Trainee driving instructor part 3 changes

 This blog is for trainee driving instructors as it explains the differences to the Part 3 (Instructional Test) changes that are due to come in on 2/10/17.  For the purpose of this blog I will abbreviate trainee driving instructors to “PDI”.

For absolute beginner PDI’s just coming into the pipeline now, it is highly likely that as the average timing of the qualification process in the industry goes, those PDI’s will be taking this new format of Part 3 test.  As such, this blog will be very useful as a summary of the key changes.  BIG TOM Driving School does provide PDI training for trainees and this blog is a key source of information.

The source of the following information was received by the author Tom Ingram being present on a webinar organised with thanks to the ADINJC on 25/4/17 with contributions by DVSA representatives Mark Magee and John Sheridan.

The very first point made by the DVSA is that the current “completion rate” of PDI’s who register with the DVSA and go through the whole process and qualify is far too low.  Whilst they were keen to say that it was not the intention to open the flood gates of newly qualified driving instructors, the aim is to raise the quality standards of ADI’s in general, and therefore road safety, but acknowledging the fact that far too many people are entering the process, spending a great deal of money on attempting to qualify and for a variety of reasons not being successful.  There was a theme throughout the webinar, as will be seen in the following that makes the connection with this outcome and the low quality of training of trainee driving instructors in the industry. 

Putting the changes into context the DVSA explained that the current Part 3 assessment is fault based whereby an examiner role plays a pupil and introduces driving faults within a pre-defined framework.  The conflict then comes once the PDI qualifies as an Approved Driving Instructor and is then assessed by a periodical “Standards Check” which is a competency based assessment using a real pupil.  The DVSA are assessing qualifying trainees to a markedly different structure to the assessment of newly qualified ADI’s.  The problem with the current assessment is that it is “test centric” in nature – a term that I have not previously heard of.  The issue as raised by the DVSA is that it tends to lead to PDI’s learning WHAT to teach as opposed to HOW to teach which any reader of this blog will know is a subject that I am passionate about.  It was also openly recognised on more than one occasion by the DVSA that the quality of the current part 3 assessment was directly linked to the ability of the examiner to effectively role play; a point that is undesirable.

The aim of this change to the Part 3 assessment is to align driving training of PDI’s (and therefore the work of ADI’s), with the DVSA National Standard for Driver and Rider Training and the post-qualification assessment known as the “Standards Check”.  Mention was also made of the new format for the Learner driving test coming in on 4/12/17 which is aimed at encouraging learners to gather more pre-test driving experience, on a variety of class of road (especially faster roads) in order to increase competence and confidence.

The assessment structure of the new Part 3 test will be aligned to that of the Standards Check, using a real pupil and looking at 17 sub-competencies within the broad umbrella of 3 competencies:

Lesson Planning

Risk Management

Teaching & Learning Strategies

It was stated by the DVSA that far from resulting in an easier assessment it is their opinion that the new assessment will be more challenging.  This is due to the fact that by replacing a role playing examiner with a real pupil, there are unpredictable factors of how well the pupil can accommodate driving while having an examiner in the back (and possibly an observer of the examiner too) – despite the fact that the personnel in the back are not assessing the learner driver.  Also other road users, changing driving conditions and differing routes are also unpredictable factors.

Part of the initial registration process for a PDI is the “fit and proper” vetting, and the DVSA were keen to point out that they were keen for PDI’s to not start training until this hurdle had been completed.

The use of a real pupil for the Part 3 test was qualified as being flexible to include a friend, family member, real learner for no fee, colleague including someone who is a full licence holder.  The key test of the appropriateness of the choice of “pupil” is that the lesson given by the PDI must be meaningful, client centred training tailored to the individual’s needs.  One of the key concerns in the industry is that this will invite PDI’s coming to test using a “pupil” who has a full licence for a motorway lesson.  The DVSA were keen to point out that the lesson must be meaningful, learning must take place and if a PDI were to present such a “pupil” and have what is seemingly an easy time of it, this would be in danger of leading to a fail, as the lesson has not been adapted to ensure that learning has taken place and is meaningful.

The DVSA went on to describe how they intend to Quality Assure the calibre of “pupil” presented by making trainers more accountable for the quality of training provided to PDI’s and the quality of the PDI presented for test.  There will be monitoring of which trainers sit in on part 3 tests, whether log books are seen to be in use relating to the PDI’s experiences prior to test, and whether there are themes of the type of “pupil” presented by trainers.  Although the log book is not a legally enforceable pre-requisite, it will be very desirable for the DVSA to see evidence of this, especially from trainers who are on the ORDIT register.

