying that it should be done in a real car is that it IS done in a real car – the HPT is only one small part of the training a learner receives, and much of that training IS in the car. It happens during their lessons!

Others are totally ignoring the fact that these are merely samples – very early samples, at that. The DSA is asking for feedback, and comments about overtaking the cyclist too close to a roundabout or not adhering to the 2 second rule are precisely the sort of feedback they want and need.

ADIs need to help make the clips better – not just poo-poo the whole idea. The level of reality is already quite stunning, and by the time they come into proper use I expect they’ll be better still.

But hey, I’m just too positive.

A Drop In Prospective ADIs?

25/02/2012

DOAADI

ADI, DSA, Training

I noticed someone was saying that there has been a “huge” drop in the number of people training to become ADIs.

Using the DSA’s new published statistics, the following can be gleaned from the number of people taking Part 2 tests:

Year	Total Part 2 Tests
2007/08	16,185
2008/09	14,574
2009/10	14,942
2010/11	10,916

So, it would appear that the number was relatively flat between 2007 and 2010, but showed a drop of about 4,000 last year. However, it should be noted that the number of those passing the test only fell by about 2,000 between last year and the previous period (i.e. the success rate appears to be increasing).

For Part 3, there are only data available for the last two years:

Year	Total Part 3 Tests
2009/10	10,581
2010/11	9,204

Here, there is a yearly difference of about 1,200 – but the total number of passes only fell by 344 – or around 3.5% from the previous period. You could argue that a greater percentage of people passing Part 2 ended up passing Part 3 last year, since the difference between Part 2 and Part 3 is much smaller for last year than it is for the previous year (i.e greater success rate). But there is insufficient data to conclude this with any certainty (it’s probably a contributory factor). In any case, the pass rate from the DSA data is flat.

The previous years were those covered by the “earn £30k, no qualifications needed” adverts. Last year was free of that, so it is also likely that the quality of those embarking upon training is now improving – hence the greater success rates if you look at the data overall.

When you also consider that 2011 was a terrible year as far as the economy was concerned, I don’t think you can say anything other than people were being careful how they spent their money.

And the other thing to remember is that – just like share prices – a fall is often followed by a rise. It might not be this year, as the fall in Part 2 tests is carried forward, but it’s pretty certain that there will be one at some stage.

Some People

24/02/2012

DOAADI

ADI, General, Training

Someone found the blog on the following search term:

bsm late or acromas or goodsell or saga or aa or complaint or driving or lesson or instructor or cancelled or theory or franchise or passed or failed or pupil or car –brick –waka –mining –benilde –exhaust –bmw –blind

You have to try not to laugh sometimes. They actually typed all that into a search engine – they seem to have a big axe to grind, but on a very badly worn grinding wheel! A search term like that is almost like not using any search criteria at all – it’ll throw up a zillion results, 99.9% of which are absolutely irrelevant (as the attempts to remove certain hits would confirm).

Let’s assume that the earlier chapters of the term are what the person was interested in – something to do with a driving instructor from the AA or BSM turning up late.

First things first. Forget any idea you might have about suing them for millions. It isn’t going to happen.

Next, you need to understand how driving instructors work. Every single instructor out there (well, except for a handful who work for specialised companies who deal with expensive lessons to people who can afford them) is self-employed. That means that if you get a bad one, there’s almost just as much chance of him being with Red, the AA, BSM, or any other large school as there is of him being with a smaller school or operating on his own.

I say “almost”, because there is a slight likelihood that the one from a big school will – on average – be more reliable than one of the lesser ones. The reason is the brand name, and the degree to which the school in question wants to protect it. Still not convinced?

OK. Every instructor has to make money, and to do that they need pupils to teach. Those with a franchise are almost always there because they can’t generate the work themselves, and they rely on the school to get them that work. Assuming that this arrangement works, the instructor will not want to get on the wrong side of his franchiser – who might kick him out if he upsets customers. So there is a general tendency for any behaviour likely to cause upset not to happen.

