ADUK Archive

Hi All

I am aware that the art of advanced driving in general does not have a great image. It has improved over the years from very "pipe and slippers" to something the masses are sort of getting....But what could we do to make it more appealing, especially to younger drivers?

The IAM have done a good job in recent years, but I still think it remains something good drivers do, to become really good drivers, whilst the "at risk" drivers have no real interest..

Its not cool
Its something my dad would do
I'm already a good driver
It doesn't give a insurance discount...does it?

etc etc etc.......

If it isn't appealing in itself then there is little one can do to make it appealing other than to dispel preconceptions.

Image is only one aspect of selling it.

Simply: what does the general public stand to gain from spending their money* on AD? What proven, cost-effective, benefits are there?

Until that's answered, why should they bother?**

* I know that the IAM/RoSPA options are 'cheap', but even then there's a time commitment needed too.

** And if there's a benefit for all drivers, should 'L' training be amended to incorporate the key beneficial elements?

Horse wrote:Image is only one aspect of selling it.

Simply: what does the general public stand to gain from spending their money* on AD? What proven, cost-effective, benefits are there?

Until that's answered, why should they bother?**

* I know that the IAM/RoSPA options are 'cheap', but even then there's a time commitment needed too.

** And if there's a benefit for all drivers, should 'L' training be amended to incorporate the key beneficial elements?

I certainly feel "L" training should incorporate elements of advanced training - it may even plant the seed in the minds of new drivers, that there is something of use after they have passed their test...

Advanced Driving wrote:

Horse wrote: Simply: what does the general public stand to gain from spending their money on AD? What proven, cost-effective, benefits are there?

Until that's answered, why should they bother?

. . . that there is something of use

"What" and proven benefits . . . ?

Advanced Driving wrote:...I certainly feel "L" training should incorporate elements of advanced training...

What elements?

Image ????

Well I do my best to help: I keep an IAM badge in my back window, the edge just visible in my rear view mirror to remind me that I'm supposed to be setting an example and I (almost) always where a flat cap when driving. Hopefully that'll improve the image a bit?

martine wrote:

Advanced Driving wrote:...I certainly feel "L" training should incorporate elements of advanced training...

What elements?

Not too sure, but maybe additional focus on forward planning and anticipation over and above things like the turn in the road, parallel park etc..

Advanced Driving wrote:

martine wrote:

Advanced Driving wrote:...I certainly feel "L" training should incorporate elements of advanced training...

What elements?

Not too sure, but maybe additional focus on forward planning and anticipation over and above things like the turn in the road, parallel park etc..

Obviously some attention to Observation, Anticipation and Planning is already essential for passing the novice driving test. The Hazard Perception Test was introduced specifically to encourage more teaching of this area (unfortunately the implementation has been rather poor).

However, new drivers need concentration for the mechanics of controlling the car and their observation is focused mainly on avoiding road users and other objects in their immediate vicinity. They do not have much spare mental capacity for longer range observation and for planning.

In my not so humble opinion (as the saying goes) the novice test is already very hard for learners to pass, and passing it does demonstrate sufficient competence for new drivers to go out and practice on their own. I would like to see further stages to obtaining a full licence, for which there would be too different purposes. Firstly, it would prevent people who had just passed the novice test thinking that they were now fully fledged drivers, and so would encourage them to take more care during their early solo driving experience. And secondly, it would enable them to enhance their skills once the basics of driving had become more instinctive.

Advanced Driving wrote:Hi All

I am aware that the art of advanced driving in general does not have a great image. It has improved over the years from very "pipe and slippers" to something the masses are sort of getting....But what could we do to make it more appealing, especially to younger drivers?

I'm not sure I'd agree they get it. OK not so much pipe and slippers, but ask ordinary folks about it and you will still get a lot of views that display a high level of ignorance. Quite common for folks to suggests that ADs have a bad accident record, are "must be in fronters", or people who bimble everywhere at 30mph.

It's not a solvable problem IMO. The public forms their view of the world based on what they believe, what they read in the papers and what their friends and relative think.

Reality and evidence plays no part in how they understand the world around them, and many will reject anything, even in the face of overwhelming evidence, that does not fit in with their beliefs and prejudices.

waremark wrote: The Hazard Perception Test was introduced specifically to encourage more teaching of this area (unfortunately the implementation has been rather poor).

. . . And secondly, it would enable them to enhance their skills once the basics of driving had become more instinctive.

The introduction of the HPT was credited with an 11% reduction in crashes involving new drivers. 'Enhanced skills' doesn't, as far as I know, have any substantial evidence to commend it.

Horse wrote:

waremark wrote: The Hazard Perception Test was introduced specifically to encourage more teaching of this area (unfortunately the implementation has been rather poor).

. . . And secondly, it would enable them to enhance their skills once the basics of driving had become more instinctive.

The introduction of the HPT was credited with an 11% reduction in crashes involving new drivers. 'Enhanced skills' doesn't, as far as I know, have any substantial evidence to commend it.

I was under the impression that the proportion of KSI accounted for by young drivers increased after the introduction of the HPT. Can you lay hands on some relevant stats without wasting much time?

As to the justification for skills enhancement, are you saying that all that money spent by fleet operators on driver training is wasted?

Advanced Driving wrote:Hi All

I am aware that the art of advanced driving in general does not have a great image. It has improved over the years from very "pipe and slippers" to something the masses are sort of getting....But what could we do to make it more appealing, especially to younger drivers?
.......

I don't often find people who are aware of further driver training as a concept, let alone having an image in mind of what it might involve. They no more think they need driver training than training in how to walk.

And as to recreational road driving as practised by my group of friends, it is almost embarrassing to deal with the reactions when I say 'I am off to a driving weekend'.

waremark wrote:

Horse wrote:

waremark wrote: The Hazard Perception Test was introduced specifically to encourage more teaching of this area (unfortunately the implementation has been rather poor).

. . . And secondly, it would enable them to enhance their skills once the basics of driving had become more instinctive.

The introduction of the HPT was credited with an 11% reduction in crashes involving new drivers. 'Enhanced skills' doesn't, as far as I know, have any substantial evidence to commend it.

I was under the impression that the proportion of KSI accounted for by young drivers increased after the introduction of the HPT. Can you lay hands on some relevant stats without wasting much time?

As to the justification for skills enhancement, are you saying that all that money spent by fleet operators on driver training is wasted?

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/haza ... fety-award

Worth noting that people driving for work are doing what their employer demands. And, if they're being monitored as a result, then there may be repercussions from non-compliance, For example, if I ride a motorcycle on behalf of my employer, then I am required to wear hi-viz gear. But on my own bike, I don't.

It's a similar situation with people who choose to take post-test training, they're probably already 'safety conscious', so respond accordingly and may even skew the stats.

Simply: there is very little scientific evidence that 'training' makes drivers safer.

I've posted multitudes of links before, and usually suffer in a 'shoot the messenger' manner as a result. So, here's a challenge: go and find a selection of scientific studies which show that skills training works.

Making a big financial saving will have loads queuing up to do it but that means the insurers will need to get on board in a big way