How many goes should be allowed?
Should it affect the insurance rating /costs to insure
As in I am suggesting that there are those driving at the very limit of their abilities,
despite having passed the test
I appreciate that there are also who suffer from "nerves"
thus being competent /good drivers DESPITE requiring multiple attempts to pass their test
food for thought
M
{made non make / model specific. If your question doesn't relate to any particular make of car then you DON'T need to select it (for the discussion forum), just select the category instead}
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 19/10/2009 at 13:56
|
Perhaps a fifth fail should result in some kind of pshy...pspych...sphyc...brain analysis of the driver just in case its more than slight nerves and bad luck.
If they really are incompetent behind the wheel its better to find out early rather than once they've been passed and been let loose with a car.
on the flip side someone is bound to argue it would be against their human rights to deny them the chance to pass.
|
I don't think there should be a limit as such. After all there are too many factors in standards of training and individuality. Agreed, if after say, 20 times, you are still failing miserably then there is a problem somewhere along the line.
I'd say a huge proportion of drivers would fail a test everytime they get in the car, if they were checked against a DSA check sheet (one hand steering, resting arm on window, not checking mirrors often enough....) but therein lies the problem; none of these drivers are necessarily unsafe, just more learned and more practiced and attuned to the skill of driving. In fact a large part of driving skill is probably more attitude and mind focused than the actual manual operation, which a monkey could do if trained.
A test is just that, a set pass mark, a set way of ruling - and only reason it's done like this is so it is seen to be universal, fair and impartial. Without this, you'd be passing based soley on the opinion of the examiner, so one might pass you but another one not.
If anything, it could be argued that the test is too short, and hardly anywhere detailed enough that some people pass by the skin of their teeth, but are quite frankly dreadful drivers. Despite all the hundreds of signs and regulations, a theory test could consist of 35 simple questions - most of which nowadays are nothing about road signs, or road skills, but in fact more about "eco driving." Important yes, but firstly does the average 17yr old really care about that, secondly there are far better safety questions that could be asked. Although I hasten to add that the multiple choice questions these days are such that most people could pass using coming sense:
eg. You are on the motorway and you need to make a phone call, do you a) answer it, b) stop in the lane you're in, c) stop on the hard shoulder, d) find a safe place to stop and park before making the call......
(not quite exact but there is a question like this (or was!)
Compared to the amount of regular and continued training found for most other skills and professions, perhaps instead there should be a continuous rolling program of checking basic driver awareness and standards. There never will be as someone would have to pay for it (us drivers probably) and would be huge to set up. I'm not talking about retesting, but perhaps an obligatory assessment drive (like an IAM observer) that you must take every couple of years just to highlight any major problems.
Also, on a side note, does anyone know why on a driving test, you only do an emergency stop on average on 1 in 3 tests? Whereas 3(?) other selected manoeuvres are compulsory.
The only thing I could think of is that it might not always be safe to do so, depending on location/traffic - ie. causing disruption if no real emergency...
The way I see it is that after the test, if you didn't want to, you never have to parallel park, never have to turn in the road, never have to reverse around the corner - you could practically avoid all of these if you wanted - but you can never avoid needing to know how to stop safely and quickly when something happens.
|
My father spent several years as an instructor, his approach was not to put people in for tests until they were (in his opinion) ready and this resulted in a very high pass rate and not many paying two test fees.
Another instructor with a different apporach would have seen many more resits with the same pupils.
Why penalise the pupils?
|
Screw it up 3 times, compulsory course of lessons with a different instructor. Think it's probably a minority but watching programs like Britain's Worst Driver etc makes you wonder how these people passed their test in the first place.
Alternatively, ramp up the test fee for each successive attempt. If you can't pass after 5 goes then you probably shouldn't be on the road. The test isn't difficult.
|
|
Keep it as it is. However I say there should be only 10 minors allowed. 15 is stupid. I got four minors and my test driving was far from flawless. I dread to think how bad you have to drive to get 15 minors.
|
|
|
|
"until they were (in his opinion) ready and this resulted in a very high pass rate and not many paying two test fees"
A great approach, but is that really cheaper than the additional driving lessons?
|
|
I'm surprised our wonderful money grabbing government hasn't thought of ramping up the fee after each fail. This way they'd rake in some cash and after 5 failed attempts they could then ban the driver from further tests and withdraw their licence therefore making one less car/bike on the road. Said driver would then be forced to use public transport therefore fulfilling the governments green credentials.
|
I'm happy to see the driving test situation left as it is.
Instead I would want to see the reforms on the post-test side, with more use of disqualification and re-test as a penalty for serious traffic offences.
Also, many people are barred from ever holding a licence by medical conditions. In a similar way, people who have shown themselves to be psychologically or temperamentally unfit to drive should be barred from driving too.
Edited by Sofa Spud on 19/10/2009 at 21:06
|
Let people have as many goes as they want. When you pass it is because you have convinced the examiner that your driving is of the required standard, what does it matter if it is on the first or tenth go?
Now if someone could produce the figures to show that those who passed after multiple attempts had more accidents then fair enough, but there aren't any and it is rather an arrogant assumption to think that people who took longer to pass than you end up being inferior drivers. Of those I taught to drive, it was always the quick learners who passed after minimum lessons who ended up buried in a hedge after a couple of months.
|
|
|
|
|
