IAM masters/RoSPA gold?

[Horse]

I think that there is a logic disconnect here

. . . capable / qualified as their manager who has spent 30 years in the job and has spent 29 of them repeating the mistakes he made during the first

FTFY

One of the benefits of training (and I fully accept that an NVQ isn't always 'training') is that you can learn best practice from the start and learn from others' mistakes.

[akirk]

I would argue that 90% DOES indicate quite an easy test. Not for nothing is the pass rate used as a guide to varying the difficulty of school exam questions. Ideally you'd expect a 100% pass rate there, too, but we know that will never happen.

I am not sure they are comparable...
school exams are open to and used by all - so you would expect the pass rate and exam question difficulty to be linked...
IAM or equivalent is self-selecting and by its nature, generally someone wanting to take the test is likely to have the ability / they aren't going to be put forward until ready... so I would expect a very high pass rate...

Alasdair

[Horse]

F-i-L used to have an autobox Ford Focus [shudder, I hated it . . . ].

It defaulted to having the overdrive 'on'. So on the approach to bends I used to switch it off, drive around the corner, then 'change up'.

Don't know if that's an approved techniques, but it worked

[RobC]

I would argue that 90% DOES indicate quite an easy test. Not for nothing is the pass rate used as a guide to varying the difficulty of school exam questions. Ideally you'd expect a 100% pass rate there, too, but we know that will never happen.

I am not sure they are comparable...
school exams are open to and used by all - so you would expect the pass rate and exam question difficulty to be linked...
IAM or equivalent is self-selecting and by its nature, generally someone wanting to take the test is likely to have the ability / they aren't going to be put forward until ready... so I would expect a very high pass rate...

Alasdair

Hi Alasdair

But DVSA ADI Pt2 is self selecting and those who want to take the test should have the ability and be test ready yet the pass rate is 45% and that's for the 50% of those who started out and passed the Pt1 theory test.

Rob

[akirk]

I would argue that 90% DOES indicate quite an easy test. Not for nothing is the pass rate used as a guide to varying the difficulty of school exam questions. Ideally you'd expect a 100% pass rate there, too, but we know that will never happen.

I am not sure they are comparable...
school exams are open to and used by all - so you would expect the pass rate and exam question difficulty to be linked...
IAM or equivalent is self-selecting and by its nature, generally someone wanting to take the test is likely to have the ability / they aren't going to be put forward until ready... so I would expect a very high pass rate...

Alasdair

Hi Alasdair

But DVSA ADI Pt2 is self selecting and those who want to take the test should have the ability and be test ready yet the pass rate is 45% and that's for the 50% of those who started out and passed the Pt1 theory test.

Rob

Hi Rob, I see what you are saying, but I think that like so many issues discussed online it is far more complex in real life! With the example you give is there not a commercial / career reason for wanting to progress and therefore an incentive to take the test even if not ready for it? I would also be very surprised were IAM groups putting forward candidates before they considered them to be ready - when I took mine in the 90s I had to undergo a complete mock test with an out of area examiner before I was allowed to apply for the test - that surely has to be a key reason behind high success rates? Perhpas of more interest would be numbers of people starting / doing the training v. passes?

Alasdair

[Horse]

A few things often stand out amongst those who are successful. Overtaking is one clear one - the ability to imagine that a potential opportunity is coming and being ready. The ability to just drive as yourself rather than trying to deliver a drive you think I might like to see (a big problem for me when in was on the other side of the process) is another.

Given what I do for a (partial) living I analyse more than others who go on gut feeling, but it's rare for us not to reach a consensus.

Indeed - the difficulty is writing it down in a way which it can be understood by someone else and used to make the same differentiation. Or maintaining conformity between candidates.

. . . /Continued

Saw this today, talking about training for emergency responders:

- Training providers which can effectively document and demonstrate all of these elements

[Quote from Jon Hall, Director of Training, Fire Service College, commenting on 'an appropriate level of assurance']

[RobC]

Hi Rob, I see what you are saying, but I think that like so many issues discussed online it is far more complex in real life! With the example you give is there not a commercial / career reason for wanting to progress and therefore an incentive to take the test even if not ready for it? I would also be very surprised were IAM groups putting forward candidates before they considered them to be ready - when I took mine in the 90s I had to undergo a complete mock test with an out of area examiner before I was allowed to apply for the test - that surely has to be a key reason behind high success rates? Perhaps of more interest would be numbers of people starting / doing the training v. passes?