On the other hand, instructors who charge stupid prices and who force pupils to stay with them by making stupid “10 lessons for £99” offers, which only apply if you stay for your entire course, can afford to be a little less customer friendly. And since they will be earning less to start with with these daft offers and low regular prices, they may well upset pupils without being aware of it by not teaching them quickly enough for the pupil’s liking. So there is a general tendency for unhappy pupils to be greater in this group.

Note I said “general tendency”.

Now, let’s cut through the crap and try to help people who are anally retentive enough to type huge search terms like the one above, with a view to being able to retire on the outcome of what they might have in mind… here are some simple things you could try

If you are unhappy with your instructor, just change them
If it’s with a large school, ask them for a different instructor
If you’re pissed off with the school, go for a different one
Complain directly to the school if you have a grievance
Concentrate on learning to drive, not complaining
Don’t spend so much time watching daytime TV and formulating opinions about companies based on only two or three cases
If you’re a parent, try butting out unless you understand the mechanics involved, have a genuine problem, and can separate fact from fiction when your little darling drops a comment
Remember the saying “six of one, half a dozen of the other” – the pupil isn’t always unblemished when it comes to lesson mix-ups

It’s really that simple. Just change instructors and stop moaning!

Some years ago, I had a pupil who was extremely unreliable. She simply couldn’t afford her lessons, and she was honest about it. In return, I was absolutely tolerant to her numerous last minute cancellations. This is not a word of a lie, but she cancelled in excess of 10 lessons less than 24 hours before she was supposed to have them, and other lesson reorganisations ran into similar figures. I even gave her a free 2 hour lesson on one occasion when she accompanied me on my Check Test. I estimate that she cost me more than £500 overall. You could say that I was crazy to carry on with her, but I did.

Then, one day, she sent me yet another text cancelling her lesson at the last minute (on the day it was supposed to be, as I remember). I was used to this and merely saw the first line of the message flashed up on my phone. I made the mistake of not reading the rest, which turned out to be an essay and a half. Right at the bottom it said “can you do a lesson at 11 on Thursday?”

Now, bearing in mind that I didn’t reply, I didn’t turn up at 11 on Thursday. But she thought I was going to.

When I realised what had happened, I apologised profusely and explained, but she didn’t reply. I then found out from another pupil that she was going around saying I was “unreliable”. I’d never turned up late or missed a lesson that we’d arranged, and yet she’d missed dozens. If I worked for a large school, and she was interviewed on daytime TV, you can imagine how it would look, But it was just lies.

Mind you, as I’ve said before, driving instructors are often not the brightest sparks in the fire, and some may well give grounds for a genuine complaint. But these are the exception rather than the rule.

So, one more time: if you aren’t happy with your instructor, just change them and get on with your life.

And if you really feel the need to create a stink about whatever it is that’s bugging you… you might just need to get a life!

And Another Thing About Roundabouts…

20/02/2012

DOAADI

ADI, Training

Someone was asking why the Highway Code (HC) shows a car coming off in the right-hand lane when turning right.

Just to clarify, this is the picture the HC uses to explain roundabouts.

It doesn’t show a car turning right (the green arrows) coming off JUST in the right-hand lane. It shows a car turning right using EITHER the left- or right-hand lanes.

It does not show a car merely using the right-hand lane to exit, nor does it advocate this as the preferred default. It is simply showing that you can use either/any of the lanes if there is more than one. It doesn’t say anything about “if it’s safe to do so”, because that should be taken as read.

That’s because on an unmarked roundabout where a single lane entry carriageway leads off to a multi-lane carriageway, this is exactly what you would do – if cars in the left-hand lane were going slower, for example, or perhaps if you were getting ready to turn right further on, then you would legitimately exit to another lane on that carriageway. I suspect that the complaint has something to do with learners and lane discipline – however, the HC is something learners are supposed to adhere to, not something that needs to be dumbed down for them

Of course, if you had multi-lane entrances to the roundabout, and/or road markings, then you’d use the appropriate lane suggested by the markings (the HC says that, too).

As I often have to explain to my pupils, there is the basic roundabout procedure – but road markings can change all that.

