High Performance / Precision Driving Forum?

[ipsg.glf]

In the same way as we do not see Police Driving Instructors giving detailed explanations of the various levels that they teach to, we should not have other people (no matter what organisation they claim - either overtly or discreetly - to represent) doing the same. Especially when the vast majority of them do not have formal teaching qualifications.

I'm a little confused here. What exactly is the purpose of this forum if it is not for persons of different abilities and experiences to share and learn with others through discussion. For example an advanced police pursuit driver may be very skilled in certain aspects of driving, and they may be able to offer some tips on dealing with traffic hazards, but they can also appreciate the views from a civilian driver with regard to "normal driving" and how the public percieve police behaviour. Does someone need to be "qualified" before offering advice or a view. A Forum is only a discussion tool, not an instruction manual.

I dunno. Do you take mechnical advice from your milkman?

There comes a stage when discussion needs demonstration and since the opportunities for demonstration seem to be few and far between, I think we need to err on the side of caution.

[Why_Aye]

As a layman, I would like to put an opinion on this:

Red Herring asked of ROG why credentials may be important. I have come to respect a few individuals on this site, most of whom not least for their credentials, but never for credentials alone. For example, Roger displays his credentials (Civilian Advanced Driver, Senior Observer, Leicester Group of Advanced Motorists, LGV instructor). Now, smite me with a herring if I am a fool for believing that he knows a huge amount more about driving than I do, but that is the case and I await the smiting. How, otherwise, am I to guage to what standard of driving a certain contributor is?

There must be caution involved. It would be easy for someone to make a bad comment for then an inexperienced driver apply that to the road. Easily this could cause harm.

For example, Red Herring, you do not display your credentials and therefore a newcomer to this site is more likely to disregard your comments in favour of someone with a list of credentials regardless of what you have to say - however, you could be a Class 1 driver. Who knows unless it crops up in conversation?

So, if there were to be another separate forum for 'other' advanced driving then great caution must be taken. As a newcomer to this site, I am not in favour of another section for 'other' advanced driving, as what I have seen so far demonstrates that when discussions include 'other' techniques (LFB, for instance) they are labeled readily as other than normal advanced techniques. It could happen that people fall into the habit of idly discussing 'other' techniques without realising with whom they are potentially talking and get people to try out things that are beyond their scope. The learners forum, for instance, already has a clear divide courtesy of the DSA.

[Red Herring]

So are we saying that persons with plenty of qualifications to offer advice on complex advanced technique should not do so because an inexperienced driver may read them and apply them out of context....whilst at the same time those who do not have the knowledge or experience should not offer a view because they are not qualified to do so? A Forum is a discussion tool, by it's nature you can only offer, explain and evidence a view, you cannot demonstrate it. I come on here because I like to read a diverse range of opinions, sometimes offer a view, and sometimes challenge one I don't agree with. I don't feel the need to advertise my credentials because I prefer to rely on the strength of my posting to get my point across, not a few vague statements after my name that may or may not be accurate or relevant. By the way, what exactly is "Advanced driver of 2008" supposed to mean. Is it a hopeful statement and if so how you you propose to measure it?

[Why_Aye]

My apologies, not least for potentially saying that I don't respect you or anyone else who don't post credentials in their signature. That is not the case.

I mean to say that someone reading these fora who are new to the idea of advanced driving may rely on credentials posted within a signature to guage the validity of what is being said. I intended to make it clear that personally I don't have that as a guage and prefer to read what people say in order to realise what manner of authority they have on the subject.

Don't forget that what I said was in context of a potential new section of this site and newcomers to the site: not that I was advocating a need to either place or omit credentials from your signature for any arbitrary reason. It can, however, take a while to realise who on any forum is talking sense and who is talking nonsense - credentials at the foot of each post have an obvious effect on this!

By the way, what exactly is "Advanced driver of 2008" supposed to mean. Is it a hopeful statement and if so how you you propose to measure it?

Hopefully, it is clear that by the question mark that it is a target to be attained. I will know how to measure it once I do something by assessment. Other than by assessment (and therefore credentials), who knows how what I say about driving is to be trusted? I am not an AD and am happy for people to know this, as it has everything to do with what I say here.

[waremark]

Hi David. I liked you calling yourself Advanced Driver of 2008? - I thought it made it very clear where you are coming from, and congratulations on your plans.

I think it is up to individual forum members whether they choose to post their 'credentials'. I think regulars get to understand where other forum members are coming from.

Still think that on balance we should stick with the current forum structure. As someone has recently mentioned, it is generally clear when techniques being discussed are outside the normal IAM/Rospa syllabus, and I guess we should always try to make sure that this is the case.

[ScoobyChris]

Interesting discussion. I don't include my qualifications in my sig because I don't really see it's relevant (and they're not that impressive! ). I have my own ideas on advanced driving based on my experiences/training and I assume these are taken at face value, after all imho advanced driving should be more about questioning and discussing why we do something, rather than seeking instruction on how to robotically achieve it.

