Data Privacy

With the Government saving money by being paperless, the tax payer should be seeing a reduction in costs, however there seems to be an opportunity to make more money as opposed to less.  By making services available on line the profit on fees will increase, with the DVSA being responsible for accrediting all CPC courses for a fee on a yearly renewable basis, when is the tax payer going to see a benefit based on the savings?  The DVSA have streamlined their services, are saving on resources without costly test centres to run in many areas, and a cash intake from the sale of properties. So what will this extra money be spent on? Well prevention of scamming the system, fraud or similar. In fact anything that would divert money from Government resources.

So although scam websites with DVSA in their web address are reportedly illegal, why is taking so long to stop the few who are making vast profits from the less savvy internet user.  Surely the extra available funds should be directed this way. Well it seems that the most effort is advertising the fact that these sites exist, which is all very well, but unfortunately those who are most likely to be caught out are the ones who are less likely to heed or even understand the warnings,

As with most things, if you already revolve in an environment then you would expect a certain level of knowledge and that just is not the case.  With computer use estimated rather than confirmed, then surely information should be slightly easier to access.  Any system is easy and usable with experience, but with many using this service once in their lifetime that seems wishful thinking.

The DVLA have had huge staff loses with a rolling redundancy programme for over 6000 staff as we see the end of local offices, pushing the consumer online, which from my experience can be tedious, time consuming and at times very frustrating, and I consider myself to be very internet literate.

It now transpires that the DVLA will be raising their fee to make a 'small surplus' which to you and me is profit, for providing vehicle owner details to private parking agencies. A service that surely is using a loophole in data protection and leaves the tax payer vulnerable, particularly to the less scrupulous operators.

If a private company cannot enforce the fees and parking restrictions on their own property then surely individual management systems need to review their operating procedures, not sit in an office and target individuals because they do not have enough manpower.  If giving out data is cheaper than on the ground enforcement, then something is wrong with the system.  With this resource now being available on line as opposed to the previous postal requests then enforcement has just become too easy and invites lazy practice.

The shared ANPR data which the DVSA access is necessary in this technological age, with no displayed tax discs or MOT evidence.  However, selling of personal data should surely be restricted. With so much remote Policing and enforcement, we won't have anyone working in the agency offices, but just techy equipment and an operator.

The DVSA working with other agencies including the DVLA will have their own STMO, which does also confirms the moving into more limited companies, owned by the Secretary of State and the potential to sell shares. Privatisation is just around the corner for all departments.

AI Solutions: Wanstead instructors vs the rest of the UK?

AI Solutions: Wanstead instructors vs the rest of the UK?: I thumbed through an article in Driving Instructor Magazine and was a little shocked by the content.  Having browsed instructor forum...

Wanstead instructors vs the rest of the UK?

I thumbed through an article in Driving Instructor Magazine and was a little shocked by the content.  Having browsed instructor forums for years, the majority frown upon on intensive courses, whereas a few embrace the intensity, this article sent mixed messages along with a large dose of self righteousness. The writer, Noel Gaughan, says he gives a better service for the money he charges, you can see this where he charges £250 for ten hours, against a £200 charge by another instructor for a two hour lesson and use of the car on test day, which actually equates to four and a half hours on test day. Pass rates are not relevant, post test survival is, and there is no current evidence to support that a high pass rate equates to safer drivers.

So along with the self elevated status comes comments regarding 'cash machine instructors', so also we have to assume that Noel teaches for fun and not to earn a living.  I've been involved in road safety for many years, I have written articles about it, I blog about it, follow the statistics and decipher them and I give talks about it too, but I would never claim to be better than anyone else, my previous experience as a research journalist led me to tracking figures and outcomes.

The test centre mentioned in the article, Wanstead, is one I used when I lived a stones throw from there, it does have one of the lowest pass rates in the country, but you can't only blame the instructors that use it.  Several examiners were disciplined here after failing the last wave of tests so they could have a darts match, an examiner at the same centre wasn't invited to take part and reported it to the DSA.  Of course nobody knows how many more of these incidents there were, it can of course be assumed if using the same logic as this article, they are in it for the money and not to put safe drivers out there.  Retests did take place once it hit the press.

Wanstead test centre, on the outskirts of East London no car park facilities, the waiting room is akin to a cupboard and you can hear examiners discussing previous tests while you wait.  The roads surrounding it have double yellow lines and are heavily parked, so quite difficult to park pre-test.  I used this centre infrequently but on one occasion I took someone who lived nearby, it was pouring with rain so I waited in the very cosy waiting room, an hour later no sign of pupil or examiner, other tests of which there were three had returned and the ADIs gone, it was the last test of the day. I knocked on the office door and was told the examiner had gone home.