Another thing I see a lot of is instructors not teaching their pupils to drive properly, but forcing them to do everything in the left-hand lane – even when they NEED the right-hand lane almost immediately after some junction. They then have to indicate and change lanes, often causing others to slow down to let them in – which is just about OK on their tests if they do it properly, but a guaranteed fail if they don’t.

I teach mine to plan ahead. If you’re going to turn right, then right again 200m further on, bloody well get in the right-hand lane for the first turn so you don’t have to force everyone to stop 25m before the next one to let you in.

How NOT To Do Roundabouts (And Other Junctions)

19/02/2012

DOAADI

ADI, Bad Drivers, Training

Note that this is a very old post from 2012. As of 2022, I have a decent dashcam and – best of all – the Police accept online submissions of footage.

Today was one of those days. It started off with some idiot stopped completely on a mini-roundabout (they were giving way to traffic coming on to it). I was still in a good mood as far as other road users go at that point.

Then, not more than 40 minutes later, I was entering the Nottingham Knight roundabout in the ONLY lane for going straight ahead. The other two lanes are marked left-only – but that didn’t stop the prat in the green Mini Cooper (reg. no. K5 CKR) trying to use one of them to go ahead. I saw him/her swing in behind me, and then across to the inside lane (that’s the one for going right), and then cut back in again. You actually only need to use one lane to go straight ahead properly, but this prat used three – two of them incorrectly.

Later, driving to Long Eaton with a pupil, we were at the Bardill’s roundabout, going ahead down the A52. As the lights changed, this pillock in a silver estate car (reg. no. PN55 JJL) was in the inside lane (marked for turning left into Toton). As the lights changed, he shot forward and cut everybody up to move into the middle lane for straight ahead. He quickly swung out into the outside lane, but his rather excessive speed was curtailed by another car.

Then, driving into the City Centre with a pupil, we stopped at the lights on the other side of Lady Bay Bridge. We were in the middle lane behind a large transporter – unlike everyone else, who was piling into the right hand lane to try and get past the transporter, not considering the fact that he was there because he needed the turning circle. One or two managed to cut the transporter up, but not the dark Fiat Punto (reg. no. YH52 TZK), who got stuck behind, and who was even more put out when the transporter then signalled to move into his lane. The Punto wasn’t going to give way to anyone else, so he cut us up by moving across three lanes to get right into the left hand one. Of course, if he’d gone behind the transporter in the first place, like we did, he wouldn’t have had to ignore me at the next set of red lights as I used universal sign language to describe his mental capacity.

And finally today, driving through Mapperley, we were at one of the dozens of sets of traffic lights our illustrious council has decided to replace (even though there was nothing wrong with the old ones). In other words, there were fair-sized queues because of the temporary three-way lights standing in for the complete absence of any kind of workforce. The normal two lanes is down to one, and as we pulled up, one woman cut us up to make sure she got through first. I didn’t get her reg. no. – but the second one who tried it pissed me off – another young woman with a zit-faced youth in the passenger seat (blue Ford Ka, reg. no. X166 FLK).

On the one hand, when you’re teaching pupils how to do things properly, these people make a mockery of the Highway Code and give full justification for the huge insurance premiums young drivers have to pay.

On the other hand, having to share the road with such troglodytes can be used as an excellent teaching opportunity. It’s so predictable how people are going to drive, you can actually say “now, watch this car in front – he’s likely to cut in”.

And they do!

Seriously, though, I have a lot of conversations with pupils about the large number of full licence holders who simply can’t do roundabouts (and other things) properly. Even the ones who think they’re being clever (the young males, usually) are only hiding their inability to do things the right way.

Young Drivers… VERY Young Drivers

17/02/2012

DOAADI

ADI, Bad Drivers, News, Training

I just saw a skit on BBC Breakfast about teaching young drivers – as young as 11 – to drive. It is an initiative which is being championed by Quentin Willson (yes, two “ells”; media motoring “expert”).

In the skit, an in-car camera recorded an 11-year old with a huge grin exclaiming:

How cool is this?

