3. Standards Check & Risk Management
In this third of a series of articles that takes a look at the new Standards Check I shall be exploring how to address the second competency of Risk Management. Within this competency there are five competency indicators:
Did the trainer ensure that the pupil fully understood how the responsibility for risk would be shared?
Were directions and instructions given to the pupil clear and given in good time?
Was the trainer aware of the surroundings and the pupil’s actions?
Was any verbal or physical intervention by the trainer timely and appropriate?
Was sufficient feedback given to help the pupil understand any potential safety critical incidents?
It should be noted that this competency is closely linked to the previous one, Lesson Planning, which I discussed in the previous article. As a result of the goal setting, agreed lesson plan, and appropriate route, the responsibility of risk and the way in which risk will be managed during the lesson needs to be considered. Managing risk is crucial to ensure that the goal(s) for the lesson can be achieved. All the competences in the new Standards Check are inter-related and the assessment process will take the whole lesson into consideration.
Let’s take a look at each competency indicator in turn:
Did the trainer ensure that the pupil fully understood how the responsibility for risk would be shared?
Once the goal has been agreed you must consider how to share the responsibility for risk. If the pupil has said they would like to practise something on their own, you might simply state that you will keep the car safe. In this instance, for example, the pupil may have agreed they would like to practise emerging from junctions on a route that might last a few minutes and involve three or four different junctions in a reasonably quiet area. The pupil has said that they would like to drive this route with no help from you, their instructor, so that they can concentrate on approaching the junctions, assessing their speed and visibility and choosing a safe gap. You must allow the pupil to do this and, at the same time, be prepared to step in with instruction or the use of dual controls where necessary to keep the car safe. Similarly, if the pupil has agreed that the goal for the lesson is the turn in the road and that they will have achieved their goal if they can get the car turned around in three moves, then it might be that you do the observations. This is sharing the responsibility for risk. The pupil will be able to focus on the accuracy and control part of the manoeuvre, whilst you look after the observations.
In both of these examples, the risk is shared to ensure that the pupil has the best possible chance of achieving the agreed goal.
Were directions and instructions given to the pupil clear and given in good time?
If directions and instructions are given clearly and in good time then you are managing the risk effectively and enabling the pupil to focus on achieving the agreed goal. It might be that the pupil has decided they want to choose the route or drive on a previous route without directions. This is perfectly acceptable and, in this case, you would not be expected to give directions. However, you may still need to give instruction if this is what has been agreed; or if a safety critical incident occurs. In these situations you must ensure that you are giving your instructions clearly and in good time.
‘Right, turn left here’ is a confusing direction where the trainer should have clearly stated, ‘At the end of the road turn left’ so as to avoid the pupil turning right into someone’s driveway. Similarly, the timing of instructions and directions can be very distracting especially if the trainer barks them out late. This can actually increase the risk of being involved in a crash simply because the pupil becomes distracted and confused and may make mistakes.
Was the trainer aware of the surroundings and the pupil’s actions?
Being able to observe the road ahead and behind as well as the pupil’s eyes, hands and feet is a vital part of risk management. It is your responsibility to ensure that the pupil is going to be able to cope safely with whatever presents itself on the road and to do this you have to be constantly assessing the whole of the environment. Say, for example, the pupil has agreed that they would like to focus on adequate clearance to parked vehicles along the high street. At the start of the session you have looked at the responsibility for risk and agreed that you will share the risk by ensuring that the pupil can focus on their goal whilst you manage any other hazards. On the route there is a pelican crossing, which, at first glance, looks safe. There is no need to mention the pelican crossing because the pupil’s goal is specifically adequate clearance to parked cars. However, if someone now walks up to the crossing and presses the button then there is a potential safety critical incident and the next two competency indicators might be used to assess how the risk is managed.
Was any verbal or physical intervention by the trainer timely and appropriate?
