Did the trainer ensure that the pupil fully understood how the
responsibility for risk would be shared?

The ‘balance of responsibility’, between the pupil and the PDI, will inevitably vary in different circumstances. For example, compare the following two scenarios:

a) A pupil in the very early stages of their training, in a car fitted with dual controls.

In this situation it might be reasonable for a PDI to start a lesson by saying something like:

’At all times I expect you to drive as carefully and responsibly as possible. I will expect you to be aware of other road users and to control the car. However, I do have the ability to take control of the car in an emergency. I will only use these controls when I feel that you are not dealing with the situation yourself. If that happens we will take some time to talk about what happened so that you understand for next time.’

b) A pupil who has passed their driving test but has asked you to give them some additional training in their own car, which is much bigger and more technically advanced than the one they learnt in.

In this situation a PDI might say something like:

‘You have passed your test and I will therefore assume that you are taking full responsibility for our safety. I will be talking to you from time to time but I will try to keep that to a minimum so that I do not distract you. If I am quiet do not worry; that just means I am comfortable with what you are doing. I will, of course, let you know if I see any risk that you appear to have missed.’

However, such opening statements are not all that is involved in meeting this criterion. The PDI should be managing this process throughout the lesson. So, for example, if the pupil makes some sort of mistake carrying out a manoeuvre the PDI should, ideally, find an opportunity to analyse that mistake with the pupil. Having achieved an understanding of what went wrong; they might then ask the pupil to try the manoeuvre again. At that point, they should provide the pupil with clear information about what is required of them. So, for example, they might say:

’Let us try that manoeuvre again. I will not say anything. Just try to remember what we have just been talking about.

On the other hand, they may want to take back a bit of control and they might say:

’Let’s try that again. I will talk you through it this time. Just follow my instructions.’

The PDI should work with the pupil to decide the best way of tackling the problem and that might mean a temporary change in the ‘balance of responsibility’. The important thing is that the pupil knows what is expected of them.

Under test conditions there are no circumstances in which a PDI can assume that the issue of risk management has been dealt with. Even if the PDI and the pupil have had discussions about risk before the observed lesson, they must show that they are actively managing the issue for assessment purposes.

Indications that all the elements of competence are in place could include:

• asking the pupil what is meant by risk
• asking the pupil what sorts of issues create risk, such as the use of alcohol or drugs
• explaining clearly what is expected of the pupil and what the pupil can reasonably expect of the PDI
• checking that the pupil understands what is required of them when there is a change of plan or they are asked to repeat an exercise

Indications of lack of competence include:

• failing to address the issue of risk management
• giving incorrect guidance about where responsibility lies for management of risk
• failing to explain how dual controls will be used
• undermining the pupil’s commitment to being safe and responsible, e.g. by agreeingwith risky attitudes to alcohol use
• asking the pupil to repeat a manoeuvre or carry out a particular exercise withoutmaking sure that they understand what role the PDI is going to play

Next: Clear directions & instructions