We Do It Differently!

Yes, of course you do! This article in getwokingham made me smile.

All it is is a story about two learners who have won 30 hours of driving lessons each. That’s ALL it is – unless you listen to the driving school who put up the prize, for whom it is a major advertising exercise.

At [big-headed school in question] we have a slightly different way of learning which aims to help people develop their driving skills rather than just pass the test.

If I had £1 for every driving school – single- or multi-car – which has claimed this, I’d be able to retire.

SmugLet’s just set the record straight on a few points. Every ADI is self-employed, and the way they teach is purely down to them. So no school or franchise can claim that all of its instructors are identical, because they aren’t. Nor could they ever be.

An ADI might be taught to teach a certain way by his instructor, but once he is out teaching he will develop his own style. Simple fact.

In exactly the same way, learner drivers will do the same once they pass their tests.

Every driving school in existence is there to teach people to pass the test – that’s because there is a test that must be passed, and that creates a market for people who can teach you how to do it.

Like everything else in life, learning new things is merely a stepping stone to further development. When a child learns to write, they quickly learn to express themselves in ways that are specific to them. They don’t just learn to write the alphabet and nothing else – they apply their knowledge and develop new skills independently of anyone else. This is one of the miracles of the human brain.

Driving is the same. If people are taught appropriately – I’ll leave the word “correctly” to the idiot school in the article – then they are given all the necessary tools to carry on developing. They do not need showing how to use them in every conceivable situation. Anyone who thinks they do – like the school in the article is implying it does – is not as clever as they think they are.

A few ADIs out there take things to extremes, of course, and only drive test routes. Of course, I’m sure the school in question is going to drive miles and miles away from test routes during those 30 hours the two learners have won.

The bottom line back in the real world is that someone somewhere has donated around £1,500 worth of free lessons and got their company splashed all over a newspaper. It would cost a lot more than £1,500 to do that through normal advertising.

Oh, yes. And they are driving instructors like most others. They teach people to drive.

And one final thing. One of the prize winners said:

I was really surprised and shocked to find out I had won. It will save me a lot of money, well, it will save my dad a lot of money.

So like every other learner out there, her main priority is to spend as little as possible in order to get her licence.

So it matters little that the driving school claims that it “does things differently”. The only “different” thing any school can do to get people to become safer drivers than they would otherwise be is to get them to take more and more lessons. Because experience only comes with driving time.

Making them take more lessons is a certain way of making them go to a different school – it happens all the time when people know they aren’t being taught quickly, and end up spending too much time parked up and yapping away.

Still, it was a nice advert for them.

Try and Squeeze Through That One!

I saw this story about a new traffic calming measure in the Watford Observer.

This Google Maps image shows the feature (BEFORE it was modified, judging from the descriptions in the article):

Woodmere Avenue, WatfordThe restriction in question used to be 236cm wide, and it had a single post either side. After being modified, it is now 213cm wide, and it has three posts on each side.

The question you have to ask is why was it made  narrower?

Apparently, numerous cars have been damaged – some can’t even get through it – and at least two are in the process of suing the council.

It is also on a driving test route.

The article points out:

On the day it was re-opened, police were forced to close the road while engineers came back to shorten the steel posts, which had knocked the wing mirrors off dozens of cars.

So it was poorly installed even in the first place. This should automatically lead you to at least consider that it might have been poorly installed in other ways, or that it was perhaps poorly conceived at some point. The fact that it is causing so many problems surely points to something being wrong somewhere.

…several drivers have continued to hit the shortened posts, with one engineer admitting one in ten vehicles are being damaged by the obstacle.

There comes a point when you can’t keep blaming the motorist. When 10% of them are experiencing the same problem, maybe you have found that point?

Unless you are a council held by this Mickey Mouse coalition we have at the moment.

The problem seems to be that the restriction is now not so much a bottleneck as a channel – the three posts either side mean you have to drive in a precise line over a finite distance instead of just at a single point, so you have to be absolutely parallel with the kerb as well as more equally spaced either side to negotiate the 23cm narrower gap – and you have to maintain it over several metres.