…as he drove a car around an off-road circuit. Just remember that, because I will. That 11-year old was driving a car and exclaimed:

“HOW COOL IS THIS?”

It doesn’t take a huge leap of the imagination to transport him – or someone his age – from a private compound near to London to an inner city street with a gang of his mates, taking a car that doesn’t belong to him. Or on a Road Wars video, trying to evade the police as they try and catch him.

I’ve known about this scheme for some time. To be honest, I have always known it for what it is – a brilliantly clever way of selling driving lessons at almost £60 an hour! That’s around three times the normal cost of an hour’s lesson.

In that respect, I have no axe to grind with the scheme. It’s a business ploy to sell driving lessons at a ridiculously inflated price, but it is still a fantastic Unique Selling Point (USP). In fact, it’s quite similar to Mercedes Benz’s idea of selling expensive lessons in expensive cars to Hooray Henrys and Henriettas (or their provincial counterparts) in terms of its business model.

However, Willson and that 11-year old have now taken it to the next level for me. The next level downwards. You see, Willson has spoken in Parliament on this topic. He says (indeed, has said – in front of Parliament):

I passionately believe that we don’t teach young drivers to actually drive, only to pass a test, and one that’s woefully inadequate.

This is complete bollocks, and Willson ought to understand what he is talking about before shooting his mouth or, or committing himself to it so “passionately” (the same goes for driving instructors who embrace this scheme merely because it is aimed at children). Passion is often a mask for blindness and ignorance. I’m also fairly certain Willson has some links with the school mentioned, because I read somewhere else that his own son had taken lessons with them. To that end, he adds:

One of the most important things this Committee could do is to consider a revolutionary new young driver programme where driving is part of the school syllabus, much like citizenship. Teaching kids to drive at 17 is at their least receptive age. Their mindsets are already corrupted and corroded by video games like Grand Theft Auto and the worst excesses of Top Gear.

Seeing as he is a former presenter of Top Gear, is he not guilty of peddling “excesses” to the teenage masses out there for his own profit? Does he not do that now in the Sunday newspapers, as he drools over the latest supercars that less than 1% of the population could ever afford?

What does this misguided individual think will happen when kids’ minds have been filled with the desire to drive a car (and the impression that getting one is only just around the corner), AND THEN get “corrupted” by Grand Theft Auto and the “excesses” of Top Gear? Basically, you’ll be teaching them how to drive the cars they will end up nicking – and increasing the likelihood of the theft in the first place by creating a desire!

Can he not realise that a juvenile mind is a juvenile mind. In the entire recorded history of the world – and into pre-history – a juvenile has been a juvenile, requiring nurturing and protection on the way to adulthood, making reckless decisions of its own along the way. Six years (until you’re 17 and legal) is a hundred lifetimes when you are 11, and after having been tempted with HOW COOL IS THIS? experiences, the 21st century kid simply isn’t prepared to wait any longer than necessary.

Too many kids don’t wait even now. Car theft is unfortunately a typical juvenile male pastime – certainly one which too easily occurs as a viable activity to kill time to modern youth – and this scheme will just make it worse. A thousand times worse.

In any case, 17-year olds have a job remembering what they learnt for the Theory Test only two weeks earlier – I’m sure as hell that an 11-year old (even if he does wait 6 years) isn’t going to remember anything useful from pre-teen driving lessons once the testosterone kicks in and he hits 17. Even worse, he’ll probably THINK he knows everything – and what 17-year old doesn’t know it all already?

They will not wait! They will want to drive now. Those fools who start gushing that we should “pleeeeease think of the children” are totally ignorant of the likely consequences of teaching some things at too young an age. Teach them about sex at primary school, and you have an increase in teenage pregnancy. Teaching them to want a car – and want one badly – is not going to turn out any differently.

The real problem on the roads is illustrated by that thing I mentioned about kids not being prepared to wait. These days, they DON’T wait. They’ve been allowed to develop into ungovernable little savages (even the ones from Chelsea, Kensington, and those begat by TV presenters with inflated opinions about themselves).