As a result, I'm happy to listen to ideas from other people irrespective of their background (it's always nice to hear TripleS's common sense opinion) and equally happy to put forward my own. Just because we hold the same qualification, doesn't mean we'll agree on the same things!

Chris

[ROG]

Just because we hold the same qualification, doesn't mean we'll agree on the same things!

That would be boring

[martine]

Just because we hold the same qualification, doesn't mean we'll agree on the same things!
Chris

Absolutely agree.

One of the things the IAM is criticised for is being too prescriptive but it's worth remembering the IAM test is there to raise driving standards above the norm. and should be just the start of a long and never-ending journey to driving perfection. (almost poetry...that)

[Gareth]

So are we saying that persons with plenty of qualifications to offer advice on complex advanced technique should not do so because an inexperienced driver may read them and apply them out of context

I do think there is a potential problem. People who are learning advanced driving by following the IAM/RoADAR syllabus need to precisely keep to that syllabus if they are to achieve the goal of passing the respective tests. Those who have passed the tests may sometimes see things in black and white - there is a right way to drive and everything else is wrong. Dare I say that those who have had additional training beyond the IAM/RoADAR syllabus will more likely see shades of grey instead? With three distinct groups of people, views will be put forward that reflects each persons current point of view and understanding about advanced driving.

I'm trying to think of a good analogy, and there are very few that come easily to (my) mind. A driving example might be the avoidance of BGOL. Someone who has not yet passed an advanced driving test might be working hard to eliminate BGOL from their driving. Someone who has passed such a test might dogmatically claim that BGOL is always wrong, and someone else may start discussing when it is entirely appropriate to the circumstances. Such claims may sit awkwardly with the person who feels that avoiding BGOL is the one true way to drive, and may confuse the person who is trying to eliminate it from their driving. After all, if it's sometimes permissible, who's to say that all the effort to eliminate is necessary?

At each stage in our driving development, how we view the skills we have learnt will be different. In the case of BGOL avoidance, it can be a goal to be achieved, the only way to do something, or just one of a series of tools that can be employed depending on the circumstances.

I think there is a related issue, although some seem to feel otherwise. I believe that to develop great skill in something, most people need to be thoroughly accomplished in the basics. Perhaps it depends on how much is art and how much is science, but I think there is an argument for this being the case in many human endeavours. The problem is how to decide that one has achieved sufficient skill to be able to treat the hard and fast rule as only an approximation of the truth. Moreover as we develop as advanced drivers, what is seen as basic changes as our skill, knowledge and experience is expanded.

Perhaps it sounds like I am arguing for a separate forum, but the problem I see is how to say what would belong in each advanced driving forum.

[martine]

Excellent post Gareth.

EVEN the IAM doesn't completely ban BGOL - it's allowable in some circumstances (like the famous turning from a NSL road with someone tailgaiting).

As far as a seperate forum goes - I think we all benefit by being exposed to each other's views and questions and would like to keep one forum. I have certainly learnt a lot from certain threads - some started by less experienced, some started by the artisan advaced driver.

[Renny]

I think it unnecessary. I think the range of forums are enough and to add another to cover "Track" or "Beyond Advanced" would dilute what is here already.

[TripleS]

I think it unnecessary. I think the range of forums are enough and to add another to cover "Track" or "Beyond Advanced" would dilute what is here already.

On the other hand, the signal to noise ratio on the existing forums might improve if we had a Clowning Forum.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[Mr Cholmondeley-Warner]

Maybe the solution is to go the other way - leave the advanced driving forum as it is, with a free rein, and add (an)other forum(s) specifically for issues related to the IAM/RoSPA/DIA tests. This last to be slightly more formal in its approach, with off-topic posts being moderated more than in the current one, so that candidates don't get confused with too much banter and conflicting advice. The premise being that if you ask a question or pose a problem in that forum, it is answered with the relevant organisation's guidelines in mind.

Just a possibility ...

[martine]

The premise being that if you ask a question or pose a problem in that forum, it is answered with the relevant organisation's guidelines in mind.

Just a possibility ...

That's a good idea - we have some IAM/ROSPA examiners on board here as well a more than a few Observers/Tutors who can offer 'official' guidance.

Anyone else think it's a good idea for a 'Preparing for IAM/ROSPA Q&A' forum?

[ROG]

The premise being that if you ask a question or pose a problem in that forum, it is answered with the relevant organisation's guidelines in mind.

Just a possibility ...

That's a good idea - we have some IAM/ROSPA examiners on board here as well a more than a few Observers/Tutors who can offer 'official' guidance.

Anyone else think it's a good idea for a 'Preparing for IAM/ROSPA Q&A' forum?

and made into a sticky with the FAQs on it once all aspects have been generally covered