Disregard of Speed Limits

[TripleS]

It's not an essential element of good driving.

This is something with which I strongly agree. I've met a number of people steeped in IAM or RoADAR who think that commentary is important, and I inevitably tell them to STFU and get on with the driving.

In the police context, though, isn't commentary necessary in order to paint a word-picture for the control room? In this it's like learning the short-hand words and phrases that are rife in any other specialised field, where uniformity of content leads to improved common understanding.

It is, but the commentary expected for the test goes way way beyond what is required in a pursuit.

Yes, I would imagine a commentary by a civilian driver, perhaps for test purposes, to be much more detailed than one by a police driver in a 'follow' or a pursuit situation. In the latter case I imagine the main objective is to keep the control room advised of where you are, where you're heading, and what the target vehicle is doing, in order that additional support can be deployed.

Still, it's been a week since I was in a pursuit, and memories fade. Actually it wasn't a real pursuit, (it had better not be!), more a matter of following to see what was going on. I have reported my observations, so I'm now awaiting the outcome. It's local authority stuff, nothing to do with police.

[waremark]

It's not an essential element of good driving.

This is something with which I strongly agree. I've met a number of people steeped in IAM or RoADAR who think that commentary is important, and I inevitably tell them to STFU and get on with the driving.

Gareth, I strongly suspect we have had the commentary discussion before. For those of us who enjoy trying to develop our driving to the highest level we can achieve, trying to combine a good drive with a good commentary is for some of us a welcome challenge . On a couple of my weekend drives my co-driver and I both attempted it. After all, we are not trying to make things as easy as possible for ourselves.

When I am driving a less experienced but aspiring advanced driver I hope that a commentary from me focusing on planning issues which affect speed or position is helpful.

I encourage Associates to have a go (though don't insist), most make quite a good effort, and I always suggest that if they want to ,maintain their AD skills after the test doing a commentary for a few minutes a week will help.

[trashbat]

How many IAM associates do you think continue to apply a fair degree of what they've learnt, post-test?

How many of those do you think continue to practice commentary?

If as I suspect, the latter is only a small proportion of the former, it's reasonable to question why they attach such importance to it. It's not something I care deeply about, nor do I have particularly strong feelings about commentary itself, but it is a good example to illustrate von's assertion that since there is only so much time, the focus ought to be strongly prioritised.

[Ancient]

How many IAM associates do you think continue to apply a fair degree of what they've learnt, post-test?

How many of those do you think continue to practice commentary?

If as I suspect, the latter is only a small proportion of the former, it's reasonable to question why they attach such importance to it. It's not something I care deeply about, nor do I have particularly strong feelings about commentary itself, but it is a good example to illustrate von's assertion that since there is only so much time, the focus ought to be strongly prioritised.

Do they (who's they?)?
As an associate it was never even mentioned, in the test it was not required (again not mentioned).
I try to give a commentary for myself, as others have said to force me to concentrate better and observe earlier but until my RoSPA tutor mentioned it a few weeks ago, it's never been a requirement for anything.
And I've never been taught how to commentate (just told on the last RoSPA drive "No you need to include that" several times without giving me chance to finish speaking ).
So IAM place no importance on commentary at Associate / Member level and RoSPA require it but (IME) do not teach it. Who then places "such importance" on it?

[trashbat]

It was mentioned to me many times as an associate. It was assessed on test, and thus required for top marks, although mine was fudged. It is mandatory for observers, albeit in a slightly different context.

However, it's not really the point. For the word 'commentary' you can substitute steering technique, gear grip, whether you rest your right elbow on the window sill when stuck in traffic, or any number of things that you may or may not agree with.

[Horse]

It's a common and understandable trait that people like to know where they stand. It's easier to be content when everything in the universe appears solid and reliable, and I think a lot of people actually avoid complexity and subtlety of thought in order to maintain the illusion that they have a complete grasp of how things are. Advanced driving is likely to be as prone to this kind of behaviour as any other sphere

Looking at it this way, it's easier to see how voluntarily giving up these certainties and embracing the confusing complexity of the real world is not an easy thing to do. The misplaced sense of superiority is more damaging in this case as it will offend both the less and more knowledgable. (cf. the public image of the IAM)

Even those that are open to new thoughts can be held back at first by their existing ideas.

A few lines selected from your post to set the scene . . .


I'm a modest sort of person (Mr C-W's met me, so he'll verify that, I'm sure ), but I'm happy to admit that I have a thirst for knowledge on riding and training.

This was particularly so during the 80s and 90s for me, as I was very heavily involved in UK rider training. Setting the scene for that, from '89-'93 I set up the BMF's Blue Riband Award 'advanced' course, eventually with 45 centres across the UK and with more advanced passes in '93 than RoSPA.

So I had a fairly good understanding of traditional UK, Roadcraft-based, advanced training. But I knew there was 'more to it', so kept looking. One avenue was the USA's MSF - but gettign access to that would be difficult! However, via the USAF at bases in the UK (before the 'peace dividend' closed most of them!) I was able to attend their course and, in '94' qualify as an MSF instructor (aka RiderCoach).

After that, I was able to get 65 Brits onto their 'advanced' course. The outcomes were 'interesting'

One of the trainees was a trafpol, Class One cars & bikes, acc investigator etc. etc. He actually said that he couldn't complete one exercise because of the years of training he'd had 'stopped him' from doing what was asked!