At any one time, there are currently about 40,000 ADI’s and 2,000 PDI’s registered.  There are roughly 800 trainers currently registered on the ORDIT register and about 200 organisations. 

There is a stipulation to qualify (pass the part 3 test) within 2 years from the day the Part 1 test was passed.

It was noted that whilst there is not a legal necessity for part 3 training to be conducted by ADI’s only, the prospect of part 3 training being provided by trainers who are not registered as ADI’s was very undesirable from the DVSA point of view. 

The “curriculum” of driving training is generally acknowledged as being the contents of the DVSA national standard quoted above.  Required to be demonstrated on the new part 3 assessment is evidence of learning within the 17 sub-competencies.  (These sub-competencies are tagged within each blog presented by the author).

It was apparent to me that throughout the webinar there was much emphasis being placed on the integrity and accountability of trainers who provide training for PDI’s so not only is the assessment structure of the part 3 test being changed but there will also be tighter monitoring of the quality of PDI being presented by which trainer(s).  The DVSA appear to be keen to offer the opportunity for trainee driving instructors to be able to make informed decisions when selecting their training provider so that more successful outcomes are created more regularly in the industry.

The author has already registered for the Instructor Trainer Workshop being run by the DVSA shortly re changes to the part 3 and ORDIT scheme.  I will keep readers up to date on completion.

Tom Ingram provides payg training for trainee driving instructors 0775 607 1464

Expanding the learning experience

How easy it would be to start off a driving lesson with a pupil; after some pleasantries, look at what subject they covered the last time you saw them, make an attempt to recall the last session by asking the pupil a couple of questions, and then deciding on what is the next most appropriate subject to do.  It goes something like this:

You:  Hi John, how are you today?

John: Yea not bad ta

You: Great stuff. Well the weather is being kind to us today.  Should be good eh?

John: I guess

You: Now I see on my record here you did junctions last time.  How did that go?  Where did we do it?

John: Oh yea that’s right.  Down near the church, you said you wanted me to go there because it was quiet.

You: Excellent.  That’s right, I remember now.  That went alright didn’t it?

John: Ermmm, yea I guess.

You:  Great, well, in that case John, what we should do next is go down near the supermarket because over there, it can get a bit tighter and that will be different to where you were near the church.  It’s the next step up if you like.  Sound good?

John:  [Yes, you know what’s coming]    Yea I guess.

I make light of it, but this will represent a very common way of a driving instructor starting a driving lesson.  They will think they are doing good, because they clearly are recording the subject matter of what the pupil is doing, they are engaging the pupil in Q&A, they are making attempts to keep the lessons stimulating by going to new, more challenging places, and they have the pupils engagement.

It lacks some pretty fundamental ingredients for a briefing though.  When we give driving training there are a number of variables that are worthy of mention.  How does the pupil feel?  Tired, excited, nervous?  Well worth discussing because how a pupil feels will often affect their driving behaviour eg response times, concentration levels, priorities of attention etc.  This will have a direct influence on the safety of you, the pupil, your driving school car, and everyone around you at the time.  Safety and assessing risk is worth talking about.

Equally important in the briefing is the necessity to encourage the pupil to self evaluate their last session in terms of what they learnt, how they felt.  Ask them to score it in some way.  This is good, because when they give you a 6 out of 10 for example, it will be helping them to remember the good and bad stuff that happens.  The bad stuff that happens is an opportunity for them to learn more.

The reason why I point this out is summarised in the ADI1:

“The ADI’s task is to provide an effective learning experience for their pupil.  An effective learning experience is judged to be one in which the pupil is supported to take as much responsibility as possible for their learning process”.

In my example above, the ADI is controlling the extent of the self-evaluation by the pupil (almost zero), and also the subject AND location of the next session.  In effect, the ADI is taking full responsibility for the learning process.  This is what I refer to in my blogs as “Instructor led”, the instructor is making the session all about their thoughts and feelings, and completely disregarding the most important person in the car, their pupil (yep, the one who is paying them for their time).  The consequence?  Pupils are not practising what they want to practise.  They are demotivated because they do not own their learning process.  They see no learning path ahead of them, they literally just turn up and do what their instructor tells them to do.  They do not get the chance to assess risk, or self-evaluate, their instructor is doing all that for them (not that they always agree with what is said though). 