But here’s where it gets really funny. It’s the part where the Mickey Mouse councillors try to justify it:

Council bosses claim the work, costing £18,000, was carried out to save them money repairing the previous posts.

A resident points out that all six of the new posts are already damaged.

The police say they have had reports of drivers hitting the posts as well as of them using the bus lane in the middle. Ah yes, the bus lane – I wonder if that is any wider than it was before?

Hertfordshire County Councillor Stephen Giles-Medhurst, who sits on the authority’s highways and transport panel, said it was a possibility a camera could be introduced to prevent this.

The Liberal Democrat representative for Central Watford and Oxhey said: “If it continues it is something we could consider.

Wow. What a way for the Mickey Mouse government to save money – spend cash needlessly altering a chicane, end up spending more to maintain it than you did before to contradict your alleged reason for changing it at all, then put a camera in to make sure it isn’t used incorrectly as a result of its rubbish design and build quality!

Giles-Medhurst then reveals his true feelings about those he is supposed to represent:

“I drove my car, a Toyota Prius, through the posts and had no problem. It shouldn’t be an issue unless you misjudge it. I would ask, if you lose you wing mirror, are you driving at the right speed?

“There have been a lot of complaints, particularly from people with cars wider than 7ft, but there are signs up and if you ignore them, you do so at your own risk.”

What a prize moron he is.

In any case, all this is about the bus lane and nothing else. The modification was done for the buses, not motorists or anyone else.

What a Teacher They Must Be!

I’m getting a lot of hits at the moment on things like “dangerous adi” and “overtaking adi”.

I’m not sure precisely what the searcher is searching for, but maybe they’re looking for evidence of the silver Renault Scenic (reg no. R511 NRR ) that overtook me at traffic lights last night along Wilford Lane.

The pea-brained driver had decided he or she was going to overtake before a lane merge at Compton Acres, and overtake they were going to – even though there was no room. It’s also worth pointing out that the 30mph speed limit both before and after their idiotic manoeuvre obviously meant nothing to them.

The scary part was the “baby on board” sticker in the back window, and the L plates on the back. There’s every chance it DID have children inside, seeing as it headed off towards Clifton (big surprise). God help whoever it is they’re teaching to drive.

Test Pass: 17/3/2011

Tick!Well done to Richard, who passed this morning first time with 3 driver faults.

I will never forget that comment when you showed me how you did your parallel park, and I asked how you had judged the position. You told me “I sensed where the kerb was. I’m good at that, me. You know what I mean?” And then on the second go we ended up about half a metre on the pavement!

And when you told me you weren’t nervous, and I asked if you wanted the loo when we got to the test centre. You said you didn’t need it. But your “super bladder” failed about 3 minutes later and you had to go!

We had a good laugh.

Woman Fails Theory Test 90 Times!

According to DSA Freedom of Information data, somewhere out there – in Southwark, actually - is a 26 year old woman who failed her theory test 90 times (it doesn’t say if she’s passed it yet, but she failed that 90th attempt in November 2010).

The theory test costs £31, so she has spent £2,790 just trying to pass her theory!

You’d think she might have got the message by now that Nature was trying to tell her something, wouldn’t you?

The same would apply to a 39 year old man from around Stoke on Trent. He failed his practical test for the 36th time several months ago. So he has spent well over £2,000 just on tests. Even if he managed to get a re-test every 10 days, he’d have taken a whole year to do this many, and even with only one 2 hour lesson between tests he would have spent an additional £1,500 on top of the £1,000 (at least) he would have spent learning at the start.

Nature needs to start shouting a bit louder.

Seriously, though. If someone repeatedly fails the test like this – does it mean they are acceptable if they eventually pass?

EDIT 17/3/2011: Incidentally, this story has gone global – the newsfeeds are supplying hits from all countries. I wonder if they’ll track the woman down?

Yet Another Statement of the Blindingly Obvious

The newsfeed just threw this one up. “Threw up” is an appropriate term, I think, seeing as it is a combined insurance plug and publicity stunt.

Only an hour or so ago I mentioned that the driving test has never been designed to turn out perfect drivers with built-in lifetime driving experience. It has always been intended to decide whether people are safe enough to go out and continue learning through their own experiences.

