DVSA examiners

[akirk]

no - that is to misunderstand...

it is difficult to quantify / corrall / put into simple checkboxes levels of any skill at the top end in such a way that they can be understood / and verified or examined by someone below them in ability...

that is what is happening in lots of disciplines and it will cause regression to norm - and lose a lot of what is great about those disciplines...

it has nothing to do with hoi polloi etc. - it is simply that we need to accept that until you are at a certain level you might not understand how that level is judged / etc. and that is fine - to say that it is only acceptable to have examining / judging / whatever you wish to call it where it can be brought down to quantifiable statements is to miss out on huge ability ranges where it is quite possible to see and understand greatness without being able to produce a mark sheet to explain why - life / humans / skills are not so simple that you can put them all into boxes

ref recent discussions about musicians as an example

Alasdair

[Horse]

greatness without being able to produce a mark sheet to explain why - life / humans / skills are not so simple that you can put them all into boxes

ref recent discussions about musicians as an example

And they're a good comparison for this (despite whatever I may have said before ).

Foal is going through this. He skipped Grade 1, did 2, then 4 and 5 (and 5 theory), then 7 and is now preparing for Grade 8.

I believe that, after Grade 8, it becomes performance-oriented.

For each of those exams (and for competitions he's been in too), the examiner has used a combination of 'absolute' marking, with elements of 'opinion' - but even those are justified, evidenced.

Wiki tells us:

. . . four individual components:
Set pieces. The student is required to play three pieces (four, from memory, for singers doing Grades 6–8) prepared beforehand. These pieces are selected from the current syllabus for the instrument and grade, usually one piece from each of the groups A, B and C. Group A usually features Baroque and early Classical repertoire, Group B late Classical and Romantic, and Group C 20th century and contemporary music, encouraging the student to select a balanced programme with music in a range of styles and periods. For most instruments (obviously excluding the piano itself), some or all of the pieces are played with piano accompaniment. Each piece is marked out of 30. The pass mark is 20. (For Grades 6–8 singing, the pieces are out of 24/24/21/21 for each piece, the pass mark being 16/16/14/14 respectively.)
Scales. Various scales, arpeggios, dominant and diminished 7ths and, for Grades 1–4 only (Grades 1 & 2 for Piano), broken chords, are examined, according to the grade of difficulty. Scales are marked out of 21. The pass mark is 14.
Sight reading. The student is presented with an unseen piece, has up to 30 seconds to prepare, and then must play to the best of his or her ability. Sight-reading is marked out of 21. The pass mark is 14.
Aural. Various exercises are played by the examiner and the student is required to demonstrate skills in listening to and analysing music, for example clapping the rhythm or singing the melody. At higher grades, students are expected to comment on features of a short piece played by the examiner, including dynamics, phrasing and style and period. Aural is marked out of 18. The passing mark is 12.

The exams are marked out of 150, where 100 is a pass, 120 a pass with merit, and 130 a distinction.

Partly this is the 'spiral curriculum', where the same elements are covered in more detail.

Would it be so wrong to create a similar structure for driving? It might need a little imagination, but surely it's possible? One objection I can foresee is that it doesn't address the 'randomness' of typical on-road driving - but surely that's an indication of potential randomness in the training/test regime itself?

[akirk]

Would it be so wrong to create a similar structure for driving? It might need a little imagination, but surely it's possible? One objection I can foresee is that it doesn't address the 'randomness' of typical on-road driving - but surely that's an indication of potential randomness in the training/test regime itself?

What like this?

exactly what it does - and certainly one of the course coaches will give you a very detailed and knowledge comparison between driving and music - and is a fine pianist to boot

I suppose the analogy does slightly fall down where it gets to the reality that musicians are usually in a co-operative environment, whereas drivers are in a more random and combative setting - though having seen some orchestras it tends to be more orchestra versus conductor!

Alasdair

[Matt62]

Perhaps not heavily relying on ex Police for examiners would help, The vast majority of those ex Police also won't have been trained by the Police to teach or examine, they'll have been given the training & tools to drive that way, not to teach/examine driving that way (let alone alternate ways).