Alasdair

Hi Alasdair

With the DVSA ADI qualification system you wouldn't want to take the Pt 2 test before ready because you only have 3 attempts before having to wait 2 years before starting the whole qualification process again. Also Pt1 and Pt 2 tests cost £110 a time so you wouldn't want to have the stress and expense of taking the Pt1 more than once and Pt2 up to three times! On top of that training for Pt2 is expensive.

Im not saying IAM observers are not good at preparing candidates for test, however having done IAM & ADI Pt2, I still don't think the IAM test with its 90% pass rate is a difficult test to pass, and I think ADI Pt2 is much harder to pass with its 45% pass rate.
I have no idea of the 'drop out' rate for IAM. With a 90% pass rate, I would imagine that the majority who pay their skill for life pass the IAM test at the first attempt and a minority on the 2nd. I would also imagine the main drop out rate for the IAM is not renewing membership after passing the test.

With the ADI process the pass rates are 50% for Pt1, 45% for Pt2 and 28% for Pt3 so the overall pass rate for those starting out the process and even allowing for 2 or 3 attempts at Pt2 and PT3 is low, maybe not much more than 10%, so around 90% 'drop out'.
Of course the low ADI pass rate is a little known fact and most of those who start ADI training process aren't told that

Rob

[akirk]

Hi Rob, no idea which is easier or harder, just saying that you can't derive from pass figures unless you take into account many other variables... If the PT2 is expensive and you only have a few attempts, why do people fail? how many of those go on to pass later (showing that they are capable but weren't ready), how many never pass, for those who don't pass / or who do - what was their track record in part 1 - amount of training / attempts to pass / etc. - I think it is in this richness of data (undoubtedly not publically available) where we would start to see a more meaningful trend...

Alasdair

[RobC]

Hi Rob, no idea which is easier or harder, just saying that you can't derive from pass figures unless you take into account many other variables... If the PT2 is expensive and you only have a few attempts, why do people fail? how many of those go on to pass later (showing that they are capable but weren't ready), how many never pass, for those who don't pass / or who do - what was their track record in part 1 - amount of training / attempts to pass / etc. - I think it is in this richness of data (undoubtedly not publically available) where we would start to see a more meaningful trend...

Alasdair

Hi Alasdair

I guess people fail ADI Pt2 because they aren't prepared for the test, are poorly trained or unable to cope with the test situation, or ultimately they don't have the required driving skills to pass.

I suppose there are figures for those who go through the process fail and wait two years and start again. I know some people have done that. To be honest though I don't think anyone would be interested in the figures not least on an advanced driving forum. I just know that The DVSA marking system is strict and their tests are not easy.

With advanced driving qualifications there isn't so much pressure to pass, maybe that's another reason for the 90% IAM pass rate

Rob

[RobC]

I've just had a look at the requirements for the Pt.2 test: why such a low pass rate? it would seem to me that anyone who had passed IAM or RoSPA, (especially at Silver or Gold) should be able to pass Pt.2.
I suspect it may be that those aspiring to be driving instructors are not necessarily keen drivers, whereas anyone attempting IAM/RoSPA is actually keen to be a better driver.

Most PDIs don't go down the IAM or Rospa route before taking Pt2 but I agree that it could be a good idea and certainly a lot cheaper than paying an ADI trainer.
DVSA tests including the learner test have generally been around 50% pass rate nationally unless you take your test in the Isle of Skye where the roads are quiet, everyone knows everyone and its about 70%. DVSA tests are marked strictly and a serious fault may not seem that serious yet you will fail for a single one of those.

It may be that those who are ADIs aspire to be a great trainer of drivers/learners rather than keen drivers. If you're in a car all day every day then they usually not as keen to drive around enthusiastically in their spare time and go to evening meetings about what they do all day!

I wouldn't say that those who attempt IAM or Rospa are necessarily any better drivers. Pt2 is not any easy test and I think and there is probably a far greater range of abilities and attitudes amongst those with IAM or Rospa quailifications some better some worse.

[GS]

I've just had a look at the requirements for the Pt.2 test: why such a low pass rate? it would seem to me that anyone who had passed IAM or RoSPA, (especially at Silver or Gold) should be able to pass Pt.2.
I suspect it may be that those aspiring to be driving instructors are not necessarily keen drivers, whereas anyone attempting IAM/RoSPA is actually keen to be a better driver.

