Coaching and the Client

Today I stumbled across a website specifically aimed at driving instructors, as most of my students and clients know I run a driving school and I am a practising life and executive coach, so my experience is as varied as the people I meet everyday.

The website claims, 'with the advent of the new check test and it's heavy reliance on coaching or client centred approaches I have developed courses to help you become ready for the 21st century' surely nobody actually falls for this sort of unrealistic claim, it actually leads other instructors into believing that this one ADI knows more than anyone else about coaching and client centred learning.

The DSA is quite clear about the fact that client centred learning is about giving the customer what they want, coaching is not a teaching tool and the evidence supports that coaching for the novice, be it driving or sky diving is not the way forward. The DSA recognise this and are not looking for coaching, their modernisation is a less restrictive approach to teaching and learning not an overhaul of the current system.

For the cynic amongst us, by incorporating the fleet check test and the ADI check test it is a smoother path for independent examiners to replace the civil servants who currently oversee the work of the driver trainer. By introducing a customer friendly service by the ADI, the standards that examiners will seek are the same as within any organisation or business that serves the public. As role play will not be an option it opens the door for any private sector service provider to tender. There is a whisper that the DSA will offer training to the private sector for testing, to coincide with their accreditation of courses, this will include driver trainer courses and see the end of the ORDIT registration, as this will no longer be needed.

The standard check forms that are being revised are point scores, so clearly designed by the private sector for ease of use.

This myth about coaching being CCL, quite apart from the rejection of this by the DSA, is quite ridiculous as not one person who is a coach, life or executive will recognise or refer to CCL.  The coach does not teach. The DSA have referred to the coaching chapter in the NDRS document as not being relevant, this supports the statement from the ERSC, and the fact that HERMES 2 was in 2010 and further developments have taken place since then.

So how does one person working for a national school but advertising themselves as an expert in the future of the check test justify scaremongering amongst those that don't want to be left behind.  In the case of all Government parties, it is better to just wait and see.  Having written to two ministers and having two completely different replies, I can't see that there is anything definite on the table.

As the DFT is to become the DFTandF we are in year one of a ten year programme to reform the back office and for the injection of private sector money, the NHS reforms and the fact that the NHS is also to be fed private money leaves the UK over a barrel, a very deep one.


copyright A.Green 2013 no extracts or reproduction of this blog without express permission of the author

CCL for learner drivers

Four weeks ago I wrote to the minister of transport, as a fully qualified life and executive coach. I did identify myself as a driver trainer, however I also passed on some of the research I am involved in.

 I am deeply concerned by the watered down approach to change within the driving instruction industry, particularly this spoon fed coaching which are words with no substance. having studied hard for my qualifications over the last few years and taken time to build a robust portfolio of clients within the executive sector as well as individual clients, I have found it quite difficult to see how coaching can be incorporated in it's purest form to help learner drivers. It was a relief to find that it has been recognised within Government that misuse of coaching has the potential to be damaging to the client, as I felt that had been over looked.

Some of the response covers the Standards document and the fact that trainers should not change their methods, just that ADI's have felt restricted within their work with clients and this encourages more listening and a better transition of the transfer of responsibility from trainer to trainee.  It also says that once the standards check comes into force instructors will be given a clearer idea of what is expected of them and this will enable them to choose more effective training.

I asked how an instructor could present coaching to a client without years of study and qualifications

'We do not want to lose what we already have and if we were to suddenly say that all ADIs had to become coaches there would be some who would become confused about what was being asked of them.  Others would try to deploy what they understood to be coaching tools and not do it well.  The result could be an overall deterioration in the quality of driver instruction.'


I asked why CCL is considered to be coaching within the driver training industry, the response was

'I can assure you that we are very aware client centred learning (CCL) is not the same as coaching. '


Although the reply was very in depth I have felt that these are very relevant to the sudden twist towards coaching for instructors, there are many other elements that were specifically asked linked to my research and understanding of the real risk within the young driver sector.

However, I am passionate about road safety, I do still work as a driving instructor, and I desperately would like to see better fatality figures for young drivers. Some of you may have seen my research and others may have read extracts from my up coming book, although not for the driving instructor industry, young drivers and road risk is touched upon. So, with this in mind I needed some answers, and today they were not just answered in full, but they satisfied my concerns.  As I am known to be cynical, as most writers are, when dealing with quotes and lengthy exchange, I feel that this response was by far one of the best I have received to date.

Moving along, it was felt that although HERMES was used as a reference which had emphasised coaching as a concept, this has been decided against, with the overall feeling being that there will be no attempt to use fully formed coaching skills, the aim is to relieve instructors of rigid approaches to training and allow more listening in the learning environment.

This appears to be quality control with the clients needs being more important and the tutor taking a guiding role. However, although this seems like a sensible approach it still doesn't tackle scientific evidence which shows that the young driver brain activity, risk, excitement etc is the controlling influence as opposed to the training environment.

Copyright A.Green 2013 - no extracts or reproduction without express consent of the author.

 

Government Consultations

Road safety consultations, NHS consultations, MOJ consultations, the list is endless, so why, for the last few years we have had occasional consultations, usually when the Government wants to trade an unpopular idea, but over the last few months surveys and consultations are in abundance, with a new survey in almost daily mailings.

