Tuesday, 12 June 2012

e2-e4


The standard required to pass a driving test is without doubt, far too low.

*STOP*  re-read.....  did he REALLY just say that?!

Well, this is my blog, and the above statement is a true reflection of my honest opinion... and I’m entitled to it people!  It may be wrong, but I believe it, for what I think is good reason.

It is not being too controversial to say that in very general terms, getting a person to physically drive a car without killing someone, and without causing excessive disruption to others is not in itself, overly difficult.  Plenty of parents I’m sure know only too well, with the benefit of the experiences of taking their young ones on empty car parks on a Sunday morning, that it is possible to get the hands and feet doing roughly the right things, relatively quickly.  I take my hat off to all parents who get involved in this way, I really do – that’s why a long time ago, I dedicated a section to them on my website, to help them in these sessions they do with their young ones.

But... there’s always a but isn’t there..... but, hands and feet is only half the battle, and I would argue not even half.... perhaps a 1/3 of the requirement.

What is by far much more difficult to develop is a driver that THINKS.  Engaging the brain, before engaging a gear is not so easy.

Let me give you two prime examples that I have encountered over the last 2 days:
  
Yesterday, Chap no.1 wants me to assess his driving – he has been a motorbike rider for quite some time (1000cc no less) but wants to learn how to drive a car.

Today, Chap no.2 wants me to assess his driving – although he hasn’t driven a car before, he has to manoeuvre HGV’s at his work (on private land) and so although he has never got out of 2nd gear, he knows about the clutch, and seeing as his work would not be happy with him reversing into stationary objects, he has some spatial awareness too.

Two very different people, very different backgrounds, both with their own stories to tell, their own recollections/experiences in driving matters, they have different needs, different concerns, and different aspirations. 

Chap no. 1 drove my car like he drives his motorbike – superb at reading situations ahead of him, always looking to make progress -  “Stand by world, I’m coming through” mentality, and is keen as mustard.

Chap no. 2 could not be much more different.  He is more thoughtful, his actions are more deliberate, much more methodical, reserved, considerate, and does not want to inconvenience others.  Oh..... and keen as mustard.


Now, my point about the statement at the top of this blog is that until the test starts to interrogate what is going on in the brain, it will only churn out temporarily robotic drivers.  What I mean by that is, it is too easy for a candidate to attend a driving test, and drive to a standard that is acceptable on the test but have not the slightest inclination to drive to that standard/system from the moment he/she leaves the Test Centre. 

When the DSA has a tag line of ‘Safe Driving For Life’, what exactly are they doing to test a candidates ‘readiness’ for exactly that.... safe driving for life?

It is a complex mix of things that produces a persons attitude to learning to drive.  People are influenced by the attitudes and actions of friends/family who already drive, they will become conditioned to what they believe is acceptable eg wearing a seatbelt or not, drink driving, driving with no insurance.   Some of us have our attitudes affected by a traumatic experience.  Not everyone can afford to learn to drive, or insure a car or even properly maintain a car.  Some may be influenced by an authoritative figure like a stern Father or a driving instructor.  

But for that precise 38minutes, you can put all these things to one side, and just drive for that moment in time, to a ‘safe’ standard, efficiently and with consideration to others.  38 minutes.  That is not long.

What I would prefer to see is some kind of interaction that tests the brain.  It needn’t be requiring to hear a ‘commentary drive’ as such, it may be as simple as asking why a mirror check was done, or asking for an opinion on another road users driving.   Anything that digs a bit deeper, and truly searches inside the psyche of a candidates attitude to driving has got to be a good thing.  The options are endless when you think about it:  opinion of ‘amber gamblers’, asking how overall stopping distances applies to a very specific driving situation up ahead, asking what a candidate is assessing on the approach to a roundabout, asking how they have trained for the test, asking if they see any difference in the test standard compared to real life.

To have a driving test that only tests a persons ability to physically drive is a little bit like asking a Grand Master at chess to play a game of chess considering the next move ONLY; stopping them from anticipating, stopping them from planning, stopping them from developing – it is complete and utter nonsense.  To play chess well you HAVE to be able to predict outcomes, you must anticipate strengths/weaknesses of what you see in front of you, you absolutely must appreciate the consequences of poor/irrational decisions, and 
I see comparisons with a good driver  ....  what I call a good driver anyway, maybe not what the DSA call a good driver.

I’d like to see a test that tests a persons mind, rather than scores driving faults. 



Got any comments about the above?  Bung them down below.....  

No comments:

Post a Comment