As you have said, the DSA ADI pt2 test does not look difficult, but then no test is difficult if you have prepared properly and know what you are doing.

I think that lots of people see driving instruction as a 'filler' job ( I can't find a job at the moment so I'll just do a bit of driving instruction type of job ) as opposed to something they really want to do and have researched what is actually involved. In my experience they are rarely driving enthusiasts. As such they think their standard is OK and just take their test and fail. After all, the pt2 test uses the same marking system to the basic driving test but just to a higher standard so it could be said that any experienced driver should be able to pass! The pt2 includes a braking exercise, turn in the road and various reverses which some people struggle with. The examining and marking is also different to the likes of the IAM and RoSPA. The DVSA examiners are trained far better to examine and know what the DVSA are looking for. I'm sure that all examiners are still trained at Cardington so they all get the same training. This is very different to the IAM and RoSPA which rely heavily on people who have had driving tested, not necessarily to a consistent standard, as opposed to being taught how to examine. It's also a more factual as opposed to subjective marking system. Some would argue that this is actually better as far as consistency and possibly fairness is concerned compared to the other subjective method. Lots of people pass their IAM and RoSPA tests because their driving is OK and the examiner has given them the benefit of the doubt. This possibly does not happen with DVSA examiners. I also strongly suspect that the DVSA examiners are more strict about sticking to the laws than IAM and RoSPA examiners, for instance a STOP sign means actually stop, not just slow right down and nearly stop. Some view this as pedantic, some view it as accurate. I have no doubt at all that the DVSA system is more consistent, not perfect before people jump in with their storeys, but more consistent than the IAM and RoSPA system.

I've often said in the past, if observers think they are good, why not take their pts 1 and 2 to compare the standards between the DVSA and their 'observing' standard? They might find it interesting and, after all, if they are teaching 'advanced' they should have no problems passing a 'standard' test. If they can't do 'standard' why do they think they can do 'advanced'?

[Horse]

I've just had a look at the requirements for the Pt.2 test: why such a low pass rate? it would seem to me that anyone who had passed IAM or RoSPA, (especially at Silver or Gold) should be able to pass Pt.2.
I suspect it may be that those aspiring to be driving instructors are not necessarily keen drivers, whereas anyone attempting IAM/RoSPA is actually keen to be a better driver.

I've often said in the past, if observers think they are good, why not take their pts 1 and 2 to compare the standards between the DVSA and their 'observing' standard? They might find it interesting and, after all, if they are teaching 'advanced' they should have no problems passing a 'standard' test. If they can't do 'standard' why do they think they can do 'advanced'?

A guy I knew was an ex-trafpol Class 1, he said that he thought the ADI Pt 2 was harder to pass!

[RobC]

I've just had a look at the requirements for the Pt.2 test: why such a low pass rate? it would seem to me that anyone who had passed IAM or RoSPA, (especially at Silver or Gold) should be able to pass Pt.2.
I suspect it may be that those aspiring to be driving instructors are not necessarily keen drivers, whereas anyone attempting IAM/RoSPA is actually keen to be a better driver.

As you have said, the DSA ADI pt2 test does not look difficult, but then no test is difficult if you have prepared properly and know what you are doing.

I think that lots of people see driving instruction as a 'filler' job ( I can't find a job at the moment so I'll just do a bit of driving instruction type of job ) as opposed to something they really want to do and have researched what is actually involved. In my experience they are rarely driving enthusiasts. As such they think their standard is OK and just take their test and fail. After all, the pt2 test uses the same marking system to the basic driving test but just to a higher standard so it could be said that any experienced driver should be able to pass! The pt2 includes a braking exercise, turn in the road and various reverses which some people struggle with. The examining and marking is also different to the likes of the IAM and RoSPA. The DVSA examiners are trained far better to examine and know what the DVSA are looking for. I'm sure that all examiners are still trained at Cardington so they all get the same training. This is very different to the IAM and RoSPA which rely heavily on people who have had driving tested, not necessarily to a consistent standard, as opposed to being taught how to examine. It's also a more factual as opposed to subjective marking system. Some would argue that this is actually better as far as consistency and possibly fairness is concerned compared to the other subjective method. Lots of people pass their IAM and RoSPA tests because their driving is OK and the examiner has given them the benefit of the doubt. This possibly does not happen with DVSA examiners. I also strongly suspect that the DVSA examiners are more strict about sticking to the laws than IAM and RoSPA examiners, for instance a STOP sign means actually stop, not just slow right down and nearly stop. Some view this as pedantic, some view it as accurate. I have no doubt at all that the DVSA system is more consistent, not perfect before people jump in with their storeys, but more consistent than the IAM and RoSPA system.

