Driving training.....an alternative approach

We must make our roads safer by raising the standard of training for newly qualified drivers.

I’ve had 3 yrs experience in the driving instruction industry, and it seems to me there is much room for improving safety on our roads.  In my humble opinion (as they say), the DSA system for training new drivers seems fundamentally flawed.  I say that because there are signs that the training provided to learners is not fit for purpose.  The DSA openly quote the probability of newly qualified drivers having a collision for all to see, the insurance premiums for these new drivers seem to confirm that they are very likely to claim on the insurance. 

If the DSA are serious about improving the safety on our public roads, then taking a fresh look at how driving training is provided in the UK would be a good starting point.  Before I turn my attention to that though, there is another issue relating to learner training which is completely seperate but actually linked.  In many regions of the UK there are too many driving instructors for learners.  Some are specialising, some are getting second jobs and some are deciding it’s time for a career change.  The consequence of this supply/demand mismatch is that many instructors are making the training financially cheaper and cheaper with the result that standards in training have to reduce in order to make it viable as a business.  Many instructors are bending to the learners demands in order to keep the customer happy.  The average national pass rate for learners in the UK is just under 50%.  So many learners are failing the test, and even the ones that do pass are not feeling confident having done so.   This is not a healthy situation.

So you see the connection here?  Evidence tends to suggest that learners who go through the training are actually ill-equipped for driving independently after passing the test, and yet instructors are having to discover new ways of looking more attractive than the competition, to stay in business when there are too few customers around. Looks a little like a downward spiral to me.    

If the DSA were to raise the bar for the expected standard of training to learners, then not only would that pass rate of 50% increase, but also driving instructors of lesser quality would be slowly weeded out.

So without wanting to over generalise, the danger with this situation is that you have learners going to test, taking 2, 3 or 4 attempts and only just being of a good enough standard to pass.   The driving instructors are happy to comply, ‘the customer is king’, and they still get paid for use of their car even on these failed test attempts.   ‘Justifiers’ of this situation will say that if an instructor is no good, then by natural selection, they will get a bad reputation and be weeded out, therefore there is nothing to worry about.  Which under normal conditions of supply and demand would be correct, but these are not normal times.  As such, more and more instructors are offering cheaper and cheaper lessons, a certain number free, or £7, £8, £9 an hour lessons are increasingly common.  They are desperately trying to ‘hook’ more customers – the hook is not quality, the hook is cheap lessons.

Pause for a second.  Look at who is controlling things here.  Look at the consequences.  Is the DSA really satisfied with this current situation?

I have an alternative approach.

Any booking of a learner test HAS to be authorised by a qualified driving instructor (ADI).   When that ADI approves the pupil to go to test, not only are they saying that they fully agree the pupil is ready to go to test, but they declare to the DSA that all the syllabus as defined by the DSA have been covered; and they are prepared to put their name to that pupil. 

If an ADI gets a pass rate of lower than a certain threshold as set by the DSA, let’s say for the sake of argument 75%, then that ADI is automatically recalled for a check test, at the instructors expense.  The instructor is provided with his/her results from the tests for a set period, and if there are any common themes of driving faults that are exposed, the check test will in particular be looking at those areas.  A grade of 4 or above on check test, carry on.  Grade 3 or lower and you are facing being taken off the register.

If an instructor is recalled for a check test a certain number of times in a given period eg 3 times in 12 months, then a warning is then given that they face losing their badge.

If a learner with a diagnosed learning difficulty wants to learn to drive then there must be a mechanism in the test booking system that precludes the result of that learner’s tests from affecting the performance measure of that instructor, due to the unpredictable nature of performance from learners with learning difficulties.

If a learner suffers with excessive test nerves then it is the responsibility of the instructor to identify that early on in the training, and assist that learner to pass the test.  ‘Test nerves’ per se, are no excuse for low pass rates for an instructor (in the above example there is a 25% allowance on the threshold to cater for such cases).  If the instructor is unable to train the learner to cope/manage the test nerves then they would not sign them off for test, and the learner would need to find an instructor who IS able to.  Word would soon get round of which instructors are ABLE to assist in this regard.

Every test is taken as a separate case.  10 learners that take 20 attempts to pass in total will result in a 50% pass rate.  On the other hand, 9 learners that pass first time, and one that takes 11 attempts in total will result in a 50% pass rate.  Therefore instructors will be directly accountable for providing training for the needs of each individual.

The public would be able to search for any ADI on the DSA website and see their latest pass rates.

Any newly qualified ADI would have a certain period of time (eg 12 months) shown on the DSA website whereby the pass rate would not be disclosed.  This is to cater for odd stats that can arise due to low frequency of tests being taken (due to being new in the industry).   In that 12 month window only, their pass rates would still be calculated and run on in to month 13 but would not be displayed.

The public would not necessarily need to know what the check test threshold is, they would only see the pass rates of each instructor and would therefore be able to make comparisons between instructors.

The pass rate figure quoted should also have a figure following it in brackets, indicating the number of tests that pass rate relates to eg ADI 191010 INGRAM 84% (48), this is to provide transparency about the number of tests the figure is calculated on – the public can then be better informed by that information.

This would improve the current situation in a few ways:

1.        The standard of driving at the test stage would dramatically improve, due to the fact that there is accountability between the pass/fail and the instructor’s career.

2.       Learners would know from the outset that if they do not cover all the syllabus of learning, and reach it to the instructor’s satisfaction, the instructor will not sign them off for test, therefore the onus is on the learner to learn rather than the instructor to get the learner to test.

3.       Lesser able instructors would slowly be weeded out of the industry, allowing the higher quality instructors to flourish.

4.       Driving instructors would feel more valued, they would feel less pressured.

5.       There would be a direct incentive for an instructor to ensure that he/she maintains standards, and does not cut corners. 

6.       Instructors would have the opportunity to ensure a full range of training was provided that truly aims to provide a safe driver for life.

7.       Instructors would have more control of the timing of the tests, and would be less vulnerable to learners wanting to take the test too soon. 

8.       The public would be given the opportunity to make a more informed decision on who they select for driving training based on a meaningful, accurate measure.

9.       The attitudes and responsibilities of the learner would be more adaptable than the current system provides due to the balance of power for the learning process shifting from the learner to the instructor.

10.   Due to the clearly defined expectations, there would be more willingness for the learner to take ownership of the training and embrace independent learning to satisfy their personal needs.

11.   There would be less need to provide cheaper and cheaper lessons, as the quality of the instructor is more transparent to the customers.