It wouldn’t be appropriate to talk about the pelican crossing if the pupil appears to be dealing with it okay and there is clearly no risk – unless pedestrian crossings are part of the goal for the session; or, the pupil has clearly said that they want to be alerted to other hazards outside of their goal. This is to do with understanding how people learn and very often driving instructors disrupt the learner’s learning by giving partly-trained instruction. In many situations the learner will achieve far more understanding about how to practically apply their skills and assess the risk involved if they can carry out the task in silence. This raises their awareness of their personal strengths and limitations and therefore builds their responsibility. Constant verbal instruction whilst the car is moving can lead to a bombardment of the senses and a task overload where something has to give.
Nevertheless, if you need to intervene to keep the car safe then it really doesn’t matter if there is a sensory overload …. So, in the example cited earlier where a pedestrian approaches the crossing, you must now assess whether you will need to step in and take control in some way. There are four possible options to choose from:
Option 1: There is no need to do anything. The pupil has already checked their mirror and eased off the gas in case the lights change.
Option 2: The pupil has made no response and the lights are now starting to change. It is necessary to say something and a question will keep the responsibility sitting with the pupil for longer. You could ask: ‘Do you think you need to slow down for the lights ahead? This is a leading question with an implicit call for action.
Option 3: You decided to wait a little longer to see if the pupil was going to respond. You don’t want to interfere too early with their achievement of the goal – adequate clearance to parked vehicles. However, it is clear that the pupil is not responding so a direct instruction is necessary, ‘Slow down for the lights.’
Option 4: You decided not to give a verbal instruction and must now take physical action as the pupil is not responding, the lights are on red and the pedestrian is crossing the road. You use the dual brake.
Was sufficient feedback given to help the pupil understand any potential safety critical incidents?
In the situation above you must now decide how much feedback to give to the pupil. If you have intervened physically and used the dual controls then it will probably be necessary to ensure the pupil realises that you have taken action, reassure them and check that they are alright to continue until it is safe to pull up and discuss what has happened. In options 1 and 2 (and possibly 3) above, it may well be sufficient to continue with the agreed route and discuss the potential safety critical incident (the pelican crossing) as part of the debrief on the goal for the lesson – adequate clearance from parked cars.
In this third of a series of articles that takes a look at the new Standards Check I shall be exploring how to address the second competency of Risk Management. Within this competency there are five competency indicators:
Did the trainer ensure that the pupil fully understood how the responsibility for risk would be shared?
Were directions and instructions given to the pupil clear and given in good time?
Was the trainer aware of the surroundings and the pupil’s actions?
Was any verbal or physical intervention by the trainer timely and appropriate?
Was sufficient feedback given to help the pupil understand any potential safety critical incidents?
It should be noted that this competency is closely linked to the previous one, Lesson Planning, which I discussed in the previous article. As a result of the goal setting, agreed lesson plan, and appropriate route, the responsibility of risk and the way in which risk will be managed during the lesson needs to be considered. Managing risk is crucial to ensure that the goal(s) for the lesson can be achieved. All the competences in the new Standards Check are inter-related and the assessment process will take the whole lesson into consideration.
Let’s take a look at each competency indicator in turn:
Did the trainer ensure that the pupil fully understood how the responsibility for risk would be shared?
Once the goal has been agreed you must consider how to share the responsibility for risk. If the pupil has said they would like to practise something on their own, you might simply state that you will keep the car safe. In this instance, for example, the pupil may have agreed they would like to practise emerging from junctions on a route that might last a few minutes and involve three or four different junctions in a reasonably quiet area. The pupil has said that they would like to drive this route with no help from you, their instructor, so that they can concentrate on approaching the junctions, assessing their speed and visibility and choosing a safe gap. You must allow the pupil to do this and, at the same time, be prepared to step in with instruction or the use of dual controls where necessary to keep the car safe. Similarly, if the pupil has agreed that the goal for the lesson is the turn in the road and that they will have achieved their goal if they can get the car turned around in three moves, then it might be that you do the observations. This is sharing the responsibility for risk. The pupil will be able to focus on the accuracy and control part of the manoeuvre, whilst you look after the observations.
In both of these examples, the risk is shared to ensure that the pupil has the best possible chance of achieving the agreed goal.
