This would take too long,
How so? Didn't TJ state that 93% of would be bikers pass the test, so there would only be a small percentage that would need the interaction time.
Clearly having a simple pass/fail and retake is the cheapest model, but not the most efficient really, is it?
Clearly having a simple pass/fail and retake is the cheapest model, but not the most efficient really, is it?
seems to work well enough. No evidence that explanations would make it any better. Taking TJ's data, would give us 7% who would need further testing. But the time per person is the inefficiency, and realistically, some of those 7% would still fail, so by instituting a back up system, with all the associated admin, we end up gaining 1%-say 3% of the people on the border line.
People had a tendency to be 'test-smart' identify which of a range of potential hazards was likely to develop. Not sure of the mechanics of this but it was little to do with the behaviours of the hazards. May be some sort of priming effect which we were unaware of
Its certainly not test priming causing it, but much more likely experience priming. That is surely a place for some more research and it's suggested in the ADI pass rate data too.
seems to work well enough.
That's got me convinced. 😕
That's got me convinced.
well, what do you want? all the evidence seems to say that it does OK. Test development can't be based on opinion.
Nothing more, you've already said it's not a perfect system, and that it seems to work and does ok is clearly the way forward.
Perhaps more people should strive to be ok... 😉
Perhaps more people should strive to be ok..
In terms of assessment systems, this is very true.
It might be that the test agency don't think that a pedestrian turning slightly is particularly hazardous
Like the one who, on hearing my bell, then turned sharply and walked straight in front of me, resulting in both of us on the ground, her with the phone she was yakking on smashed on the ground, me with a badly grazed knee and bruising.
Like the one who, on hearing my bell, then turned sharply and walked straight in front of me, resulting in both of us on the ground, her with the phone she was yakking on smashed on the ground, me with a badly grazed knee and bruising.
No comment (too expensive).
It might be that the test agency don't think that [b]a pedestrian turning slightly[/b] is particularly hazardousLike the one who, on hearing my bell, then [b]turned sharply and walked straight in front of me,[/b] resulting in both of us on the ground, [b]her with the phone she was yakking on[/b] smashed on the ground, me with a badly grazed knee and bruising.
Clearly not
turning slightly is the first part of turning sharply...
That's proper hazard perception right there! 🙂
Did anyone score the rant in the OP?
I'd give it a 2/10
That's proper hazard perception right there!
Clearly not
I'd give it a 2/10
With [i]my [/i]immaculate grammar?
That's at least a 1.5/10
0.5 for feeling that you were too sharp for the test. 🙂
If sense of superiority is quantifiable, then It's a 9/10 I think you'll find.
I'm not superior. It's just that everyone else happens to be inferior.
well nyaaa nyaa nya nya nyaaaa.
Passed now. Gaming it and clicking for England.
Interestingly I had a chat with the nice guy administering the test centre who was a former police driving instructor. He had nothing good to say about the Hazard Perception test, and anecdotally at least, knew of many ADIs/colleagues who'd failed or not not done nearly as well as their experience/training/skills would normally suggest. It's still a shit test.
Anyway, I can now mow down children with the righteous complacency now...
Dammit I failed my driving theory test so will be resitting this Friday ... Multiple choice got 38 out of 50 (43 to pass) but passed hazard perception at 59/70 (45 to pass) ...
I based my revision on one of the tiny book ... arrgghhhh ... should have revised using the thick book for multiple choice questions since they were exactly the same ... arrghhh h... 😡
well nyaaa nyaa nya nya nyaaaa.
Passed now. Gaming it and clicking for England.
Yes! I don't have to buy you a drink now! 😀
I shall happily buy my own beers tonight 🙂
Well I hope you won't be driving after. You're complaceny alone is a danger on teh roads!
😉
Well done on your moving on from failure. Enjoy your beer.
What's next? Intensive course and direct access, or CBT and a 125 for a bit?
Nahhh.
I reckon my reaction times after 10 pints will still be faster than the lag on that stupid test 😉
Ive been on CBT and twist & go 125cc since the beginning of the year.
Next stop is review session with my CBT instructor and one of his geared bikes and then sort out what needs work on before the DA. No rush, am happy to take 12 months over it.
Ahh. Forgot you could do your CBT before the theory. Did my theory last year, and coming to the end of a DA course (fingers crossed) on Tuesday next week. I want to get it done and passed while the training's all fresh, I don't have a bike at them mo, so I can't keep practicing in my own time.
Just "enjoying" the fantastic pricing on offer for fully comp. on a Street Triple. £2.5K? zomg, as I beleive the kids are saying these days.
Re "12 months": Rules are changing at the beginning of next year. Not sure if any of them affect you though, certainly some of them are about age restrictions at 21 / 24. Your instructor will know though.
I thought they were going to effect me, but Im an oldie, so it actually doesnt. so no rush now
No-one I know has failed the hazard perception to date, and I know some shocking drivers. But I do think you don't have to over-think things as the tests are designed for the lowest common denominator.
PErsonally I've no idea, I passed decades ago where hazard perception was not tested, only the basic 35? questions on the theory. Really I think hazard perception would be better off being tutored rather than tested - it's a hard thing to test reliably and it'd be beneficial to spend more time and expense learning. Maybe a day or two on a bike would help.