The ex (and serving) Police officers that I have been examined by over the years (ROSPA), have all been quite pragmatic regarding many of the 'hot' procedural topics that appear on this forum. They have also been quite happy to offer comments, advice, suggestions and general conversation during the drive; making the whole exercise a relatively pleasant and informative experience.
Other than the first time I have been given a 'Gold' on each occasion, despite delivering drives which I am sure many members of this forum (including myself) could easily pick holes in. From this I suspect that what they are really looking for is a combination of enthusiasm, driving knowledge and safety, delivered in a reasonably systematic way. They are not carrying out a 'box ticking' exercise.
I believe that they carry out this role, in their own time, due to a general interest in improving driving standards. Replacing these people with box ticking examiners obsessed with the minutiae of BGOL or whatever, would I think, be a seriously retrograde step.

[RobC]

Perhaps not heavily relying on ex Police for examiners would help, The vast majority of those ex Police also won't have been trained by the Police to teach or examine, they'll have been given the training & tools to drive that way, not to teach/examine driving that way (let alone alternate ways).

The ex (and serving) Police officers that I have been examined by over the years (ROSPA), have all been quite pragmatic regarding many of the 'hot' procedural topics that appear on this forum. They have also been quite happy to offer comments, advice, suggestions and general conversation during the drive; making the whole exercise a relatively pleasant and informative experience.
Other than the first time I have been given a 'Gold' on each occasion, despite delivering drives which I am sure many members of this forum (including myself) could easily pick holes in. From this I suspect that what they are really looking for is a combination of enthusiasm, driving knowledge and safety, delivered in a reasonably systematic way. They are not carrying out a 'box ticking' exercise.
I believe that they carry out this role, in their own time, due to a general interest in improving driving standards. Replacing these people with box ticking examiners obsessed with the minutiae of BGOL or whatever, would I think, be a seriously retrograde step.

Hi Matt

I certainly wasn't offered any advice or suggestions during the drive on my IAM test, the examiner was happy to chat though.

I do agree that you wouldn't want the IAM exam to be box ticking exercise by a DVSA style examiner not employed for his personality, however that doesn't mean that more consistency couldn't be introduced.

I was under the impression IAM examiners were paid for assessing candidates rather than carrying out the role in their own time

Rob

[Stephen]

When I took up the role of Examining I was lead to believe that I was going to see a standard of driving that was nearly as good as a standard Police driver , Oh how disappointed I was.
Now 4 years on I am still waiting to see that standard, I will probably never see it and due to this I have had to lower my standard when testing associates for test.
Prior to being an Examiner I was a Senior Observer within my local group for best part of 20 years so feel that I knew what I was talking about.
I would be asked to check drive associates who had been put in for test and on theses occasions I would say that they needed a bit more tuition but they would go ahead and they would pass with the of then examiner for 30 years. I also had to take my test with the IAM as it was prior to any exemptions.
For me standards have declined over the years and will not get any better in fact they are getting worst this is only my opinion and it is not only AD standards that are worst but DVSA standards as well and I put it down to the poor tuition they get which is to pass there test and not a SFL teaching them to be fit for purpose.

[RobC]

When I took up the role of Examining I was lead to believe that I was going to see a standard of driving that was nearly as good as a standard Police driver , Oh how disappointed I was.
Now 4 years on I am still waiting to see that standard, I will probably never see it and due to this I have had to lower my standard when testing associates for test.
Prior to being an Examiner I was a Senior Observer within my local group for best part of 20 years so feel that I knew what I was talking about.
I would be asked to check drive associates who had been put in for test and on theses occasions I would say that they needed a bit more tuition but they would go ahead and they would pass with the of then examiner for 30 years. I also had to take my test with the IAM as it was prior to any exemptions.
For me standards have declined over the years and will not get any better in fact they are getting worst this is only my opinion and it is not only AD standards that are worst but DVSA standards as well and I put it down to the poor tuition they get which is to pass there test and not a SFL teaching them to be fit for purpose.

Hi Stephen

I don't have your experience of examining for AD organisations so cannot comment on AD standards declining over the years.
I do have experience of the DVSA test however, and having sat in over 100 tests I know that it not an easy test to pass or instruct to and that many FLHs would fail the learner test if they were to take it.

The UK driving test is one of the hardest and the UK licence is highly valued throughout the world and we have one of, if not the best road safety records in the world. The UK ADI qualification process and DVSA examination process is both difficult and strictly monitored. Learners are taught SFL skills but there isn't any further driving reassessment required in the whole of a drivers career.
You can therefore hardly blame those who taught the person to drive for any subsequent decline in drivers skills over the years, or indeed many decades of a drivers career.

