I went to a meeting yesterday, supposedly with the echelons of the driver training industry. The movers and shakers. The people who meet with the DVSA on behalf of the driving instructor industry and put forward the view of the ADI to then discover they have not moved with the times. As a coaching business we put forward a presentation and the most resistant members of the group were an organisation purporting to be the oldest, which was reflected in their attitude and behaviour. The younger members and those who understood the psychology behind the way we do things and why, were a different audience, whose interaction of the presentation was spoiled by ungentlemanly and down right rude behaviour, from the top of an association tree and two former DSA registrars chatting amongst themselves during all presentations from guest speakers. What hope is there for a modern test and serious acceptance of road safety, if those who are supposed to support it do not actually believe it.
Introducing something new is always a challenge and that is to be expected, but if the minds of some older road safety 'professionals' are stuck in the past, how can the ADI believe that their real wishes and understanding is being presented to the ministers. A point I have today raised with my MP.
It is true making changes within the world of road safety takes time, evidence of that is the fact it took SEVEN years after announcement of a change to the driving licence for this to actually come into force. Incidentally today. Maybe that is why we are now looking at a diluted driving test. It resembles the test of years gone by, with no interest in maneuvering the car and driving out of town. So how will a pupil once passed tackle the trials of driving in built up areas, turn the car around, a skill that is essential in all drivers, it is a fact that fatal accidents happen during this move by unskilled or unpracticed drivers. So with a driving test that would be laughable in most EU countries, how will that help road safety?
On being questioned about the new driving test a spokesman for the MSA said " I wouldn't get involved with this one" so how on Earth are driving instructors supposed to get proper representation when the providers of people power, don't believe in it?
A survey by Direct Line and Brake actually identified there is a greater risk with young drivers using sat nav in the car on their own. The driving test would still require intervention from the examiner if the sat nav makes an error, how does that prepare drivers for post test capabilities. The evidence has always supported preparing pupils for post test, this is not the case when looking at the new proposals. It is of course an easy teach for driver trainers.
Driving forward into a parking bay, reversing out of a parking bay, surely that is part of learning to drive anyway. Parking on the right. Pupils already do this on a one way street.
The new driving test is not reflective of the NDRS and totally represents a waste of tax payers money. More publications, more research, more trials, more money.
The new driving test has returned a higher pass rate. Hardly a surprise, trails involve new skills from the trainer, so refreshed, pupils who take part in trials are usually the better able learner who would have also most likely passed the old style test.
ADI's who know what is needed for safer roads and better educated young drivers, need real representation within the DFT.
.Support the ADI within the industry, don't fight them.
From a personal note, sabotage of a professional presentation is rude, disrespectful and damaging for the industry as whole. Thank you to all of the attendees at yesterdays meeting who contacted us with words of support and encouragement. It is heartening to find that there were many who did not support the poor and unprofessional behaviour of someone who is supposed to be a leading supporter and owner of a national association for ADI's.
No comments:
Post a Comment