NEW Driving test 'independent driving' section

[grober]

In attempt to improve driving skills the Driving Standards Agency have introduced an section to test the ability of new drivers to drive safely while making decisions independently. This is supposed to help new drivers to drive in a safe manner after passing their test. However I am not so sure about this since it means the number of driving manoeuvres tested is to fall from two to one. Does this mean we will have a generation of drivers able to drive to Tesco's but unable to reverse into a parking space once they get there? BBC News - Driving test change introduces 'independent' section

 

[mattc]

As more technology is added to cars so more drivers will come to rely upon it rather than their own judgement. I think your prognosis is entirely correct graeme.

 

[PJH]

ADIs have taught Independent Driving already when they tell their pupil to 'drive home'.
We will still be teaching 4 reversing manoeuvres as before.
When people arrive at car parks they will probably drive forwards into a parking space anyway.

The DSA have had lots of problems creating new test route because road signage is not good enough in many places.
Personally I think that pupils with learning difficulties might have more trouble passing than they did previously, depends on the individual.

 

[Toodeep]

I've read the report and don't really understand a few things.

Firstly, it mentions 'memorised routes'. I can only really vouch for where I used to teach but each test centre I used had several pre-defined routes. It would be hard for a pupil to memorise them all and fairly pointless to do so. Even I didn't bother and I was out there 12 hours every day. If I persistently used a particular corner or stretch of road, it was because it presented a particular challenge or typified a situation likely to be encountered in the real world that I could not guarantee elsewhere. If I presented someone for test who was not a safe driver (since this is all the test really measures) and they were lucky enough to pass, the traffic incident they are then likely to be involved in could be with me or someone I care about. In any case, I don't expect much to change. In a 40 minute test it would be hard to divert far from a set route for 10 minutes and get back to the test centre in time. I've never been an examiner but with the constraints on time they have to deal with, I'm sure it is useful to have a fair idea what they are going to find on a given route. In effect they will end up using the same roads for the 'independent' part and closely controlling it for fear of not getting back for their 10 minute cuppa. As PJH says, the one manoeuvre part is fine because, as now, the candidate will still need to know all four.

As for compulsory testing on rural routes, it would take all of 40 minutes to even get to a rural route from some test centres.

Also, what is the point of setting a minimum learning period of a year other than providing a back-door way of raising the minimum driving age? My first ever pupil was someone who had booked a 30 hour course over a 5 week period. Others do this much time within a week or two with what they have been learning fresh in their minds each session; not to mention the residential intensive course industry which would disappear. On the other hand, some people have a lesson as and when they can afford it or have time, meaning that over 12 months they might only have had a dozen or so hours and, because of the time elapsed between sessions, have had to start virtually from square one every time. The new proposal implies that the latter is a safer driver. Generally, having lessons close together is advantageous while what is being suggested will encourage learners to 'stretch out' their period of tuition. I once had a qualified driver who needed 'refreshing' having passed but never subsequently driven, prove incapable of moving the car!

Setting a minimum number of hours sounds more sensible but is still likely to be unfair for some. The only hour of 'tuition' I ever had was the hour the driving school I went to insisted on before they would let me use their car for my test. When I was teaching, I and other instructors had people pass from scratch in 4 or 5 lessons. I haven't been an ADI for 7 years but frequently give lessons to nieces and godchildren etc. I'm also sure that many drivers who have never been ADIs do a perfectly adequate job teaching their loved ones. Setting any minimum required hours under ADI instruction will unfairly effect a lot of people.

The report says it is not a test of navigation but why not? "Follow the signs to x" puts a candidate in a more realistic situation than "Turn left at the end of the road." if it's independent they are after.

 

[Druk]

Your 'Tescos' is a tad prophetic Graeme. The numpty the Beeb put in a car this morning to try out the new scheme did exactly that. Took a wrong exit at a roundabout and ended up in Tesco. Then, to cap it all, drove head first into a space at the test center to finish. Pathetic display.

 

[lil.smartie]

I have 2 step sons, one almost 21 the other was 17 in June. The 21yr old took 6 manual tests and finally passed on the 7th in a Smart fortwo as an auto only. He's since lost it under new driver regs with 9 points! The 17yr old had 10 hrs lessons and passed 1st time last week. He didn't need 12mths experience and the couple of years didn't help the elder one!

