Kimosabe wrote:[The only difference I can see is that IAM grades are regarded by some as being lower than RoSPA. I remain continually perplexed by the notion that everything the IAM do is regarded as always being slightly below RoSPA Gold. IAM F1rst is 'about a RoSPA Gold', IAM Masters is considered as 'about a RoSPA Gold' and unless i'm missing something, both use the same abridged version of Roadcraft (hallowed be it's name), insist on the same steering and braking inputs (Pull-Push be thy name and Heel-Toe be not thy name, not ever) and use the same observation approaches. I have the marking criteria for both and to me it seems that the only differences are in the layout of the marking sheet.
If you are keen to progress towards being the best driver you can be, rather than to develop your teaching skills, then the cost of a Diploma course might be better spent with an HPC 'gatekeeper'.
As to comparisons, since neither Rospa nor IAM express their marking in relation to the other, different examiners are likely to come up with slightly different interpretations of the boundaries between the different grades. However, I cannot believe the minimum standard for First would ever be lower than the minimum for Gold. As to texts, at the initial advanced test level, according to the official line IAM only accept their own limited and confusing book whereas Rospa use Roadcraft throughout. And as to methods, again according to the official line IAM is increasingly inflexible in the interests of standardisation and quality control, whereas under its new Chief Examiner Rospa is more inclined to 'if safe smooth planned and controlled then its good'.