New IAM standards

[Carbon Based]

In many ways it requires more from the Observer because telling them "this is the way you must do it because I say so" is no longer an option.

Substitute "how to steer" with "how to teach". It is the same idea of considering output rather than input.

The tricky bit is that there may not be a set answer. Coaching/facilitating will be more flexible and encourage wider discussion although the even this may depend on things like the student's motivation, willingness to change, self awareness, trust and available time.

[akirk]

In many ways it requires more from the Observer because telling them "this is the way you must do it because I say so" is no longer an option.

Substitute "how to steer" with "how to teach". It is the same idea of considering output rather than input.

The tricky bit is that there may not be a set answer. Coaching/facilitating will be more flexible and encourage wider discussion although the even this may depend on things like the student's motivation, willingness to change, self awareness, trust and available time.

I don't think it is all that tricky it is standard teaching - you vary it according to the level at which you are teaching:

- beginners
this is the way to do it

- improvers
this is the way to do it and this is why

- intermediates
this is one way to do it and it has this affect, there are other options as well, but we may or may not be able to explore them all - however this is the output we want, you can either use this method, or if you find another way that is great

- advanced
this is the output we are looking for- there are a number of tools which might help you, you should know them and how to choose the right one to deliver the output...

a very simplistic summary - but the same basic teaching principles whether you are teaching maths from 4-18 & uni / teaching tennis / teaching driving

with this simplistic view - beginners might be the initial driving test - there might be some of improvers in there...

AD starts at intermediates and the initial IAM / RoSPA probably sits there, but should be pushing the driver towards advanced - F1RST / GOLD / Masters / HPC / etc. should firmly be on the Advanced approach

Alasdair

[RobC]

What we seem to have is a growing and very vocal sub-group who see to have a problem with pull/push steering for reasons unknown. For me to be convinced it should be dropped, they have to come up with a better alternative. Dropping it because it's hard to teach or Jeremy Clarkson makes fun of it are not good enough reasons.

Hi Silk

I wouldn't suggest that PP steering is dropped but its only one method of steering and not one that has to be used 100% of the time as long as control/smoothness and safety isn't compromised.

When I taught learners, I taught them PP on their first lesson. Nevertheless many learners on their first lesson will have the wheel tightly gripped at 10 to 2 or 9 to 3 and they will steer round a junction crossing their arms and will unable to steer further. For many learners PP isn't a natural steering method. Further into lessons and on to test other methods of steering may be introduced.
After the DVSA test has been passed, PP is usually one of the first things that goes out of the window, along with blind spot checks and left mirror use!

Rob

[Carbon Based]

I don't think it is all that tricky it is standard teaching - you vary it according to the level at which you are teaching:

It's tricky if you've never experienced any of the alternatives - hammers and nails and all that!

And that also applies to both parties involved.

[akirk]

I don't think it is all that tricky it is standard teaching - you vary it according to the level at which you are teaching:

It's tricky if you've never experienced any of the alternatives - hammers and nails and all that!

And that also applies to both parties involved.

Ahh - you mean reality as opposed to sitting behind a computer and talking about concept
you are of course correct - it is much easier to be proscriptive and just teach a methodology - it takes a confident and capable teacher to have the flexibility to properly teach based on outcomes - it is a shame we don't have more of that across all walks of life

Alasdair

[RobC]

In many ways it requires more from the Observer because telling them "this is the way you must do it because I say so" is no longer an option.

Substitute "how to steer" with "how to teach". It is the same idea of considering output rather than input.

The tricky bit is that there may not be a set answer. Coaching/facilitating will be more flexible and encourage wider discussion although the even this may depend on things like the student's motivation, willingness to change, self awareness, trust and available time.