Kate

 

[flango]

We are one of the area's that are currently trialling this and for once the DSA have got it right and it's a good idea for the independence bit. But as an advanced driver instructor and independent examiner I'll tell you what the new driving test is a joke I could train a chimp to pass it within 2 weeks, talk about dumbing it down, based on advice from the government the DSA have been told to up the percentage rate for first time passes so how do you do that? Improve driver instruction or dumb down the test? you guessed it they have done the latter.

My daughter is currently learning to drive and what an experience that has been the quality of some ADI's is absolutely shocking so much so that after we had a disaster with the first one I insisted the ADI's we looked at drove me first, I was open in what I do and 3 out of the 4 of them refused the 4th a nice woman instructor drove me no problem and was first class it was the only way I could ensure my daughter was receiving the correct instruction.

As Lil Smartie points out basing competence on hours of instruction is ridiculous, I know people who have literally had hours and hours of tuition and years after passing their test still can't drive I also know of others who have had no lessons been driving on the farm from 14 took their test on their 17th birthday and passed first time and made excellent drivers.

The way out IMHO is LOWER the age at which you can drive and then base it on hours, toughen up the test to include, rural, motorway and driving in the dark, OK you would have to do it in stages but the roads would be a safer place for it.

Also ADI's should be more thoroughly tested to weed out the cowboys and give the profession a better image

Sorry rant over but I hate seeing people ripped off for very poor tuition

 

[mbenz76]

I simply don't see the point in this aspect of the test. You don't get marked down or failed if you go terribly wrong so what exactly is the point! If it's all about sign and lane marking reading then surely you should be marked down if you mis-read them and go the wrong way.

And what they slip in on the quiet is that you will now only do 1 of the 3 key manouvers instead of 2, so as I see it this has dumbed the test down as a time when driving standards are as poor as I can remember them in my 17 years of driving.

What they should be doing is making an element of night driving compulsory and a high speed road. You should also be made to pass a specific motorway test after your actual test as using a motorway is a very different thing to driving round town.

 

[st4]

We are one of the area's that are currently trialling this and for once the DSA have got it right and it's a good idea for the independence bit. But as an advanced driver instructor and independent examiner I'll tell you what the new driving test is a joke I could train a chimp to pass it within 2 weeks, talk about dumbing it down, based on advice from the government the DSA have been told to up the percentage rate for first time passes so how do you do that? Improve driver instruction or dumb down the test? you guessed it they have done the latter.

My daughter is currently learning to drive and what an experience that has been the quality of some ADI's is absolutely shocking so much so that after we had a disaster with the first one I insisted the ADI's we looked at drove me first, I was open in what I do and 3 out of the 4 of them refused the 4th a nice woman instructor drove me no problem and was first class it was the only way I could ensure my daughter was receiving the correct instruction.

As Lil Smartie points out basing competence on hours of instruction is ridiculous, I know people who have literally had hours and hours of tuition and years after passing their test still can't drive I also know of others who have had no lessons been driving on the farm from 14 took their test on their 17th birthday and passed first time and made excellent drivers.

The way out IMHO is LOWER the age at which you can drive and then base it on hours, toughen up the test to include, rural, motorway and driving in the dark, OK you would have to do it in stages but the roads would be a safer place for it.

Also ADI's should be more thoroughly tested to weed out the cowboys and give the profession a better image

Sorry rant over but I hate seeing people ripped off for very poor tuition

Considering that driving is such a big part of day to day life, would it not be a good idea to teach basic driving theory in school, and if every school had a old £500 wreck it could be driven under controlled conditions (teacher has a remote shut off switch) it would be a better use of young peoples time than learning how to switch on a microwave in home economics.

 

[flango]

Considering that driving is such a big part of day to day life, would it not be a good idea to teach basic driving theory in school, and if every school had a old £500 wreck it could be driven under controlled conditions (teacher has a remote shut off switch) it would be a better use of young peoples time than learning how to switch on a microwave in home economics.

Totally agree Steve the earlier the better get it on the curriculum