ADVISING WORK COLLEAGUES

[Big Err]

Was the point being made by ROG that an ADI who has not not undertaken any advanced driving 'lesson's' can teach advanced driving (as they see it) for a fee?

[ScoobyChris]

Was the point being made by ROG that an ADI who has not not undertaken any advanced driving 'lesson's' can teach advanced driving (as they see it) for a fee?

I'm not really sure if there are levels of ADI, etc, but I always assumed that to become one you had to have taken an 'advanced' course and test?

Chris

[ROG]

I believe there are 6 grades of ADI, grade 6 being the highest. Bet a lot of learners looking for an ADI to teach them did not know that!
ADI stands for Approved Driving Instructor, not, as some believe, Advanced Driving Instructor.
As an observer, I have taught 5 ADIs to advanced level.
I think you may see my reason for the total lack of logic with the current rules on advising/teaching/improving/guiding current license holders to better their skills.

[Lynne]

You need to be grade 4 or above in all areas to pass ADI part 3 and/or periodical check tests carried out by the DSA.

part 2 test driving test for potential ADIs

I have to say that doing RoSPA taught me a different 'technique' in certain aspects in driving so I class my knowledge as broader as opposed to somewhat higher. Maybe because my ADI trainer was also RoSPA I don't know I can't compare. Main changes to me when actually doing RoSPA were mainly positioning and certain aspects of gear changing but I will use Roadcraft where it doesn't conflict with DSA syllabus for DSA test.

For companies generally, you'd need to go for a ADI with fleet qualifications; they will have done addiitonal training to train on experienced drivers.

I do think ADIs should be aware of Roadcraft though so that they CAN impart different techniques and understand eg. positioning of other drivers (ESP for example). It's surprising how many HAVE NEVER HEARD OF IT which is worrying because just giving out DSA style driving is not in the best interests of learners either who will, once passed their test, be out amongst the rest of us!

[Susie]

Rog, The ADI certification initially covers proof of ability to drive but the final objective is the absolute proof of ability to teach/train/advise/guide. After a trainee ADI has passed Part 2 (driving element) that’s the last time he has to demonstrate driving skill – he is graded on the ability to teach at renewals.

Very few ADIs are interested in ‘advanced’ driving. They tend to stick to ‘novice’ work, which brings in a steady and reliable income stream. Your point about advanced drivers/observers who have “the ability and knowledge at advanced level” is right in the middle of this grey area – and even in the last few weeks, we’ve had evidence of one poor soul who had three differing sets of advice from three different observers, all of whom if asked, would probably consider their advice to be correct and appropriate...but they’ve not necessarily been ‘tested’ on their ‘tutoring ability’ by anyone. The DSA has recently 'dealt with' off-road training. Taken in similar context to your comments, who would you rather learn off-road techniques from? The farmer with oodles of experience driving over ditches and down steep inclines, who can actually explain and demonstrate how to stall and recover on an uphill gradient with a ravine behind you... or the ADI who is perfectly legally entitled to teach you but has never been further off-road than a muddy car park? However, the off-road courses being run by non-ADIs were challenged by DSA and... the DSA won.

As you have already been successful in assisting associates to pass their IAM, and from your profile elsewhere on this forum it seems you have some spare time, you could probably do the majority of the background work (traffic law, theory of procedures, instructional techniques and specific terminology, road procedure, traffic signs and signals, car control, mechanical knowledge – on your own - and merely use the ‘official route’ of an ORDIT trainer for the tidying-up elements of completing your ADI – (I can’t remember the actual number of hours) – that way reducing your costs and once you had the certification, you’d have washed away the grey! Either that, or put yourself forward as the 'test case' A lot of ADIs who only train in the ‘advanced’ field would be interested in the outcome!

S

[Gareth]

The ADI certification [...] is the absolute proof of ability to teach/train/advise/guide.

Using this as a guide ...

who would you rather learn off-road techniques from? The farmer with oodles of experience driving over ditches and down steep inclines, who can actually explain and demonstrate how to stall and recover on an uphill gradient with a ravine behind you...

There is a difference between having the ability to do something oneself and having the ability to impart that knowledge to others. Chance are that the farmer is good at doing the things farmers do, but that doesn't necessarily mean the farmer is good at teaching.

The regulation of driver training in the UK is all about making sure that those who charge for teaching driving can actually teach. Without regulation there will be some who will take people's money but can't teach worth a damn. Against that, there is a hurdle for those that want to teach but don't yet have the necessary qualification.