I don't think it is all that tricky it is standard teaching - you vary it according to the level at which you are teaching:

- beginners
this is the way to do it

- improvers
this is the way to do it and this is why

- intermediates
this is one way to do it and it has this affect, there are other options as well, but we may or may not be able to explore them all - however this is the output we want, you can either use this method, or if you find another way that is great

- advanced
this is the output we are looking for- there are a number of tools which might help you, you should know them and how to choose the right one to deliver the output...

a very simplistic summary - but the same basic teaching principles whether you are teaching maths from 4-18 & uni / teaching tennis / teaching driving

with this simplistic view - beginners might be the initial driving test - there might be some of improvers in there...

AD starts at intermediates and the initial IAM / RoSPA probably sits there, but should be pushing the driver towards advanced - F1RST / GOLD / Masters / HPC / etc. should firmly be on the Advanced approach

Alasdair

Hi Alasdair

Learners today have to be trained to a high standard to pass the learner test. Most learners today will actually have far more training (though much less experience) than FLHs who may have decades of experience.

ADIs using CCL teach an individual in their preferred learning mode and thus maximizing their learning by focusing on the mode that benefits them the most. When teaching learners they aren't told to PP steer without being given the reasons for it or an option to steer in any other way.

I wouldn't try to teach a learner all styles of steering on a first lesson, however further into lessons I would teach/coach a pupil through other levels to the advanced stage.

Rob

[hir]

... but there is also an element of how good they are at operating the controls and choosing a method that has an element of safety built in. With regards to steering, few people would argue that choosing a method that defaults to safety as well as being accurate and smooth is not a good idea.

Why do you consider Pull-Push to be the only steering method that... defaults to safety as well as being accurate and smooth?

What we seem to have is a growing and very vocal sub-group who see[m] to have a problem with pull/push steering for reasons unknown. For me to be convinced it should be dropped, they have to come up with a better alternative. Dropping it because it's hard to teach or Jeremy Clarkson makes fun of it are not good enough reasons.

A couple of misconceptions there.

Firstly, us loud-mouthed-self-proclaimed-driving-"experts" don't have a problem with PP steering. I use it frequently, for turns at up to approx 25mph. For deviations of curve/bend at higher speed I use alternative techniques. What you need to understand is that we have a "problem" with anyone who insists that PP is the ONLY way to steer at all times.

Secondly, you suggest that... they have to come up with a better alternative. This discussion is not about having "a" better alternative, a single different way of steering. No, it's about having a number of steering techniques in the toolbox so that the thinking driver, and I assume you agree that's what we're trying to produce, will have a choice of techniques and will be able to select the best one for the matter in hand. And, yes, I've heard all the arguments about PP is a tried and tested technique that is suitable for all occasions and all situations so why introduce additional techniques which aren't as good as PP. It's an argument that is both fatuous and blinkered, and thankfully the IAM appear to be on the point of agreeing with me.

Yes, I know, I'm a bit self opinionated. What I'm really striving for is the accolade of being labelled a... "loud mouthed self-proclaimed driving "expert", who's also a lefty liberal who just gives out certificates, not just for showing up, but for understanding the difference between inputs and outcomes. As you quite rightly pointed out earlier... although I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, I'm afraid, on this occasion, I'm unable to recommend you for membership of the Institute of Advanced Outcomes. But, please keep asking the questions and reading the replies and I'm sure that you will be successful at your next attempt.

[akirk]

Permission to say aaaaaargh! You shouldn't be teaching anything to do with driving. Teaching will involve 'do it this way' and will not lead to anything other than a veneer in someone's driving. I've seen too many drivers spoilt in this way. Given that we ought to be looking at the highest levels of the GDE, this is not a way forward.

but teaching is totally appropriate at some levels and for some purposes...
while I don't support those who believe in only a teaching approach and no thinking / experience / understanding...
equally I don't support those who believe that everything can happen through coaching / etc.

core basic facts etc. should be taught - then onto that framework a mixture of approaches work, the balance depending on people involved...

simplistic example - you teach that the left pedal is clutch, middle is brake and right is accelerator - you don't let them learn by experience...

at the other end of the scale you don't 'teach' heel and toe simply through do xyz

Alasdair

[kfae8959]

BTW, have you tried heel and toe in lieu of the handbrake on hill starts? Works remarkably well...