Another went in totaly sceptical that anything could be better than Rc-based riding. He wrote an article afterwards stating that - and explaining how his mind had been radically altered.

The truth, of course, is that the MSF 'way' had limitations too - the optimum was to use the best bits and meld them together.

The irony, of course, is that in '95 Roadcraft was changed substantially - mirroring much of the MSF's content!

The secret, of course, is to seek, watch, listen, try, understand - then incorporate. Be certain of the benefits. Be definite about what you wish to achieve*.

* That requires knowing - being able to state as a simple one-line statement - 'what?' you wish to achieve, whether driving on your own or training someone else.

[waremark]

In the club I belong to we drive with one another a lot. One of our coaches tends to ask 'is there anyone in the club like whom you would like to drive?' My answer is that I would like to drive like me, but as well as possible. Which makes sense to me!

[waremark]

How many IAM associates do you think continue to apply a fair degree of what they've learnt, post-test?

How many of those do you think continue to practice commentary?
.

No idea. Funnily enough I am not bothered if most, as I suspect, abandon PP steering. However I would rather like them to continue to practise commentary from time to time, because then they would be continuing to work on Observation Anticipation and Planning.

[WhoseGeneration]

However I would rather like them to continue to practise commentary from time to time, because then they would be continuing to work on Observation Anticipation and Planning.

This is what it all boils down to isn't it?
The ADIs do their best as regards this but under the constraint of paying customers just wanting to get that pass.
Probably it doesn't matter what the technique, so long as those above fundamentals are followed?
It's about treating driving as proactive rather than what the majority do, which is passive.

[vonhosen]

However I would rather like them to continue to practise commentary from time to time, because then they would be continuing to work on Observation Anticipation and Planning.

This is what it all boils down to isn't it?
The ADIs do their best as regards this but under the constraint of paying customers just wanting to get that pass.
Probably it doesn't matter what the technique, so long as those above fundamentals are followed?
It's about treating driving as proactive rather than what the majority do, which is passive.

But that assumes that OAP is irrevocably linked to commentary. I don't think it is. I don't stop looking, seeing, anticipating & planning because I stop talking.
Where I am commentary seems to be more for the benefit of observer than the candidate.
Observers would rather the candidate does it, the candidate would rather not have to by choice but is compelled to in order to please the observer.

It's also about far more than OAP (which falls in level 2). It's work done in levels 3 & 4 that encourages them to uphold good standards in OAP, not commentary.

[WhoseGeneration]

[

But that assumes that OAP is irrevocably linked to commentary. I don't think it is. I don't stop looking, seeing, anticipating & planning because I stop talking.
Where I am commentary seems to be more for the benefit of observer than the candidate.
Observers would rather the candidate does it, the candidate would rather not have to by choice but is compelled to in order to please the observer.

Your ability, without commentary is, perhaps, because you've internalised it.
The question with those new is how can the observer be sure of such with the candidate?
Perhaps using video recording of a drive, back in the classroom, ask the candidate to explain their appraoch to a certain situation?
I do take your point but also consider how I approach other potentially dangerous activities, I do internally comment and sometimes out loud.
Explaining, concurrently or later, marks out those who are thinking about their actions.
I honestly don't know how decide in this debate, for if your world became one of no commentary, do you think it would provide those truly capable and capable of mentoring the next generation?

[vonhosen]

[

But that assumes that OAP is irrevocably linked to commentary. I don't think it is. I don't stop looking, seeing, anticipating & planning because I stop talking.
Where I am commentary seems to be more for the benefit of observer than the candidate.
Observers would rather the candidate does it, the candidate would rather not have to by choice but is compelled to in order to please the observer.

Your ability, without commentary is, perhaps, because you've internalised it.
The question with those new is how can the observer be sure of such with the candidate?
Perhaps using video recording of a drive, back in the classroom, ask the candidate to explain their appraoch to a certain situation?
I do take your point but also consider how I approach other potentially dangerous activities, I do internally comment and sometimes out loud.
Explaining, concurrently or later, marks out those who are thinking about their actions.
I honestly don't know how decide in this debate, for if your world became one of no commentary, do you think it would provide those truly capable and capable of mentoring the next generation?

The candidate can explain prior to the exercise their intentions in relation to the exercise. Post exercise they can make sense of the experience through thought & feeling.
The skill of the mentor is providing the safe opportunity to have the experience & helping them make sense of the experience through questioning.
The candidate is doing the work & it's their self awareness that is growing as they do. Similar facilitation is all that is required for the next generation. Encourage to think & feel about what's happening.

If they want to commentate fine, if they don't fine. If they want to do it externally fine, if they want to do it internally fine.
It's really not all that important, it's what they are experiencing & how they makes sense of it that is.
They're in control not you, you are just a support tool for them to use in their learning.

[7db]

Perhaps a level 3 & 4 commentary?

"I am feeling pleased and at one with myself and my values to drive swiftly within my limits"
"Woohoohoo"
etc

[vonhosen]

Perhaps a level 3 & 4 commentary?

"I am feeling pleased and at one with myself and my values to drive swiftly within my limits"
"Woohoohoo"
etc

They could talk about whatever they like in commentary or do none at all, it's a tool for them that they want to use or not.

What matters is how their values/beliefs & emotions have a positive or negative effect on their performance in levels 1 & 2 & their mindfulness around that.

[waremark]

The matrix has been posted before. I repeat my request.