That is a myth, there is no such thing as fail targets quite the opposite. It was always nice to have a pass It was never nice to tell people that they had failed, a lot of people have a job riding on it. Sometimes it’s frustrating when you can see that the person is a good driver but their nerves get the better of them which is why it’s so important as an examiner to try and put the candidate at ease.
Before someone else says it -
<devils advocate mode> - So why is the pass rate only about 40+% at almost every LGV test station From the outside looking in, it seems that there is a concencus on the pass rates… <devils advocate mode>
Because its sad to say but not everyone who is presented for their driving test is ready and some people who are ready for their test can make mistakes on the day that can’t be let go. I can honestly say that in my 18 years with the DSA I never had any complaints and people usually know when they have failed. There is a lot more paperwork to fill in when a fail occurs rather than a pass and it is all checked by the powers that be. Pass rates vary from centre to centre but rest assure these are monitored closely by the DSA.
P and G LGV Training:
Because its sad to say but not everyone who is presented for their driving test is ready …
This is also an issue which I would like to see change.
The present method of an intensive course being right for everyone cannot be correct - if it was, then the majority of car learner courses would be done this way.
I would like to see a similar method to the way car learner courses are done but instead of one hour lessons, have one or half day lessons for upgrading.
The test could then be booked when the learner is ready - same as the car.
Yes, I do realise that the logistics of doing the above will cause problems.
P and G LGV Training:
Because its sad to say but not everyone who is presented for their driving test is ready …
This is also an issue which I would like to see change.
The present method of an intensive course being right for everyone cannot be correct - if it was, then the majority of car learner courses would be done this way.
I would like to see a similar method to the way car learner courses are done but instead of one hour lessons, have one or half day lessons for upgrading.
The test could then be booked when the learner is ready - same as the car.
Yes, I do realise that the logistics of doing the above will cause problems.
The biggest disadvantage with non intensive courses on larger vehicles is the fact that they then go away and drive their car(like a car driver ), for a week or more, and completely lose the good procedures they have been taught- unlike car lessons where they are not driving anything in between lessons- this is why intensive works better for LGV/PCV lessons
chevmac:
The biggest disadvantage with non intensive courses on larger vehicles is the fact that they then go away and drive their car(like a car driver ), for a week or more, and completely lose the good procedures they have been taught- unlike car lessons where they are not driving anything in between lessons- this is why intensive works better for LGV/PCV lessons
There have been at least 2 members on here who did the one half day LGV lesson a week and they had no probs apart from ‘fitting in’ with the normal LGV training school schedule.
I presume you had had enough of the scary nervous drives we all put you through on test day…
As you will find out pretty quick, the examiners get the best end of the deal. They get to ride with someone who has had a training course.
Us poor nreve wracked instructors get them on day one
Now you will see what we all have to go through!! Good Luck
I’d like to think that I don’t enter candidates for test who clearly aren’t ready. What’s the point? Can’t think of a finer way of destroying a hard earned reputation. Surely better to do more training and then go for a test when ready. It’s true that the intensive courses can have problems but some of us build in a bit of slack so more training can be done before the scheduled test if needs be. Its not unusual for schools to offer both intensive and weekly sessions.
P and G LGV Training:
I am an Ex LGV Examiner and I am now an instructor, if you want any help or info let me know.
If the examiners were under no pressure to adjust the pass/fail stats - would it be reasonable to assume the pass/fail rates fluctuate drastically from one month to the next at each test centre.
There is a lot of myths about examiners but there is a lot of pressure from the DSA and pass rates are closely monitored and between the senior and the supervising examiner there is a minimum of 12 check tests a year so the DSA can keep an eye on standards. I can’t speak for all examiners but I know from my time that you always have to be on the ball, be very professional but at the same time try and understand that it is a very nervous time for a candidate and you can be the key to easing those test day nerves!!
I seem to remember a quite heated discussion between a recently failed candidate and myself who was convinced his failure was due to the fact that he had a previous DR10 on his licence. Please tell us it was untrue and the fact that a cyclist was cut up was the real reason for failure.
P and G LGV Training:
Because its sad to say but not everyone who is presented for their driving test is ready …
This is also an issue which I would like to see change.
The present method of an intensive course being right for everyone cannot be correct - if it was, then the majority of car learner courses would be done this way.
I would like to see a similar method to the way car learner courses are done but instead of one hour lessons, have one or half day lessons for upgrading.
The test could then be booked when the learner is ready - same as the car.
Yes, I do realise that the logistics of doing the above will cause problems.
Rog the logistics could be worked out with out any problem.
But the problem lies with what the candidate will retain from one week to the next, this tends to make the course not only long but way to exspensive and I would not recomend it to any of our clients.
Data Academy:
But the problem lies with what the candidate will retain from one week to the next, this tends to make the course not only long but way to exspensive and I would not recomend it to any of our clients.
I can only say that this is done with cars learners and the 2 that have done it on here have had no problems - same amount of hours in training.
For many people, letting the knowledge go in slowly is a better way.
Schools do not do intensive courses such as Maths for 2 months including exams folowed by English for 2 months including exams etc, etc - I wonder why…
Our driving school work 7 days a week and often candidates will request a Saturday or Sunday for four weeks, this doesn’t effect the overall pass rates in any way and the candidate is never to tired.
Big D:
Our driving school work 7 days a week and often candidates will request a Saturday or Sunday for four weeks, this doesn’t effect the overall pass rates in any way and the candidate is never to tired.
I think we are agreed that both ways work and it is the individual that must decide what is best for them
From the outside looking in, it seems that there is a concencus on the pass rates… <devils advocate mode> 
), for a week or more, and completely lose the good procedures they have been taught- unlike car lessons where they are not driving anything in between lessons- this is why intensive works better for LGV/PCV lessons 