IAM (Institute of Advanced Motorists) – the driving equivalent of the Bowls Club Committee or the England Cricket Team Selectors – is spending a lot of it’s time stating the blindingly obvious, these days.

Peter Rodger, chief driving examiner at the Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM)… said people should consider their actions once the L-plates come off and work to keep learning “to help themselves improve further”.

He pointed out that those getting behind the wheel should look at the skill as “professional development and not assume that once they have passed the driving test that is all they need to do for the rest of their lives”.

You can hear the collective sound of 55 million British citizens slapping their foreheads and going “ooooh, I never thought of that”. Or not, as the case may be.

The driving test has always been a stepping stone to further improvement. By definition, driving on your own leads to increased experience.

The last thing the average Neanderthal needs is advice on how to go round corners fast on the wrong side of the road, straightline roundabouts (which he can already do), or be told everything he vaguely remembers from his test is wrong anyway.

Co-op Insurance Black Box Scheme Launched

The Co-op has launched an insurance scheme whereby young drivers can benefit from lower premiums if they drive safely. The policy will be on average £328 cheaper than competing prices and around 80% of young drivers could benefit.

How it works is that the driver’s car has a smartbox fitted. The box transmits data about braking and acceleration, speed, cornering, and time of driving (day or night), and every 90 days this is evaluated. If they have been driving responsibly they will get up to 11% discount of the annual premium.

If they drive consistently badly then they could end up paying up to 15% more of their annual premium. It isn’t clear if this applies every 90 days or just annually.

It sounds like a great idea. So good, in fact, that it could be a way of reducing road deaths if the government had the guts to make it mandatory.

Find out more at the Co-op Insurance site here.

Driving Age to Rise to 18 in Northern Ireland?

The Belfast Telegraph reckons the minimum driving age could rise to 18 under proposals…

…to cut the carnage on Northern Ireland’s roads.

The proposals would also see restrictions on high performance cars, curfews, and a minimum number of lessons before being able to take the test.

Apparently, 17-24 year olds make up 15% of the driving population and yet they account for 38% of all fatal collisions. Those numbers got me thinking about the American problem I reported recently. The Americans allow driving from as young as 14, and their statistics report that “teens” account for 7% of the driving population, but 20% of all driving deaths.

How do the two compare?

Let’s imagine we have 100,000 drivers and 10,000 fatalities in some time period.

The NI figures mean that 15,000 17-24 year olds would be responsible for 3,800 deaths. That works out to 0.25 deaths per 17-24 year old.

The American figures mean that 7,000 “teens” would be responsible for 2,000 deaths. And that works out to 0.28 deaths per “teen”.

It’s not that different, is it? And I bet the UK mainland isn’t much different, either.

So is raising the driving age the answer? Is extra lessons the answer? I’m not so sure. Everything points to it being the same in every civilised country.

Irish Driving Tests to be Outsourced?

The Irish Times reports that the permanent outsourcing of driving tests to private companies is being looked into. A report is due later this month from the consultants who did the study.

The review was driven by spending cuts.

From what my Irish pupils have told me, Ireland has only recently brought its learner driver system to within a couple of centuries of the one we’re in now. If outsourcing were to be driven by a desire to bring Irish standrds into the 21st Century, then all well and good.

But when it is only for financial gain? Perhaps not.

Parents Pass Road Rage to Kids: Update

I wrote recently about an AA survey, and how the media had twisted it. The media seemed to be suggesting that the survey revealed parents pass on road rage to their children. That’s the only thing it was suggesting.

Here’s the proof that the media was talking utter crap.

It turns out the AA survey was of its driving instructors. “Poor use of mirrors” was the most common problem cited. This was followed by “speeding”, “failing to check blind spots”, and “not feeding the wheel when turning”.

Other bad habits include braking too hard or too late, driving too close to the vehicle in front, letting the wheel slip through their hands, using only one hand on the wheel, getting annoyed with other drivers, and coasting in neutral.

See that part in bold? An entire news story was made up from that. The survey summary simply said parents pass on bad habits – like we didn’t know that in the first place.

As I said, it has to be the biggest non-story of all time.