It transpired that my pupil had been left in the car two blocks away and told to wait there.  The examiner had gone to the test centre through the back door, of which I did not know there was one, dropped off his paperwork and gone.  As while I was waiting another examiner had opened the door to the waiting room and had seen me there it wasn't as if they didn't know I was there.  Although the conclusion of my complaint was in my favour, it doesn't exactly inspire confidence.  Although I now live in a different part of the country I still use test centres in those areas for instructor tests.

So cash machine driving instructors? Examiners believe their life is in danger? The test won't end happily because of the school presenting the pupil for test? I think that is dangerous ground and absolute prejudice.  I have seen many people present for test who have never had a driving lesson, some arrive driven by someone else and then try to drive away from the test centre, some arrive without L plates, others believe they don't need a car for test.  Although the figures for those arriving for test independently are not available does that mean this is okay or is Mr Gaughan going to choose this category next time.

'How do we get rid of the cash machine driving instructors? Only the DVSA are in a position to do so' (Noel Gaughan Driving Instructor Magazine p.23, 2014), as a tax payer and member of the public I think my money is better spent on education and the health service.  Leave the DVSA to test, and us to continue to do our job. The research to date is varied and extensive, and I have read the majority of it, the aforementioned people will not pass the test if they are below standard, if they choose to try then that is their prerogative.

In six years we reduced our road fatality rate by 1200, a huge achievement and one of which as a country we should be proud, our driving populous has grown yet still we are saving lives, the opinion of a high percentage of the (voting) public is that there should be some form of assessment, and the EURSC would like the same, yet our Government is a little reluctant to be that controversial although they are quite happy to have a postcode lottery for cancer drugs.

The future sees the DVSA being a training establishment only, with quality control being the order of the day and private companies controlling examiner employment, which is why more remote centres will appear and along with that no requirement to publish performance results.  As the DFT becomes a limited company in the same vein as the HA and the DVSA follows suit, I think the opportunity for some to use the DVSA as a punch bag for all that is wrong in driving training will end, and personal responsibility will finally take over.

The Dividing Line

The bridge has widened between the driving instructor fraternity and the testing agency.  Although the top four national associations have banded together to provide a voice, and this can only be commendable it still isn't reflective of the general vision that is debated in various groups who do not belong to an association of any type.

A recent survey identified that the driver trainers who took part, want to see the industry as a whole respected more by members of the public, with 60% blaming the Government for this view, 30% believe that cut price lessons are promoting poor public image, 5% believe that instructors are respected and 5% don't know.

In 2007, the then DSA announced at their Nottingham conference that as testing changed and driving instructor standards rose, the public would appreciate the professionalism and that the DSA would encourage and promote raised awareness of the crucial role ADIs hold in the future of road safety, so why did this not happen? As soon as purse strings tightened and the DSA road shows stopped any help to raise profiles disappeared, the proposed changes to the check test finally happened seven years later but where is the encouragement and support for the instructor, regardless of their role in driver training, be it teaching a novice, training a company car drive, supporting emergency services to name a few.  The stand alone statement that ADIs are doing a great job just isn't enough.  Although the majority are self-employed people the testing agency has great input to structure, with the test being an ultimate goal rather than a stepping stone.  Road safety figures so far in 2014 have bucked the previous trend of declining fatality figures, so tapping the instructor to perform better (standards check) and the modernisation of the driving test (questionable) has not had the effect anticipated, this confirms the view that attitude hasn't changed nor have inroads.

The economy has lifted, this is evident from generally raised trading levels for internet businesses despite the loss of six high street stores every week, as people turn to on line shopping they can spend without leaving the house and some are happy to pay a premium for this as it does not compare to the cost of fuel and parking expenses.

Many driving instructors are reporting an upturn in business too, as the financial outlook shows improvement, also reflected in the drink drive fatality figures then accident rates are likely to rise, can driver behaviour change, definitely, will it, not without some serious Government input and with Department for Transport PLC round the corner, who is going to lead the way where the general public listen.

A recent meeting that I chaired discussed public information films and how this really does make a difference to knowledge, because a good advert will stick in peoples minds, this meeting was attended by over sixty full licence holders, a mix of ages and experience.

Can the profile of the ADI be bought into the 21st century? Can the Government finally fulfil their promise? Or is it just on the shelf gathering dust until figures stay on an uphill trend and the EURSC step in and demand targets.  Oh no of course we want to leave the EU don't we, despite the fact that without their enforcement of the changes to safety features as a compulsory measure it wouldn't be happening.  112 in airbags from 2015, distance separators on LGV1 just to name two.

The Statistics, and the role of the instructor

After all driving instruction isn't just about the learning process it is also about responsibility post test, isn't that what the standards check is trying to achieve.  The inclusion of the ADI in the bid to contribute to vision zero is surely a worthwhile one, it's unfortunate that although this is the desire of the EU, the actual information hasn't been filtered down to those at the sharp end. So what are the latest statistics and how can we really take part.