This matters because it is directly related to the kind of relationship developed between instructor and pupil.  Pupils need to be encouraged to consider their learning path as a journey in itself.  There will be good times, there will be challenges.  There will be obstacles to encounter and overcome.  If the instructor does not allow the pupil to identify and understand this journey, then this inevitably has consequences for the effectiveness of the learning environment further down the line.

The ability for a pupil to be able to internally appreciate the relationship between their driving competence and the learning path they are on is not a given.  Far from it.  Unless we assist them, pupils will not know where they are on their learning path in terms of subject, they will not have a realistic appreciation of their competence levels on any given subject and as a consequence, it is very difficult for them to appreciate if progress is being made.  A tricky situation develops when a pupil struggles with their self-evaluation AND underestimates the standard that is required to be a safe driver.  The onus here is on the instructor to facilitate a raising of awareness levels.  This is a new learning experience for the pupil, for some, other than what they did at school, it may be the only learning experience; pupils need assistance in understanding the process for effective learning.

In the example above our pupil John did not rate very well how he did practising near the church.  He was struggling to follow the kerb to the left when approaching a left emerge.  The reason why was because he can’t see where the car is, and he does not feel confident in the position, the last thing he wants to do is drive up on the kerb – he knows that would not be good for a few reasons.  If John had the choice, John would like to go back to the church and practise left emerges only – he felt good with right emerges (in fact that was the only good thing that he took out of the last lesson).  So by conducting the brief in the manner that this ADI has, John has been robbed of expressing his internal self-evaluation which he would dearly have loved to do because he has a voice, has feelings, he has his own thoughts, and he would very much have enjoyed to express them to the instructor.  John had not considered scoring his ability before, but if he had been given the opportunity this would have sparked off a new thought path in his brain whereby he really gives his strengths/weaknesses some thought so as to grade them.  That process of reflecting on his ability, grading it, appreciating success and attempting to root cause what needed more practise would help John in the first few years of being a newly qualified driver – so that he can continue to learn.

In addition to this, John is now about to shoot off to a new location, as set by the instructor which he has already been informed is more challenging because it is a bit “tighter”.  John isn’t entirely sure what that means, but it does not sound good.  He is already rather nervous about this because he does not feel on a firm footing with left emerges as it is, now he is about to go somewhere where it is even more challenging.

If John had been asked:

“So near the Church John were there any particular good or bad bits that happened?”

That could very well have sent the conversation down the path of left emerges.  John could be offered the opportunity to draw a mind map with Left Emerge in the centre.  He might bring up words like:

Position on approach  

Concern

When to clutch down?

Speed on approach

Amount of steering

When to change gear?  

Hitting kerb   

Frightening pedestrians  

Losing my confidence  

Unknown  

Fear

Now that mind map could initiate a whole different conversation all based around the thoughts and feelings of John.  John now feels engaged, he feels important, he feels like he is doing what he wants to do……. he thinks his instructor is brilliant!    Not only is John controlling what he does, but he is now able to grade his progress, he is able to ask technical questions, he is able to develop his relationship with his instructor because he is opening up more about how he feels, he has agreed upon a time to stop practising and review.  Overall, John is feeling like he owns this now.

Tom Ingram provides PAYG driving training for trainee driving instructors   0775 607 1464

Assessing our pupils

It is vitally important to always bear in mind as a driving instructor what effect you can have on pupils (consciously or not) by how you assess them.  Whilst it is vitally important to ensure that your feedback to a pupil is fair, accurate and of value we should take care in how we go about assessing the differing aspects of learning to drive.  It would be very easy to assess a pupil as driving “well” because they are able to drive (in terms of the controls), but actually, they are driving poorly (in terms of the system of driving).  One measure relates to physical co-ordination, the other to cognitive processing.  It is a common misconception of pupils and parents/grandparents that the mere act of driving a vehicle means “they can drive” – a phrase that experienced driving instructors would take with a pinch of salt.

As driving instructors we have options regarding how we choose to give feedback of how a pupil is doing. One of the essential benefits about developing an honest and respectful relationship with your pupil is that between you, you can identify how that particular pupil prefers to receive feedback.  Our aim is always to assist our pupil in achieving the particular goal of learning to drive but we are mindful of raising self-awareness levels so that learning is able to continue post-test. 

