High Failure rate-Reasons why?

WindSock

I was wondering if the high rate of failure (is it 50%?) comes down to really bad instructors? I know we have to take responsability for our own driving etc, but as the saying goes...there are no bad students, only bad teachers.

CerebralCortex

Maybe an inconsiderate testing system.

Wishbone Ash

boreds wrote: »

but as the saying goes...there are no bad students, only bad teachers.

Many do not get any lessons or get one on the morning of their test or just go through the motions to obtain another provisional licence.

It would be unfair to make any comparisons without comparing like with like.

givyjoe81

Its inconsistent testers who interpret the given situations on test sheet differently.

givyjoe81

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Many do not get any lessons or get one on the morning of their test or just go through the motions to obtain another provisional licence.

It would be unfair to make any comparisons without comparing like with like.

It would also be unfair to make general statement's that many go in without taking lessons, dont think thats a accurate statement, certainly not anymore.

Jumpy

givyjoe81 wrote: »

Its inconsistent testers who interpret the given situations on test sheet differently.

This is the case the world over. It cannot be avoided while a human is the tester.

givyjoe81

Of course, but its still a very valid explanation as the to not only the high failure rate, but extremely large discrepancies between pass rates from different test centre's.

iconnect

boreds wrote: »

I was wondering if the high rate of failure (is it 50%?) comes down to really bad instructors? I know we have to take responsability for our own driving etc, but as the saying goes...there are no bad students, only bad teachers.

I find this statement misleading and a little offensive. If driving tuition was law as is education you might have a case for leading comments like this.
As instructors we advise people of the correct methods and it is up to them to apply the advice, however it can be hard to give advice when people dont give you enough time. I have lost count of the calls i get from people with their test in three days time.

WindSock

iconnect wrote: »

I find this statement misleading and a little offensive. If driving tuition was law as is education you might have a case for leading comments like this.
As instructors we advise people of the correct methods and it is up to them to apply the advice, however it can be hard to give advice when people dont give you enough time. I have lost count of the calls i get from people with their test in three days time.<snip>

So would you think the majority of those who fail their test give little or no time for learning and practising? Many people pay loads of money out to testing centres and still do not pass, 1,2 even 3 or more times.
Who tests the testers and how often do they get tested?

iconnect

boreds wrote: »

So would you think the majority of those who fail their test give little or no time for learning and practising? Many people pay loads of money out to testing centres and still do not pass, 1,2 even 3 or more times.
Who tests the testers and how often do they get tested?

First the fee for a driving test is 38 Euro so i dont know what you mean in your above statement. Secondly loads of money is a random statement that i dont know how to interpret. What do you thinks is "loads of money"?

As Regards the Testers you were not suggesting in your initial thread they were to blame, so whats your point?

Wishbone Ash

givyjoe81 wrote: »

dont think thats a accurate statement, certainly not anymore.

It will probably have changed a lot recently for obvious reasons but I presume the OP can't tell the future and was basing his/her opinions on results to date.

mikemac

No question there are bad instructors out there.

But if you are stuck with one they ask yourself did you ask around to get opinions on this instructor? Also they are many advanced courses an instructor can do so did you ask to see qualifications?

Ultimately many people who fail their test blame everyone but themselves!

So if if you book lessons with a dodgy instructor two days before your test then you may well fail, but I'd blame the candidate for not planning ahead rather than the dodgy instructor.

cazzy

I think its a mix of things - in some cases poor instructions, this boils down to a lot of things such as no set exams for instructors etc. Also students dont get enought lessons and there is also no set number of lessons that a student must get. Also there is no off the road driving centres as in other countries and the test itself is also pretty bad although the RSA are making inroads to improve it such as the rules of the road exam to get a prov licence , secondary controls being tested etc. The people who fail are simply not prepared - as it is the test gives the students the leeway to make quite a few faults so the system itself isnt the worst.

iconnect

micmclo wrote: »

No question there are bad instructors out there.

But if you are stuck with one they ask yourself did you ask around to get opinions on this instructor? Also they are many advanced courses an instructor can do so did you ask to see qualifications?

Ultimately many people who fail their test blame everyone but themselves!

So if if you book lessons with a dodgy instructor two days before your test then you may well fail, but I'd blame the candidate for not planning ahead rather than the dodgy instructor.

I agree with this post.
Can i suggest that the thread title be altered so as not to seem accusing.

Wishbone Ash

iconnect wrote: »

Can i suggest that the thread title be altered so as not to seem accusing.

Done

iconnect

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Done

Thank you

WindSock

iconnect wrote: »

First the fee for a driving test is 38 Euro so i dont know what you mean in your above statement.

My apologies, I meant the fee for the instructors, not the testing centres.

Secondly loads of money is a random statement that i dont know how to interpret. What do you thinks is "loads of money"?