The rise of fatal accidents on urban roads must send alarm bells ringing through road safety groups as this is the area where most engineering has taken place.  Speeding in those areas has been tackled country wide, with the introduction of average speed cameras in some villages, on major routes and past schools where there is an accident history, so what isn't working, and why not and can the new driver population contribute to the reduction of those figures.

Urban fatality rates were 34% this has risen to 42% in 2013, that is a huge and worrying change.  The vulnerable road user has always been the concern in this environment, with young teenagers having the highest fatal risk.  On questioning a group of experienced drivers most considered this group to be careless when crossing the road and distracted by technology.  While this may be the impression amongst drivers the research tells a different story.  The young teenager has always been a group for concern, going to school unaccompanied, spending more time without an adult in a peer group, this doesn't mean they are rising to the challenge of pressured behaviour, in fact the research tells a story to the contrary, in 2010 the BMJ published a report that recognised up to the age of 14 a child is unable to physically judge the speed of an approaching vehicle, as brain development cannot appreciate speed and distance at that point, so therefore is unable to quantify the risk.  When moving in a group they will follow the lead of the others, the trends suggest it is most likely to be the teenager on their own where fatal injury is most likely to take place.  There are two reasons for this.  The driver does not perceive a risk when there is a child alone as this is considered a manageable risk, the danger of manageable risk is the brain activity of the driver will switch to other risk assessments too thereby allocating less attention to the vulnerable lone person.  When the teen crosses the road in a group the driver will automatically respond, but the random unexpected behaviour of the lone pedestrian trying to assess the situation will take the road user by surprise and is most likely to result in fatal injury.

So when moving onto the young driver it is also useful to know that the same piece of research identified that an adult, considered over the age of 14, cannot judge the speed of an approaching vehicle once it is travelling at more than 50mph, although some would argue this point, it is a physical impossibility, our brain makes the assessment on fast, faster or even faster, which is why some choose an inappropriate gap in moving traffic.  All of this is of vital importance in the world of driver training.  Can the ADI really make a difference in terms of fatal accident figures, of course.  If the pupil buys into the concept which is where coaching comes in,

There is no recognisible address to the problem, despite the WHO publishing a list of considerations, the EURSC publishing a strategy that is vague and lacking in direction.  Where is the starting point, well unfortunately the only way is through thorough research starting from 1979, there are thousands of pages of data, targets and information, which do in fact result in a worthwhile plan, but the changes in the political arena interrupt this making it an arduous task for the majority.

We have lost our top slot as the safest roads to drive on in the European community, with Sweden back up there, in terms of figures, our results for 2013, although fallen from 1754 to 1713, it is a poor percentage change in comparision to other countries, particularly the new comers, in moving forward with major improvement.

AI Solutions: Changing Names of the ADI

AI Solutions: Changing Names of the ADI: I was browsing, as you do, a networking site that was not Facebook, members on this site are varied but there is a generous selection ...

Changing Names of the ADI

I was browsing, as you do, a networking site that was not Facebook, members on this site are varied but there is a generous selection of driving instructors on there.  Well at least they used to be driving instructors but all of a sudden they are changing their job description, one has to ask why?

Has the title driving instructor suddenly become dirty words.

The influx of coaching courses has resulted in driving instructors now calling themselves 'coach', how confusing is that to the general public, it also questions are instructors ashamed of the title so are looking for a replacement?

We carried out a confidential survey with Survey Monkey - you can take part in this too if you wish, it is on our website, http://www.aicoachingsolutions.com in the blog section.  The results that have returned so far highlighted the fact that some feel under pressure to change their title rather than be left behind, but who started the trend in the first place?

Coaching courses specifically designed to help improve teaching methods and to understand CCL have their place and value, however, taking a course does not make you a coach, taking any course, certificate or otherwise doesn't make you an expert, it may top up your knowledge base but that is all.

So for the vast majority courses, associations and paid for information updates are unnecessary and financially unsound, why attend a course when you could be working.  It does seem that there is now confusion regarding the role of the ADI, in particular n contrast to other countries.  Will the bar rise in terms of professional recognition by the public, well that would be an uphill struggle, you could change the title a thousand times but at the end of the day we would still be driving instructors, I'm proud to be a driving instructor, I enjoy my role, I am satisfied that my pupils get what they pay for and have never read about any of them in the paper, so I must be doing something right.

When I first started teaching people to drive it was about building a business and a reputation, I had to start that all over again when I moved some 80 miles away.  Peer pressure encourages pupils to find us and enquire and parental and peer pressure actually make the final decision in the vast majority of cases.  Whether you describe yourself as a coach or not does not make the final decision.

Coaching in the UK is a new phenomenon and is treated sceptically generally. Those who seek a life coach are often from another country or have been involved in study or an environmental situation where coaches in various genres have been utilised, predominantly in the work place.

So why? We need to be delivering what it says on the packet and if that doesn't happen then the title of the provider is surely irrelevant.