In the final instance, there are many thousands who have proven and continue to prove their ability to teach some aspect of driving, so if someone wants to enter the field, the bar isn't desperately high, although it does discourage part time or infrequent teaching.

[ROG]

Is the Senior Observer test proof of ability to advise/train/teach

[Maximum Bob]

Is the Senior Observer test proof of ability to advise/train/teach

No, sorry, it's not. Not in the context of this discussion, anyway. It is purely an internal IAM qualification. It affords the holder no professional status whatsoever (in fact, I think it says something to that effect on the certificate). The only qualification available to legally allow you to instruct/teach/advise in the driving of a car for money is the DSA's ADI Certificate.

[Gareth]

Is the Senior Observer test proof of ability to advise/train/teach

I would say not since the main skill is in assessing whether an associate is ready to take an advanced driving test, and that is not the same as teaching.

How does one become a senior observer? Is it by 'proving' ability by being an observer for a certain amount of time? Is it in getting a certain number of associates through an advanced driving test? Is there a fixed maximum amount of 'teaching' or can it take an arbitrary long length of time? Is it that there is a vacancy for a senior observer and someone volunteers?

Is there a standard that is expected of ordinary observers before they can become senior observers? Is there independant verification? Ultimately observers are volunteers who try to give something back. Some might be good at teaching, others are probably not, with a lot of variation between.

[vonhosen]

Is the Senior Observer test proof of ability to advise/train/teach

Being an instructor of Police advanced/pursuit driving doesn't qualify you instruct the public for money either. You've got to go the ADI route in order to instruct for money, that which you already instruct for no payment.

You need to think of it as a kind of kite mark for instructional skills in the act of driving. No kite mark = no money.

[martine]

How does one become a senior observer?

You need to be a qualified observer and then take a Senior Observer practical test. This is done with the regional IAM Staff Examiner. This person is a paid employee of the IAM and always (I think) a current or ex police class-1. There are only a handfull in the UK and they are also responsible for testing IAM examiners and maintaining consistency.

My group runs a specific course for Senior Observers with involvement from the local police examiners. This lasts a couple of months (with weekly drives/classroom sessions). The course includes driving with other Sen. Obs and the group Chief Obs. Observing associates and being ciriticsed (in a constructive way) by another Sen. Obs in the back. Also role playing particular problem areas. Commentary is compulsory and expected to be a high standard.

Is it in getting a certain number of associates through an advanced driving test?

No. Although to become a Sen. Obs you must have done a min. of 20 hours observed runs in the last year. Once qualified you have to keep up this 20 hours/year and also take a retest every 3 years.

Is it that there is a vacancy for a senior observer and someone volunteers?

No - and that's a bit rude! The IAM is more structured than that (at least in recent years).

Is there independant verification?

Yes in as much as the Staff Examiner tests and retests Sen. Obs.

Ultimately observers are volunteers who try to give something back. Some might be good at teaching, others are probably not, with a lot of variation between.

Absolutely and the ability to teach (as opposed to knowing your subject) is very difficult to judge in any field - just think of some of the teachers you had at schools/Uni. The feedback loop is rather crude in that if our group gets complaints we swop the associate to another observer - if we keep getting this from the same observer we would take it further. It's pretty rare but occasionally we don't continue with observers who are not up to scratch in one way or another.

[BigJim]

If somebody wants to purely teach advanced skills, why should they be obliged to sit an exam based on teaching people for the L-Test?

Surely these are 2 completely different disciplines.

[MGF]

If Senior Observers could charge for their services what effect do you think this would have on the advanced driving as a whole?

At the moment, apart from the HPC, it is a voluntary service. So would this increase the amount of people taking up advanced driving or decrease it?


Just a thought.

[ROG]

If somebody wants to purely teach advanced skills, why should they be obliged to sit an exam based on teaching people for the L-Test?

Surely these are 2 completely different disciplines.

What a good point
Why is there not a seperate criteria for this The advanced test is DSA approved, the examiners have been approved by the DSA to test, senior observers are tested by the examiners on the way they assess and explain new techniques to candidates (one may say that this is training ), so it seems that the structure is in place for a seperate teaching qualification in advanced driving.
Does the government not want capable people to improve this countrys drivers
Perhaps reducing the number of road deaths is not really a priority
Does the DSA reluctantly acknowledge advanced driving and is therefore resistant to it
As the DSA does not have their own expertise and test for advanced driving, is that the problem
I believe that there should be seperate legislation in regarde to teaching current license holders - WHAT DO YOU THINK

[ROG]

The DSA structure is still based on MSM basics and not IPSGA and until this is addressed I cannot see a way forward - CAN YOU