'Loads of money' is a quite a random statement, as I simply have no figures on how much people pay per instruction, and how often. All I can imagine is that it is 'loads of money'. I suppose I am looking at it in a certain way-the more people that fail, the more money instructors will make. How are the general public to know that an instructor gives a 95% (or whatever) success rate? just because it says so on the companies ad?

As Regards the Testers you were not suggesting in your initial thread they were to blame, so whats your point?

As again, got the terminology mixed up, I meant instructor.

Look, I am sorry if I have offended you, I am sure there are plenty of good and decent instructors out there. But there must also be a lot of God awful ones aswell and perhaps some of these awful ones are leading a student into a fail? I was just curious to see if anyone agreed with this.

bonkey

I haven't looked into it in detail, but over the last few weeks I've done some light searching to see what I could find on pass/fail rates in other countries.

What I found was that neither our pass/fail rate nor the discrepancies between testing-centres seems to be particularly unique to Ireland. I'm curious as to whether anyone who thinks the Irish fail rate is too high has looked into this.

Regarding the side-issue of instructors...the only comment I would make there is that I think all instructors offering paid-for tuition should be required to go through a formal qualification system.

chris85

People really dont prepare for the test properly. A lot of people get a couple of lessons before it and they should then pass no problem. The nmber of lessons you get depends on how good you are. If you are a competent driver you will not need as many as a bad driver.


Some people seem to think because they have been driving for a few years (on a provisional) that they are easily going to pass due to their experience. But experience is only good if you have been driving correctly for them years on a provisional.


Some testers are bad but IMO there are a lot of bad drivers who think they are guaranteed to pass so dont prepare.

Fail to prepare, prepare to fail

slade_x

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Many do not get any lessons or get one on the morning of their test.

How many people here have crammed for college tests days and then the night before, only to forget everything within less than a matter of days again. i know its not exactly the same thing for some but yes it is. unless the current official test isn't satisfactory in determening, whether your capable of learning and executing it. There's too many idiots on the road, sure they can get the car to move as though they think they know how to drive. We should have way more educated people driving on the roads, yet whats being done about that. Experience may mean something when it comes to reacting to a possible hazard or collision or then again it may mean nothing, these things happen regardless of experience, some minor accidents are inevitable but a bit of common sense, knowledge and courtesy would come in very very handy on irish roads

I think when you first start driving you should get at least 10 lessons, then practice, call your instructor after you feel confident enough and ask him to give you a dummy test to see your progress and how you might fair in a real test. If your good and the instructor thinks you're competent go for your test / (apply for your test if practice time was over a short enough period so that you havent already applied) If not go back to the drawing board and get as much lessons as you feel you need, dont take the instructors word on how many he thinks you should have, you should know yourself when you dont need further instruction then rinse and repeat.

Cramming for a driving test a short few days and the day before a driving test will more often than not teach you nothing to last and eventually you'll fall back on old habits once you think your a qualified driver when you hold a full license. I bet relaxed overconfident driving causes a lot more accidents than this country would like to admit. Of course if your in an accident someone must have been drunk and speeding, right? nothings ever said about the right plonkers who shouldnt hold their license anymore.

Its good to be aware of what your getting marked on though. however the trivial crap bothers the crap out of me.

I have never actually put it to the test but could you get failed if on entering the car you dont follow recommended protocol like making sure your seat isnt going to fly off or slide all over the place while driving or to reassure yourself that yes in fact the handbrake is still safely holding the car in place before you begin move off procedures, because you know that seems like something you should do before leaving the car in the first place, then on returning the fact that the car is in the same place you left it should be assurance enough that yes the handbrake is infact doing its job.

all that should really matter is that you, use your belt, check your mirrors, make yourself aware of surrounding, engage a gear, secure the car with the clutch, leave of the handbrake and move off

Dalfiatach

It's a combination of all sorts of things. Some instructors don't have a clue and are actively imparting bad/dangerous habits to their students. The Rules Of The Road themselves are inconsistent and unclear on some points - roundabouts being the obvious example. Testers inconsistently apply unclear rules on a test which is essentially 40 years out of date.

But most importantly, we have far too many people on the roads who just can't drive but who think they are "entitled" to do it anyway. Some people just don't have the mental agility and hand/eye co-ordination to be able to competently handle complex machinery traveling at speed, no matter how much training they have. These people should simply not be on the road.

Post-test education is essential too. I know for a fact that going on the Ignition course made me a much better driver, and I had my full licence.

Personally I'd introduce driver training and education at school level, introduce a minimum number of lessons (with a number of US-style driver training centres around the country), properly trained and registered instructors, make everyone do the existing test before they get a provisional at all, then make the full licence dependent on completing further post-test training and testing...to be completed within 5 years of passing the basic test or yer off the road.

Short refresher tests every 10 years before you can renew your licence as well...every 5 years after age 60.