How many consultations can one person respond to, or read thoroughly without losing the will to live? It seems quite a lot, although time consuming answering these surveys makes us feel as if we might at least be heard, yet when you look at the volume of replies it is shockingly low, are we that apathetic that it just doesn't matter any more, or do we believe we are unheard. Well, if out of 64m people a few hundred reply then how can we expect to be taken seriously as a nation.

The Government back office is fulfilling it's duty, treat the public as paying customers, which we are, listen to their comments and act on the majority, because when they present to the private sector seeking investment they need to be in a position to say, we did listen, but if you can't be bothered to get involved and say what you want then don't expect to get it, quite rightly too.

Privatisation is here to stay, the merging of offices is not a surprise, the merge of VOSA/DSA had been mentioned several times in various papers, the DSA are not striking because they are bored on Fridays, more that they can see the ship sinking and are trying to save it, but really the ink is dry so they would probably be best advised to jump.

Driving tests, modernisation, syllabus, consultations, reading between the lines and adding it to the facts from the back office and their announcements in trade papers tells the whole story.

For more on the Government consultation summary follow the link below

http://www.centraladitraining.co.uk/2013/06/21/consultation-summary/

Research

I am currently collecting research data and am looking for some more volunteers, it involves filling in a short questionnaire, all responses are confidential and no personal details are asked for, if you wish to be sent the conclusion please tell us, otherwise your details will be deleted on receipt of your response.

You need to be a driver, it does not matter whether you have a full or provisional licence, but you do need to be female.

This research will be included in a book due to be published later this year, no references will be made to those who take part only the content of the group as a whole.

If you fit the criteria and would be willing to take part please contact us at aicoachingsolutions@aol.co.uk and a questionnaire will be emailed to you.

A huge thank you to those who have already taken part.

AI Solutions: Shaking up the Learner Driver

AI Solutions: Shaking up the Learner Driver: How many have noticed major changes to the learning to drive process? In the last forty years not much has changed. We now have a th...

Shaking up the Learner Driver

How many have noticed major changes to the learning to drive process? In the last forty years not much has changed. We now have a theory test, yet for those of us who were asked a couple of questions from the highway code I believe we learned more, rather than the multi choice game that can be taken several times. Then we have the hazard perception test, a useful tool for a tutor, but for a test of ability?

So what else has changed? A couple of know your car questions, slightly longer in the driving seat, parking manoeuvres.

Yet the current Government, under pressure from the EU are after reform, on a grand scale, to reduce the amount of young drivers killed and seriously injured on our roads, despite the fact that the growing group are over 65. Will a big shake up be a vote winner? Of course not, so how quiet can they keep this? have they gagged the press? There has been very little information bandied about yet with the green paper due to be published next month it's gone quiet.

If you have a teenager about to learn to drive do you want it to be harder? The changes affect all age groups, so with more people leaving the learning process until they are twenty or older, is this just lip service, will it make any difference to the figures. Although teen drivers have always been a singled out group, how risky are they? Does the complacency of the older, experienced drivers put them at risk by not playing fair on the roads and expecting the novice to know how to cope with their random actions. Our roads are shared space, but in real terms does it really feel that way?

If we, as drivers, were nicer to each other, would road death fall, and would young drivers have a better chance?

Many would have us believe it is attitude, yet there is scientific evidence to suggest otherwise.

The interest of the driver is represented by groups of road safety professionals within the confines of the Driving Standards Agency arena, how many potential drivers get a say? How many are asked? The future of the learner driver is decided by those who have a financial interest.

I'm sure Mr McLoughlin would like your views? Or maybe not!

Driving the Future

I wonder how many drivers would rate their driving below 5 on a scale of 1 to 10, not many I'd bet, yet how about someone else rating your driving, would it be well received, somehow I doubt it, yet the UK Government is leaning towards GDL, despite the fact that their is no hard evidence that is comprehensive enough, to prove it is a life saver.

On the table for some time has been a political urge to monitor the driving standards of all licence holders in the UK. The first step is CPC for professional drivers and then the next group, everyone else. The latest research shows that 25 - 49 is the biggest group of people who lose their lives on the road, and that only 7% of the World's roads have seen any steps towards saving lives, yet every 40 seconds someone loses their life on the roads, so with those figures in mind would you be keen to have your driving assessed?

Political pressure has led to various groups trying to cash in on the improved driving instructor, by selling training, but do they need it? Well one would actually hope not because all those young people learning to drive who choose their lesson delivery by price alone is then putting their life in the hands of someone who might not be up to the job. However all instructors have passed the same qualification, with all professions seeking CPD, except driver training, extra qualifications may not actually make any difference, a good academic is not necessarily a good teacher. An experienced one is likely to be, because the trade of driver training sees many come and go, so will holding a piece of paper make any difference.

When you choose your driver trainer to assess your skills, when your company chooses driver trainers to assess your skills, did they choose the one with the best recommendations and highest qualifications, or did they shop on price? Have you ever asked your fleet trainer if they hold any qualifications? Would you care or are you just conforming to company requirements as opposed to a real desire to be better, or are you good enough already? Would you choose your surgeon the same way?

Are the targets unachievable, can the driving of everyone be improved so much that there are no accidents.

According to the research I am involved in the answer is no. You can reduce accidents with a multi factored approach but they have to be comprehensive enough to get everyone regardless of their background and financial situation.