Were directions and instructions given to the pupil clear and given in good time?
If directions and instructions are given clearly and in good time then you are managing the risk effectively and enabling the pupil to focus on achieving the agreed goal. It might be that the pupil has decided they want to choose the route or drive on a previous route without directions. This is perfectly acceptable and, in this case, you would not be expected to give directions. However, you may still need to give instruction if this is what has been agreed; or if a safety critical incident occurs. In these situations you must ensure that you are giving your instructions clearly and in good time.
‘Right, turn left here’ is a confusing direction where the trainer should have clearly stated, ‘At the end of the road turn left’ so as to avoid the pupil turning right into someone’s driveway. Similarly, the timing of instructions and directions can be very distracting especially if the trainer barks them out late. This can actually increase the risk of being involved in a crash simply because the pupil becomes distracted and confused and may make mistakes.
Was the trainer aware of the surroundings and the pupil’s actions?
Being able to observe the road ahead and behind as well as the pupil’s eyes, hands and feet is a vital part of risk management. It is your responsibility to ensure that the pupil is going to be able to cope safely with whatever presents itself on the road and to do this you have to be constantly assessing the whole of the environment. Say, for example, the pupil has agreed that they would like to focus on adequate clearance to parked vehicles along the high street. At the start of the session you have looked at the responsibility for risk and agreed that you will share the risk by ensuring that the pupil can focus on their goal whilst you manage any other hazards. On the route there is a pelican crossing, which, at first glance, looks safe. There is no need to mention the pelican crossing because the pupil’s goal is specifically adequate clearance to parked cars. However, if someone now walks up to the crossing and presses the button then there is a potential safety critical incident and the next two competency indicators might be used to assess how the risk is managed.
Was any verbal or physical intervention by the trainer timely and appropriate?
It wouldn’t be appropriate to talk about the pelican crossing if the pupil appears to be dealing with it okay and there is clearly no risk – unless pedestrian crossings are part of the goal for the session; or, the pupil has clearly said that they want to be alerted to other hazards outside of their goal. This is to do with understanding how people learn and very often driving instructors disrupt the learner’s learning by giving partly-trained instruction. In many situations the learner will achieve far more understanding about how to practically apply their skills and assess the risk involved if they can carry out the task in silence. This raises their awareness of their personal strengths and limitations and therefore builds their responsibility. Constant verbal instruction whilst the car is moving can lead to a bombardment of the senses and a task overload where something has to give.
Nevertheless, if you need to intervene to keep the car safe then it really doesn’t matter if there is a sensory overload …. So, in the example cited earlier where a pedestrian approaches the crossing, you must now assess whether you will need to step in and take control in some way. There are four possible options to choose from:
Option 1: There is no need to do anything. The pupil has already checked their mirror and eased off the gas in case the lights change.
Option 2: The pupil has made no response and the lights are now starting to change. It is necessary to say something and a question will keep the responsibility sitting with the pupil for longer. You could ask: ‘Do you think you need to slow down for the lights ahead? This is a leading question with an implicit call for action.
Option 3: You decided to wait a little longer to see if the pupil was going to respond. You don’t want to interfere too early with their achievement of the goal – adequate clearance to parked vehicles. However, it is clear that the pupil is not responding so a direct instruction is necessary, ‘Slow down for the lights.’
Option 4: You decided not to give a verbal instruction and must now take physical action as the pupil is not responding, the lights are on red and the pedestrian is crossing the road. You use the dual brake.
Was sufficient feedback given to help the pupil understand any potential safety critical incidents?
In the situation above you must now decide how much feedback to give to the pupil. If you have intervened physically and used the dual controls then it will probably be necessary to ensure the pupil realises that you have taken action, reassure them and check that they are alright to continue until it is safe to pull up and discuss what has happened. In options 1 and 2 (and possibly 3) above, it may well be sufficient to continue with the agreed route and discuss the potential safety critical incident (the pelican crossing) as part of the debrief on the goal for the lesson – adequate clearance from parked cars.
