home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!pipex!warwick!uknet!acorn!steve
- From: steve@acorn.co.uk (Steve "daffy" Hunt)
- Newsgroups: uk.transport
- Subject: Re: Assholes and Education
- Message-ID: <21180@acorn.co.uk>
- Date: 25 Jan 93 20:21:51 GMT
- References: <C1Eup9.IvE@csug.cs.reading.ac.uk>
- Organization: Acorn Computers Limited, Cambridge, UK
- Lines: 30
- X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
-
- Richard T Peat (ssurpeat@csug.cs.reading.ac.uk) wrote:
- : Quite, but is the test really to blame? Most people say that you learn to drive
- : one way for the test, and learn to drive properly afterwards.
-
- On here maybe. I suspect the popular consciousness says no such
- thing; witness the common image of tearing up the L-plates on passing
- the test.
-
- It is unrealistic to coach people to a low standard, then expect them
- to realise that it is too low, and go on to teach themselves the rest.
- And it is impossible to reach any consistent driving style/standard
- that way!
-
- : Why shouldn't there be regular testing, and anybody who fails to meet the
- : standard is automatically banned. This should introduce a similar standard,
- : and method of driving across all drivers, instead of the current situation
- : where everybody drives however they want because they haven't been
- : brought up to a unified standard.
-
- Re-tests are a good idea, but the standard of driving required should
- still be raised, and that means more training. How else will people
- learn the consistent method of driving that you mention, are they
- supposed to guess?
-
- The advanced driving book I have says testing is no substitute for
- training, and I agree with it. (No, I haven't undertaken any advanced
- training yet, but least I've read some books).
-
- --
- Steve Hunt steve@acorn.co.uk
-