Those who choose to further their driving skills by AD are in a minority of drivers on the road and should be commended.
If standards of these AD has declined over the years and is poor, what does this say for the overall standard of driving for the vast majority of drivers in the UK, and what changes should be made to reverse this trend particularly in AD where you are an experienced examiner?

Rob

[Matt62]

When I took up the role of Examining I was lead to believe that I was going to see a standard of driving that was nearly as good as a standard Police driver , Oh how disappointed I was.
Now 4 years on I am still waiting to see that standard, I will probably never see it and due to this I have had to lower my standard when testing associates for test.
Prior to being an Examiner I was a Senior Observer within my local group for best part of 20 years so feel that I knew what I was talking about.
I would be asked to check drive associates who had been put in for test and on theses occasions I would say that they needed a bit more tuition but they would go ahead and they would pass with the of then examiner for 30 years. I also had to take my test with the IAM as it was prior to any exemptions.
For me standards have declined over the years and will not get any better in fact they are getting worst this is only my opinion and it is not only AD standards that are worst but DVSA standards as well and I put it down to the poor tuition they get which is to pass there test and not a SFL teaching them to be fit for purpose.

It would be interesting to have some examples of these declining standards, and how you would address them.

As 'standard' Police drivers are of course drawn initially from the general population, then the suggestion that people taking the various civilian 'advanced' tests will never reach an equivalent standard (within the obvious limitations of 'civilian' driving), seems a strange one - or a massive indictment of the civilian advanced driving community.

If you were so dissatisfied with the AD organization you were involved in for 20 years, then what made you become an examiner with them?

[hir]

I'm slightly mystified by some of the following:

When I took up the role of Examining I was lead to believe that I was going to see a standard of driving that was nearly as good as a standard Police driver , Oh how disappointed I was.
Now 4 years on I am still waiting to see that standard, I will probably never see it and due to this I have had to lower my standard when testing associates for test.

Four years into examining, why are you changing your test standards? I would have thought that your Regional Staff Examiner, as was, would have initiated you into the standard required for a test pass right from the beginning. You say that you are now lowering your standard when testing associates for test. Does that mean that you had a significantly higher fail rate than most other examiners? The overall pass rate is approx 83%, so if your pass rate percentage deviated significantly from that median surely someone would have had a quiet word in your ear. Or perhaps they now have?

Prior to being an Examiner I was a Senior Observer within my local group for best part of 20 years so feel that I knew what I was talking about.
I would be asked to check drive associates who had been put in for test and on theses occasions I would say that they needed a bit more tuition but they would go ahead and they would pass with the of then examiner for 30 years. I also had to take my test with the IAM as it was prior to any exemptions.

So, you already knew what the standard was and what was required for a test pass. OK, so you were... "led to believe that I was going to see a standard of driving that was nearly as good as a standard Police driver". But, by then, you knew exactly what was required for an IAM pass [you'd been a Senior Observer for 20 years], AND you knew exactly what a "standard police driver's" standard was. So, presumably, from what you say, you already knew that the suggestion was wrong. Why were you then surprised?

For me standards have declined over the years and will not get any better...

Why do you think that they will not get any better?

... in fact they are getting worst this is only my opinion and it is not only AD standards that are worst but DVSA standards as well and I put it down to the poor tuition they get which is to pass there test and not a SFL teaching them to be fit for purpose.

Do you consider that observer skills in teaching SFL have declined since you were an observer?

Just curious.

[Stephen]

At first I did have a higher fail rate than most other Examiners but most of them had been retired for quite a number of years and in my opinion had lost the edge, and as I says I was looking for a standard that was never going to happen on a regular basis, so moderated what my expectations down to what seems to be acceptable.

Yes, I knew what the standard was from my group and it was of a good standard as far as I was concerned, but for me could have been better. Then when I went to become an examiner I was now seeing the standards from other groups, this is when I realised that for what ever reasons not all groups were presenting for test the same standard I was now getting experience from about another 5 groups.

Standards will not get any better as over the years the standards have been watered down with the emphasis from some areas being on quantity rather than quality.

The word Police is only used to show that they along with other emergency services use Roadcraft on what can only be called intensive driving courses,so a higher standard is hopefully what will be achieved at the end, as with the road safety organisations the input is on a weekly basis or however the individual feels that they can commit on the course.