We got the NCT up and running with a minimum of fuss. All it will take is the political will, a bit of investment and for everyone to cop on to the fact that our roads are feckin lethal as things stand. Our roads kill far more people every year than were killed through the Troubles in the North even in the worst years in the 70s.

Seth Brundle

boreds wrote: »

I was wondering if the high rate of failure (is it 50%?) comes down to really bad instructors? I know we have to take responsability for our own driving etc, but as the saying goes...there are no bad students, only bad teachers.

What proportion of people who sat the test were given training by an instructor? What proportion of those who failed had an instructor?
IMO, the biggest cause of people failing is the people themselves being just not good enough.

Coala

i had an instructor and I asked experienced drives them oppinion how good or bad i am in driving and all this other stuff. They said will be in shock if Ill fail. And what you think? I failed if count all together 6 times in 1 test. Now i am waiting next test and i am very nervous because i could not believe that on Saturday morning ,everywhere quite , only few peaople on the street - perfect place for test and fail. In my oppinion test was going very good. And know I dont know what to think.

Antamojo

What aspects did you fail on? ^^

Coala

1. One thing was my fault - corner reversing - grade 3(i do that cornering every single day and on test i could not).
2. Position- stopping (grade 3)
3. Cluch - Grade1 (2), Grade 2 (4) -i did NOT coast
4. On the straight - same as above
5. Stationary vehicles - Grade 2 (4) and Grade 3 (that road was quite busy to give sufficiant space and I could not go over the line as there were oncoming traffic and could not really stop to and wait for that chance as I had lots of trafic after me.
6.Reaction on hazards Grade 2 (2). I suppose it were children on the street.But I passed them in about 20km and was watching them all the time .Maybe tester expected I will go to other side of road?

On report I have without marks observation,signals mirrors,speed,right of way, traffic controls etc AND then marked Grade 2 (2) - No reaction to hazards???

How can he know my reaction and how when I look in mirrors.
In test I was turning my head to show him that I look in mirrors but in real life I turn head only to left. But other mirrors I can see withot turning.

guy_awoke

As far as pass rates go. I am not sure how they compile the stastitics. There are different types of driving test (Car, Van, Motorcycle, Rigid, HGV etc) I am presuming that they do not mix up the percentages of different types of test as this would be statistical insanity due to the different numbers taking and pass rates of the different types of test (apples, oranges, pears, mangos etc). So unless they are using advanced statistical calculations with appropriate weighting given to the results of each category of test I can't really see how they can come up with an "overall" figure for all tests because even with such methods an accurate figure can't really be reached simpy because it doesn't mean anything unless you understand how they came up with the figure and what the original figures are. Is it made clear what the pass and fails rates are for every type of test? This should include tests actually completed and not cancelled due to no shows or lack of tax/insurance etc.

thecoolfreak

In my opinion the problem with the system is the testers and not instrcutors. There are far too many inconsistencies when it comes to marking the test. One tester will say that you didn't look in your mirrors enough while the other will say you did it too much. Many competent drivers fail the test by small margins because they were just plain unlucky with the tester they got. But at the end of the day that's life and you just have deal with it.

I failed my test and I was surprised to learn that by taking 5 points in my turnabout it was deemed a grade 2 fault because it should really be done in 3 where the road is wide enough. Yet again I think this shows some of the inconsistencies

Wishbone Ash

thecoolfreak wrote: »

I failed my test and I was surprised to learn that by taking 5 points in my turnabout it was deemed a grade 2 fault because it should really be done in 3 where the road is wide enough. Yet again I think this shows some of the inconsistencies

You must have been awarded the Grade 2 for a reason other than the '5 points'. There is no limit on the amount of 'points' an applicant may make.

Turnabout

An applicant should turn the vehicle around on the road in a competent manner, taking the best possible
observations, and allowing the right-of-way as required, or a fault may be recorded for ‘Turnabout’ as
appropriate. All faults which occur during the manoeuvre should be recorded opposite ‘Turnabout’. The
turnabout should be a normal manoeuvre, i.e. not starting off in reverse. A fault should not generally be
recorded where an applicant turns the steering wheel while the vehicle is stationary (i.e. ‘dead’ steering).
The manoeuvre should be completed before any fault/s is/are recorded. Only one fault may be recorded
where necessary, opposite each heading, regardless of how many times a particular type of fault occurs on
the turnabout.

Examples of ‘Turnabout’ faults include:

(a) Where an applicant hits or bumps a kerb, or makes inadequate progress, or uses excessive speed, or does not make proper use of the controls, a fault may be recorded opposite ‘Competently’.

(b) Where an applicant obliges another road user to slow or stop, a fault may be recorded for ‘Observation’ or ‘Right-of-Way’. (not both).

(c) Effective use of side mirrors is acceptable. However, where an applicant reverses on the mirrors only, a fault may be recorded if e.g. effective use is not made of them, or if they are not angled correctly. The fault should be recorded opposite ‘Observation’ (Turnabout).