All of this is a fault of the parents, who spoil their offspring with expensive treats – like driving lessons at 11, or in fancy cars.

Kids used to be taught road safety as part of cycling proficiency. But in just the same way that the Three Rs have fallen by the wayside (and kids are pretty stupid as a result), is it any wonder they have no sense on the roads? Willson’s plan isn’t addressing the problem – it’s just papering over the cracks, and badly.

Road safety definitely ought to be part of the curriculum. Driving cars shouldn’t be. It’s for adults, not 11-year olds. And if anything is going to change, it should be the minimum age at which people can drive, because many 17-year olds are still of the “hang-around-outside-the-chip-shop-causing-trouble” mentality – but in cars instead of on BMX bikes.

Incidentally, I love the Statement of the Blindingly Obvious from the Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM) that lack of driving experience – not age – is the reason why young drivers have crashes. But it also conveniently ignores the biggest problem: attitude.

The problem is far bigger and much deeper than people like Willson, the IAM, and all the bleeding-heart-children-come-first clowns are capable of recognising.

The Highway Code (Book)

15/02/2012

DOAADI

ADI, Driving Tests, Training

Recently, I’ve been appalled by the knowledge of the Highway Code exhibited by my pupils – after having passed the Theory Test, and being only weeks away from their practical tests in some cases.

It was highlighted during the snow we had. I’d used the opportunity to cover skidding and the importance of planning ahead, but not one pupil was able to tell me what kind of clearance they should leave between themselves and the car in front in normal conditions, let alone in the wet or on ice.

Answers included two metres, two car lengths, and even two feet! And the one who said “two feet” has failed his test five times already (not with me, I should point out), and he gave that answer when I asked what he’d do at 70mph on the motorway!

Since the snow cleared, I’ve been mentioning this to most of my pupils, and it is frighteningly clear that the problem is not isolated.

To be fair to them, they wouldn’t actually drive two feet (or two metres) behind the car in front. All of them can maintain a safe distance, but it’s when questioned the guessing starts.

You see, if someone is able to maintain a safe distance in practice, does it really matter if – when questioned – they don’t recall the Two Second Rule verbatim, or can’t declare that the gap should be at least two seconds?

At the moment, I (the jury) is out on that one! Just.

However, if they can’t recall the Two Second Rule, how many other things can’t they remember? Road signs, for example, or how and where to park next to junctions, etc? So part of me is still of the mind that they should bloody well know this stuff (or at least some of it).

From now on, I’m going to keep a supply of Highway Code (HC) books and give them out as I see fit. The RRP of the HC is £2.50, which isn’t a lot – but give away 40 of the things in a year and you’ve lost £100. Surprisingly, even the bulk suppliers are asking £2 a copy.

But I got an email through from Amazon today, and it reminded me of the fact that the Official HC only costs £1.49 on there (and delivery is free). You can only order a maximum of five, and it appears you can only have open orders to that maximum number at any one time. I’ll be a bit annoyed if it turns out I can’t buy any more once my order arrives, but we’ll see.

The Perfect Lesson

04/02/2012

DOAADI

ADI, Bad Drivers, Training

Well, the snow they forecast arrived mid-afternoon. I had a lesson booked at 7pm, and after considering the conditions and the pupil’s ability I decided to go ahead with it and use it as a “snow lesson”.

It’s incredible when you do a lesson that goes so well, and which you know is going to be useful for the rest of their lives.

First of all, moving away on his road, I got him to stop and witness how easy it is to skid. I made sure that he understood that in snow (and on ice), slight skids and wheel spins are almost inevitable – but the important thing is not to let them overlap with other traffic or hazards.

So we dealt with speed and planning ahead – particularly anticipating lights, bends, other traffic, and anything else which would require us to slow down or stop. Using the gears to slow the car down gradually, rather than braking, was especially important.

He was amazed driving through Colwick on the Loop Road (as was I) that some prick decided to overtake us and the three cars we were following – at speed (maybe he had a nail in his tyre) – on about an inch of lying snow, pulling in sharply in front of us at one point to avoid colliding head on with a car coming the opposite way. I wish I’d got his number or caught up with him at the lights, but he was going too fast.