Having made that comment above about the purpose of feedback, perhaps it might be wise to consider how “assessment” in general interacts with our pupils.  They often will go out for drives with their parents who have an incredibly powerful influence on the beliefs of our pupils by the feedback that they provide.  Driving instructors give feedback to their pupils continually throughout the learning process, referred to as formative assessment; the aim of which is to help them to identify their learning and ability, and offer more support in their training to achieve the end goal.  Pupils will get feedback of the assessment made by a driving examiner, referred to as summative assessment, it gives a quantitative measure of achievement AFTER training has occurred.

So we must be careful to appreciate what we are actually referring to when we speak of assessment.  I consider the ability of a driving instructor to effectively assess as being so crucial to their job that if they cannot do it, they really should consider if this is the right career for them.  I say this because “effectively assessing” encompasses many factors but the absolute top priority is that it must be of value to the pupil.  Reasons for assessments on learner drivers can include to:

Assist you to measure the effectiveness of your driving instruction

Understand what is actually known by the pupil (in the long term memory)

Grade your pupil’s ability

Provide feedback to the funders of the training regarding “progress”

Assist the DVSA to grade how good a driving instructor you are

The reason that this subject is so important in our work is because the extent a pupil is learning is not always apparent.  What might appear at first glance to be “good progress” of the understanding of a key road safety concept, may just be a short term memory gain, and no indication of long term learning.  Lucky correct answers to poorly worded questioning may give an illusion of understanding and learning, as could some near on perfect driving in a very forgiving area, but these “gains” can quickly turn out to be nothing more than short term.  This is one of the reasons why we take the time and trouble to re-cap regularly.  Asking pupils to describe what they have been working on and why it is important is essential as those frequent testing questions will help them to raise their awareness of what they know rather than what they think they know.  For the essential components of safe driving techniques to be applied and further refined in the coming years of the varying contexts that occur with newly qualified drivers, the skills and knowledge must have effected change in the long term memory….. as driving instructors we should be assessing long term retention.

Formative feedback is by its nature intended to be supportive and helpful.  Praising effective observations, demonstrating good practice, asking the “what if” question.  What pupils do not need in formative feedback is criticism, over-bearing instruction, and constant focus on driving faults.  Driving faults occur due to the thoughts and feelings in the pupils head, the feedback is more effective if it enables a pupil to raise their awareness of how they were feeling at the time of a driving fault – they really do not need telling they messed up… they will know that.  On the BIG TOM intensive driving course we offer a mid-course formative assessment that very much encourages pupils to understand what they have achieved so far, their strengths and weaknesses.  When the timing is right, we also offer an end-course summative assessment in the form of a mock test.  The value of a mock test is not to be under-estimated, but there are some essential ingredients.

It must have validity, meaning we should be measuring the things that we claim to be measuring.  It should have “predictive validity” meaning does it predict how a pupil will perform in a future driving test.

It must be accurate, in terms of the composition, conduct and duration of the test – so that what happens on the mock is a very close resemblance to what happens on the actual test eg doing a mock test in the dark or on a quiet Sunday morning.

It must be reliable which means it should be consistent.  It should matter not how you feel at the time of giving a mock test, or which driving instructor gives the mock test to the same pupil, the assessment is the same.  It stands to reason then that if it is not reliable, it cannot also be valid.

It must be precise.  The quantity of driving faults committed should be accurately recorded, the grading of the driving fault should be precise.  The end test grading of pass or fail must be spot on. 

The reason why I place as much importance on this as I do is because the quality of the mock test can significantly assist pupils by raising their awareness of “the unknown” of the driving test.  One of the reasons why more people pass the driving test on the second occasion and not the first is due to the fear of the unknown.  A clear, accurate, consistent summative mock test is potentially an incredibly powerful benefit to a pupil; it offers clarity, understanding and raises awareness.  Not all pupils are going to have that buy in.  As mentioned in an earlier blog, the challenges relating to “anticipated regret” in some pupils are not to be ignored.

In summary, there are numerous techniques available to driving instructors for providing feedback to pupils.  A well timed and genuine affirmation of deserved credit is worth a 1000 criticisms in my book.  We need to be mindful of the purpose of assessments and always have in the forefront of our mind, “Will this assessment be of value to my pupil?”.   Do not mix up in your mind, the thoroughness of your driving training (as per the DVSA Driving Standard) with the assessment criteria of the DVSA driving test.  As professionals concerned with the maintaining of high standards of road safety in the education we provide, we should not teach to what is assessed.  I say “should” because I am in no doubt it occurs in the industry, but not at BIG TOM.  This is an important service being provided to our pupils, and the integrity of the assessment will speak volumes about the integrity of the driving school.