At present I can not say what exactly is the root cause to the declining standards whether it be the Observers ,the ones who do not want to move with change or other influencing factors. Might I add that it is not only the decline of the AD standards it is driving at all levels that has/is declining and it will get worst as the roads will be getting policed even more in the not too distant future.

As said above its not the Police standard that is declining its the civilian, the only limitations between Police and Civilian is the exemptions the standards should be the same but as I said arent.

I am not dissatisfied with any organisation or group I have never stated that what I mention about, is the standard of driving that is all. This is my opinion and not one of any organisation everyone criticises these organisations what I say to those who dont like it then go somewhere else and get what you want, just like I can do as well but like everyone else I moan and put up with it.

[RobC]

Standards will not get any better as over the years the standards have been watered down with the emphasis from some areas being on quantity rather than quality.

At present I can not say what exactly is the root cause to the declining standards whether it be the Observers ,the ones who do not want to move with change or other influencing factors. Might I add that it is not only the decline of the AD standards it is driving at all levels that has/is declining and it will get worst as the roads will be getting policed even more in the not too distant future.

Hi Stephen

We are all entitled to an opinion, however you haven't explained why standards wont improve or given any examples or facts to support your opinion on declining standards.

In my opinion the standard of driving for the average driver is not declining. The UK driving test is far more difficult to pass than when I passed it in the 1970's and more training is required to pass the test.
The UKs road safety figures are one of the best if not the best in the world. When the driving test was brought in in 1935 the KSI figures were over four times what they are today with less than a tenth of the number of vehicles on the road. Vehicles may be safer today but our road safety figures don't support declining driving standards.

You mention that standards of some Observers may be a factor. If groups don't train to the same standard who's fault is that?. Tests and examiners define the standard so if examiners have to moderate their marking to achieve a pass rate, are they not lowering standards? and how will increased policing in the future make driving standards worse?


Rob

[Matt62]

I am still a bit hung up on the comparison with Police drivers. It seems to me that if any Police driver could turn up in 'plain clothes', take the ROSPA or IAM test and be obviously BETTER in terms of safety, smoothness and progress than any other member, then the AD organisations are going down the wrong track - and this seems to be what Stephen is saying.
If the Police drivers are just DIFFERENT - commentary style or whatever, then I am not so sure that this is quite so worrying.
Many AD organisation members (like me) will be 'chancers' when it comes to our three yearly re tests, but there are a lot of 'anoraks' who I am sure will be quite disappointed by Stephen's comments and the implication that they can't improve (or are going down the wrong route anyway).

[akirk]

I am still a bit hung up on the comparison with Police drivers. It seems to me that if any Police driver could turn up in 'plain clothes', take the ROSPA or IAM test and be obviously BETTER in terms of safety, smoothness and progress than any other member, then the AD organisations are going down the wrong track - and this seems to be what Stephen is saying.
If the Police drivers are just DIFFERENT - commentary style or whatever, then I am not so sure that this is quite so worrying.
Many AD organisation members (like me) will be 'chancers' when it comes to our three yearly re tests, but there are a lot of 'anoraks' who I am sure will be quite disappointed by Stephen's comments and the implication that they can't improve (or are going down the wrong route anyway).

I would assume that police drivers have a variety of abilities / standards as anyone else - yes, there will be those who have done very advanced training, but that is not necessarily the same as the public and what they would be taught in AD - police driving has many advanced elements, but also needs and techniques which would not be ideal in the standard AD world... so they could be better or worse than an AD organisation member...

also ref. Stephen's comments - why would any member of an AD organisation be disappointed - it is simply one view / perspective on the internet - fascinating to have diverse views, but I can't see one view deeply upsetting everyone and having seen lots of AD organisation members improve and being myself on a long journey of growth, I am sure that there is much about which we can be optimistic!

Alasdair

[Matt62]

Yes - I take your point, maybe there won't be too many members of this forum throwing themselves off high buildings based on these posts ; but these views are coming from a self-identified examiner, and long term member of the AD fraternity.

I think most of us would identify Police drivers in 'civilian' mode as role models for where we would like our own driving to be (isn't that why Roadcraft is the almost universal 'manual' for AD?), so the idea that an examiner thinks that none of us get anywhere near there, must be slightly unsettling?

[WhoseGeneration]

I think most of us would identify Police drivers in 'civilian' mode as role models for where we would like our own driving to be

Why do you think this?