He realised the importance of planning ahead and anticipation when going uphill towards lights, and trying to keep the car moving to try to avoid the problems of moving off on ice on slopes. I wasn’t so lucky going up a slope in Clifton later, when some prat coming downhill with parked cars on their side decided to apply the Clifton Gene (it only has one helix in it), and barge through. I had to stop, then was unable to move off again and had to turn around.

Travelling through Bingham, we were tailgated extremely closely by a Nissan Navarro (reg. no. AY08 FPG) as we were doing 30mph on a 40mph road on snow which was, by now, quite deep. If we’d stopped, he wouldn’t have. As soon as we got on to the new roundabout down there, he overtook at speed and flew off down the A52 towards Nottingham, I think – he was going so fast, he was gone by the time we got round there. Mind you, I lost count of the number of Audis that overtook me as I was going to pick the pupil up.

All in all, though, a great lesson. We covered all the snowy stuff, and he handled it brilliantly. I just wish all pupils could have a lesson in snow – that way, maybe fewer of them would end up driving like those other idiots out there.

Between lessons this afternoon, the Traffic News just went nuts – there were multi-car pile-ups on just about every motorway the moment snow started to fall. So when my pupil said “how do they get away with it?”, the answer was: “eventually, they don’t!”

Common questions:

Will my driving lessons be cancelled due to snow?

It depends on how much snow there is, how far advanced you are with your training, and your instructor’s attitude to teaching in snow. There is no rule that says you mustn’t have lessons in snow. In fact, it makes sense to do them so you can get valuable experience. But beginners shouldn’t do it, because it’s just too dangerous.

Also remember that what YOU see as being “advanced” in your training, your instructor might not agree with. It’s his or her decision.

Will my driving test be cancelled due to snow?

Quite possibly. And with the amount we’ve had, almost certainly until some of it thaws. You need to phone up the test centre on the day using the number on your appointment email confirmation and check. Otherwise, you MUST turn up – even if they cancel it at the last minute. If you don’t, you’ll lose your test fee.

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.

Oxymorons ‘R’ Us

10/01/2012

DOAADI

ADI, General, Training

Sometimes, you just have to smile. I noticed that there’s a bit of a disagreement going on at the moment about the use of emails to advertise goods and services, and the definition of “spam”.

It’s an interesting one, because if I get an email from someone out of the blue, it’s apparently “spam” if I don’t want the service. But what if I do? What if the service was one I didn’t know about? Is it “spamming” to tell people about it? To advertise?

But that’s not specifically my point. In the case I have in mind, one of the services being offered is a register of only Grade 5 and 6 instructors, with the argument that we’ve got to push quality in the industry forwards. A couple of things, though:

Grade 4s are not always inferior to Grade 5s and 6s
Grade 4s are perfectly acceptable as far as the DSA – the people who call the shots – are concerned

So, where’s this oxymoron at, then? Well, one of the other services on offer is a register intensive driving course providers throughout the UK!

Now, this is strictly my own opinion – and it’s also right – but intensive training is designed absolutely and specifically to get people to pass the driving test in the shortest time possible. It isn’t about “safe driving for life”. Even if someone offering it pretends not to be just doing it to get people through the test, the simple fact is that gaining driving experience requires time on the road, and signing up for an intensive course which allows you to go from absolute novice to driving a Ferrari (but probably an Audi) in less than a fortnight (usually a week) is hardly pushing quality in the industry forwards.

I’m not criticising anyone’s advertising or entrepreneurial moxie in any way. Nor do I see it as spam (like some others seem to do) – it’s just simple advertising, and you can take it or leave it. It just seems odd to me that two totally conflicting variables are in the equation.

On a related note, a local Chinese restaurant has signs up outside advertising its Chinese New Year party, which appears to take place over two nights. They say:

Chinese Lion Dance + ABBA Tribute

Chinese Lion Dance + Elvis Tribute

Not quite oxymorons. But nearly.