I've often said in the past, if observers think they are good, why not take their pts 1 and 2 to compare the standards between the DVSA and their 'observing' standard? They might find it interesting and, after all, if they are teaching 'advanced' they should have no problems passing a 'standard' test. If they can't do 'standard' why do they think they can do 'advanced'?

GS

Very well put and I agree 100% with what you say especially this part.

The DVSA examiners are trained far better to examine and know what the DVSA are looking for. I'm sure that all examiners are still trained at Cardington so they all get the same training. This is very different to the IAM and RoSPA which rely heavily on people who have had driving tested, not necessarily to a consistent standard, as opposed to being taught how to examine. It's also a more factual as opposed to subjective marking system. Some would argue that this is actually better as far as consistency and possibly fairness is concerned compared to the other subjective method.

Thinking about it I found the IAM test much easier than DVSA Pt2 however that was probably because I had already done my Pt2. Had I not i'm sure I would have found the IAM test harder.
Those who have IAM/Rospa first will probably find the reverse than myself if they took Pt2. Interestingly the perception that the DVSA standard is just for learners and is easy isn't the case and DVSA and IAM etc are not miles apart as some seem to think.

If any observers are really keen they should take the ADI exams. Part 3 Instructional ability is the one that people cant get their head around with a 28% pass rate and those who qualify will find that teaching learners is a whole different ball game than observing FLHs.

Rob

[GS]

I've just had a look at the requirements for the Pt.2 test: why such a low pass rate? it would seem to me that anyone who had passed IAM or RoSPA, (especially at Silver or Gold) should be able to pass Pt.2.
I suspect it may be that those aspiring to be driving instructors are not necessarily keen drivers, whereas anyone attempting IAM/RoSPA is actually keen to be a better driver.

I've often said in the past, if observers think they are good, why not take their pts 1 and 2 to compare the standards between the DVSA and their 'observing' standard? They might find it interesting and, after all, if they are teaching 'advanced' they should have no problems passing a 'standard' test. If they can't do 'standard' why do they think they can do 'advanced'?

A guy I knew was an ex-trafpol Class 1, he said that he thought the ADI Pt 2 was harder to pass!

When I took my ADI tests I was a class 1 driver.

The examiner commented about how it was nice and rare to see someone observing and anticipating the actions of others to make progress. (He was also quite surprised when I turned up for my pt 2 test in a Vauxhall Senator!) However, I was examined by a supervising examiner who had visited Hendon so sort of knew what I was doing. He also commented that what I was doing was very different to what the vast majority of pt 2 candidates did and he had no doubt that some examiners might not like it. I even got an open road NSL overtake in which really surprised him. He REALLY watched the speedo as I did this!

It is often said that class 1 drivers are programmed to make progress. When I took my PCV and HGV courses the courses started with the instructor saying along the lines off, this is not about progress, driving these vehicles is different to a patrol car or bike, so forget progress. Some find this difficult to do!

[RobC]

[
When I took my ADI tests I was a class 1 driver.

I even got an open road NSL overtake in which really surprised him. He REALLY watched the speedo as I did this!

It is often said that class 1 drivers are programmed to make progress. When I took my PCV and HGV courses the courses started with the instructor saying along the lines off, this is not about progress, driving these vehicles is different to a patrol car or bike, so forget progress. Some find this difficult to do!

Hi GS

Again totally agree with your comments.

On a Pt2 you are expected to make progress however if you had exceeded the speed limit doing so you would have failed.

On my IAM test there was a lot of emphasis on progress by the ex police class I examiner. If you have driven a certain way for 20 or 30 years chasing criminals it is very hard to get out of the habit of driving that way.
To me my IAM examiner expected watered down pursuit driving. I have 2 fast cars however it isn't a style of driving that is natural to me or one that the companies I work for wish their drivers to be trained in.

Rob