Steering - again, what should be taught

[sussex2]

Once again this is the method taught in advanced driving in Spain. If anyone can find a fault with this as a basic manner of steering I can't honestly see why:

http://www.circulaseguro.com/como-regul ... more-72986


The statements below the video are a conversation as to whether what is being taught is right or wrong; does it sound in the least familiar

[hir]

Surely if it's one of the things you are being tested on (& it can therefore lead to lost marks) it could (& probably must have at some occasion) result in a cumulative lost marks that result in an unsuccessful test, when it perhaps wouldn't have been should marks not have been lost due to not doing pull/push as required.

It doesn't actually work like that. It's not marked on a cumulative marks basis. There are 27 competencies each of which is marked from 1 [Excellent] to 5 [poor]. Marks of 4 [unsatisfactory] & 5 [poor] in any competency will undoubtedly lead to a fail.

In my experience the marking for steering goes something like this:

Where outcomes are safe, accurate and with the car under complete control at all times:

With only pull-push steering used, to good effect throughout = 1 [pass]
With a mixture of fixed grip and pull push used to good effect & an examiner who looks at the overall picture = 1 [pass]
With a mixture of fixed grip and pull push used to good effect & an examiner who really, really only wants to see pull-push = 2 [pass]

Where outcomes are safe accurate and with the car under complete control at all times:

With steering which is not deemed to be wholly disciplined eg, hands occasionally going past 12 & 6 O'clock = 3 [pass]

Where outcomes are not safe, accurate or with the car not under complete control at all times:

Regardless of steering technique - even with pull-push all the time, everywhere = 4 or 5 [Fail]

So, you see, however much the IAM bang on about pull-push being the standard, the real standard is... the steering outcomes must be safe, accurate and with the car under complete control at all times. After which, the steering technique used determines which grade of mark [1 to 3], each of which will contribute towards a pass mark.

[Horse]

hir, could you explain what that understanding is based on, please.

[Horse]

I ask because:

"Our Examiners have the discretion to recommend a candidate even if they score a '2' in no more than three categories. Those categories can be Commentary, Eco-Driving and any one other category - except for Legality and Slow Manouevring which must score a '1'"

Posted in the last few days on a motorcycle forum regarding marking for First, suggesting not all categories are equal.

[Gareth]

Horse - are you mixing up the requirements for F1rst with those for an IAM pass? The categories don't need to have equal importance for a uniform marking scheme to be applied, the differences being in the mind of the examiner.

[Horse]

Horse - are you mixing up the requirements for F1rst with those for an IAM pass? The categories don't need to have equal importance for a uniform marking scheme to be applied, the differences being in the mind of the examiner.

Yes

& no

To be honest, I'm confused about the standards and marking full stop, and differences between pass, First and Masters.

How, for example, using hir's outcomes and techniques, would they be marked across the three levels?

[MGF]

I don't follow the point you are trying to make.

Back to the point you made.

So, you are suggesting that the IAM has adopted a standard the effect of which may be to reduce the efficacy of an individual's steering, and that makes sense because they are using a bunch of amateurs working at arm's length.

That's just about the daftest suggestion I've heard yet. Not even the highest echelons of the powers that be at Chiswick would be daft enough to make that assertion.

You may think it is daft but it may well have been the case that my steering declined because I adopted PP in accordance with HTBABD, the IAM's chosen technique.

It is a real possibility and not a daft assertion as you claim. It is also obviously acceptable to the IAM. If it were not PP would be a simple advisory in HTBABD to avoid this possibility.

[MGF]

So you're not even sure of the scale of the perceived problem, just a possibility that it might exist. If that is the case it hardly calls for a campaign for change.

I suppose I should be gratified to see that you have elevated the status of our somewhat modest lack of willingness to endorse the IAM's stance on pull-push steering to that of a campaign. If only the IAM would take us as seriously.

We must now press on for complete victory at all costs.

It was the Chairman of the HPC who declared "The revolution is coming", not I.

[MGF]

Part of my motivation for starting AD with RoSPA was to see if I could pass their test and that allowed me to ignore some of the silliness I was presented with...

I subsequently realised that avoiding BGOL helped with reducing my entry speeds to hazards so the blunt instrument is probably not as silly as you think.

Where the IAM's policy may be too restrictive is with its Masters test which doesn't appear to allow for developing different techniques which one might expect to be an important addition to the improving advanced driver.

[Gareth]

I subsequently realised that avoiding BGOL helped with reducing my entry speeds to hazards so the blunt instrument is probably not as silly as you think.

Yes and no - so the argument goes - in that yes, avoiding BGOL makes the driver build in sufficient time with the effect of making them slow down before hazards rather than in them, and no, in that once the driver understands slowing before hazards rather than through them avoiding BGOL isn't necessary to do so.

[Horse]

So you're not even sure of the scale of the perceived problem, just a possibility that it might exist. If that is the case it hardly calls for a campaign for change.

I suppose I should be gratified to see that you have elevated the status of our somewhat modest lack of willingness to endorse the IAM's stance on pull-push steering to that of a campaign. If only the IAM would take us as seriously.

We must now press on for complete victory at all costs.

It was the Chairman of the HPC who declared "The revolution is coming", not I.

Yes, but how are those hands moving to create a revolving motion of the steering wheel?

[hir]

hir, could you explain what that understanding is based on, please.

My understanding is based upon two things.

Firstly, much first hand experience of associates immediately pre-test which gives me information about their steering, use of the system etc. This is then followed up with extensive feedback from associates about the test after the event. In addition to which, each associate's mark sheet is available to the group committee via the IAM's database. We can therefore get a very good sense of how each examiner regards each candidate and how the marks are arrived at.

Secondly, driving with examiners, asking them do they like this, do they like that? Would they mark down for this, would they mark up for that? Demonstrating various techniques to them either overtly or covertly and seeing how they react.

[hir]

To be honest, I'm confused about the standards and marking full stop, and differences between pass, First and Masters.

How, for example, using hir's outcomes and techniques, would they be marked across the three levels?

I agree it appears complicated but if we analyse it it's fairly simple:

Using the marking system that I described earlier, if you get a 1 in just about everything then you get a F1RST, if you don't, you get a PASS. And if it's really bad you get a FAIL.

Masters is a case of assessing the 27 competencies but at a significantly higher level than when assessing the entry level test.

In other words, the criteria for obtaining a 1 at entry level is lower than that for obtaining a 1 in Masters.

[zadocbrown]

I think we shouldn't attach undue importance to the fine details of marking. It isn't a helpful way to proceed.

[Horse]

I think we shouldn't attach undue importance to the fine details of marking. It isn't a helpful way to proceed.

Well I'm interested even if you're not.