Tom Ingram provides payg driving training to trainee driving instructors 0775 607 1464 

Driving Ability

This blog is for any PDI who is training for their Part 2 (driving ability) test.

The standard of driving required is not in itself particularly high; the examiner is looking for a "refined" level of driving.  People do get quite excited about standards of driving (normally men if I'm being quite blunt about it), but I want to take a couple of minutes to put this in a bit of context.

When we come into this industry we really should remember what it is that we are attempting to do.  Generally speaking, we are attempting to facilitate learning so that our pupils develop key driving techniques that promote safety.  We as the driving instructor will not be doing an awful lot of driving.  So if your considering coming into this line of work because you love to drive, then you might be quite disappointed about the amount you actually do.

There really should be MORE emphasis placed on the confidence and competence of your pupil's driving rather than yours.  Your own ability to drive is quite secondary in the grand scheme of things.  However, a good instructor will firstly have knowledge of good techniques.  S/he will be able to pass on that knowledge to their pupils.  I don't necessarily mean pass on as in, make the pupil copy what they do, but just raise their awareness of good techniques.  Often, it actually wont come down to the dexterity and co-ordination of hands and feet, instead it will be to do with what thinking is going on in the pupils head. 

An example of what I mean would be the skill of anticipation.  On a Part 2 test, an examiner wants to see the PDI demonstrate that they are observing in very good time what is likely to happen imminently, whether it be in front, to the sides or behind.  Good drivers who do this make their driving look effortless.  There is no sharp braking, no jerky steering for last minute directional changes, gear changes are methodical and timed well.  So the efficiency of the driving actions is of a high order; the driver is being kind to the car, the ride is smooth and unflustered, nothing is surprising the driver because they have already seen what is going to happen before it does.

Our learner driver pupils will also do well to invest in developing this skill.  It makes for a comfortable ride, with no dramas and the heart rate is nice and calm.  But an examiner on an L test will not be expecting the drive to be "refined".  One definition that is in my dictionary for "refined" is:

removing impurities in unwanted elements from something

Going down all the gears while decelerating is wasteful, having the clutch down while on a bend or taking a turn is technically incorrect, driving too close to the vehicle in front is dangerous.... all impurities that on a Part 2 test would not want to be seen, but on the L test whilst not desirable there is far more tolerance for them.

It is like many things in life, there is the 'purist' viewpoint on this, and there is the more practical minded viewpoint.  Personally, I have never been one for collecting "badges" that say how wonderful a driver I am.  I have high standards of that I know, because many of my pupils who pass their driving test, do so with less than 5 driving faults committed, often with 3 or less.  So, I know my standards are good.  But do I get too excited whether a pupil of mine decides to do 30 in 3rd or 4th gear?  No quite frankly.  Do I insist on them taking the path of least resistance when choosing lanes for a roundabout approach?  No.  Am I wanting to see a 3 to 5 gear change when exiting a roundabout on to a dual-carriageway?  Yes I am, but it would not trouble me if it did not happen.

The safety stuff does trouble me.  Blindspot checks over the right shoulder when joining a dual-carriageway troubles me greatly.  No blindspot checks before moving off concerns me.  Not making effective observations when doing manoeuvres unnerves me greatly.  There is the stuff that we need to be troubling ourselves with, and other stuff we do not.

So the question really comes down to what standard you want to be driving to.  Some driving instructors will demand very high standards of their own driving, and then demand equally high standards from their pupils.  I personally want to provide my pupils with techniques that help to get them on a path of continued learning as they drive post-test.  I want them to be able to perceive when something was done untidily or inefficiently; have that self-awareness and have the willingness to analyse what just happened and how it could be better. 

It is clearly a point for debate.  I am under no illusions that some instructors would read this and be mortified that I could hold such a view.  And that is fine.  What I am attempting to prompt in this blog, is for you to question what this means for you.  Do you want to be able to demonstrate 3 different ways of doing a reverse parallel park?  Would you prefer to be able to facilitate your pupil discovering a method of doing a reverse parallel park that is meaningful to THEM?  They own it, they like it, it gives them consistent results and they can use it for the rest of their life.  Two completely different skill-sets there, the first is driving based, the second is learning based.

I mention this to you now, because as tempting as it is to get bogged down in the required standard to pass your Part 2 test, as you can see, there is actually more to this than just your driving ability.  One minute you are thinking this is all about you and how you drive and then you start realising it is more about how you can be assisting your pupils!

Tom Ingram provides PDI in-car payg driving training (£50/hr) 0775 607 1464