I had to for a while in an Alfa Spider with a handbrake made of butter. It does, doesn't it!

David

[RobC]

I don't think it is all that tricky it is standard teaching - you vary it according to the level at which you are teaching:

It's tricky if you've never experienced any of the alternatives - hammers and nails and all that!

And that also applies to both parties involved.

Permission to say aaaaaargh! You shouldn't be teaching anything to do with driving. Teaching will involve 'do it this way' and will not lead to anything other than a veneer in someone's driving. I've seen too many drivers spoilt in this way. Given that we ought to be looking at the highest levels of the GDE, this is not a way forward.

The IAM has a significant issue to overcome in that the majority of its population of Observers are not equipped with sufficient skills to be able to analyse an associate's driving and work out what could be guided into a better style. In other words the IAM must concentrate on raising the quality of their Observers insights into their own as well as others driving skills.

As von can probably testify, once you enter the coaching zone, the job becomes a piss of piss. You merely need to provide the hazards to get the changes in behaviour with a little nudge here and there. If you've ever seen Dalai Palmer in action, you'll know what I mean.

Permission to say aaaaaargh!

I'm beginning to agree with 'Stressfull Dave'

[akirk]

You've been out with the pianist - did he tell you what to do at any time?

yes he did...

but that is because at the outset we discussed learning styles and I am quite self aware of how I best learn...
so I asked that he 'taught me' and then moved the same learning points into coaching / providing the opportunities etc.

and it worked well - must have done as he seemed happy at the end...

it is too simplistic to say that there is only one approach - any form of progression for an individual will vary according to the people involved as much as the subject matter...

teaching works well for fact based stuff
coaching / context and experiential learning works well for skills based stuff
driving involves both - yes AD is primarily the latter, but there are elements of both...

and seeing how well the pianist's plastic wallet book is used with his drawing on it I think there might be quite a lot of teaching going on

Alasdair

[Carbon Based]

Given that we ought to be looking at the highest levels of the GDE, this is not a way forward.

Which might be covered by the IAM's other point of what's different: Inclusion of "HumanFactorsCompetency" - steering kind of got in the way...

I find that the older you are the more attuned you are to the teaching process, because that's what you endured at school.

What I've seen echoes that, if you have an audience who hasn't been on the nice end of any form of structured learning for a few years, they tend to expect to be taught. If you try something else and don't allow for the individual then the results can be mixed - some take to it, others react quite strongly against it: "stop asking me questions and just tell me the answer".

Seems to me that it is about finding a balance and heading in the right direction (thinking, not steering).

[waremark]

You should have said hir I would have called you that any time you wanted. I believe silk had a number of us in mind though.

Mark, you have to admit that there are grounds to be optimistic. Much that we have brought up in the past appears not to have fallen on deaf ears.

I agree that there are grounds to be optimistic.

[zadocbrown]

You should have said hir I would have called you that any time you wanted. I believe silk had a number of us in mind though.

Mark, you have to admit that there are grounds to be optimistic. Much that we have brought up in the past appears not to have fallen on deaf ears.

I agree that there are grounds to be optimistic.

I do hope so. But there are formidable obstacles to overcome. The quality of observing is one, but bound up with that is the question of what is IAM for, why do people join and what are their expectations - issues which are not wholly within our control. And then there's the structure of the organization - I can't help but wonder whether the left hand knows what the right hand is doing sufficiently for these kind of good ideas to come through. For example, the drive for 'consistency' and the rather petty dictats issued over the last few years in response to questions that really require the answer 'it depends' do not sit terribly comfortably with the idea of being more flexible about inputs.

[Gareth]

the drive for 'consistency' and the rather petty dictats issued over the last few years

I think these don't necessarily go hand in hand. The former is laudable, and probably required if the IAM is to thrive, while the latter tends to be counter-productive.