I'm a person who has a driving licence in the UK and I drive a manual car and I passed on my first try. I don't know how to drive cars with automatic gearboxes but I have members of my family who drive automatics and I know that in the USA and Canada many people drive automatics and there are people who find automatics easier to drive than manuals. Anyway, that is just a bit of background stuff on me and my driving and on which country I drive in (England). I passed my UK driving test in 2022.
Anyway, I feel sorry for what learner drivers these days have to go through to pass the UK driving exam. I think the UK driving exam in the past (1990s, noughties) was better than the driving exam of the year 2022. Firstly, why the heck did they remove the Turn In The Road/Three Point Turn from the driving test?? This is a useful skill to have. I've enjoyed and done many Three Point Turns in my own car, but my driving instructor never taught it to me, not even once (I guess because it is no longer part of the driving test and my instructor just wanted to teach the parts that would be on the practical test).
Also, the new manoeuvre (park on the right side, reverse 2 car lengths, and then drive on the road again) was controversial with driving instructors on both sides of the debate on whether this manoeuvre was a good thing to have. In the UK, the steering wheel is on the right and we drive on the left (I think it's the opposite in USA and Canada). So it is rare to park on the right. Heck, someone can go through their entire life without parking on the right in the UK. Parking on the left is the more common thing to do.
In the UK we have The Theory Test and The Practical Test. The Theory Test is a computer based test with two parts. Part A (also known as Theory Test) which is a computer-based multiple choice test which you revise for. That part is fine I think, and it makes sense that they would test that. I got 48/50 on Part A so it's fine. Part B (The Hazard Perception Test) is the part which annoys me. The Hazard Perception Test is a mouse clicking exercise on the computer screen where you have to click before you see a hazard becoming problematic. If you want to know more about it you can search it on a search engine like Google or Bing or something else. It would be a bit time consuming and complicated to explain it to you. Even my dad, who is an experienced and very good driver, thought that he would fail The Hazard Perception Test when he saw me revising for it. Back in his time, The Hazard Perception Test didn't even exist. I think it came in around 2005 or something like that. My point is that if a very good driver like my dad struggles and fails at The Hazard Perception Test, then what is the point of having The Hazard Perception Test included at all in the first place?? Driving tests are supposed to show that a person is a safe and good driver on the road that reacts to hazards correctly. I'm sorry, but The Hazard Perception Test is useless. It does not measure how good someone is at reacting to hazards, or their awareness skills of hazards. Actual driving on the road is better preparation for hazards than a silly mouse-clicking test that has little to do with real life driving experience.
In the UK you have to pass three things to get a driving licence and pass your driving test: the theory multiple choice computer test (which I think is fine), the Hazard Perception mouse-clicking Test (which I think could and should be improved on) and the Practical Test (which is the test which involves actual driving with the driving examiner seated with you and assessing, marking up, marking down your driving ability). The driving examiner will then say at the end of the Practical Test whether you've passed your driving test or not. Apparently, the Practical Test is supposed to be more harder than the multiple-choice theory computer test and The Hazard Perception Test but I disagree. I found the theory multiple-choice computer test the easiest, Practical Test second easiest, and The Hazard Perception Test the hardest. Heck, give me a million Practical Driving Tests over one Hazard Perception Test. It shows that there is a flaw in the UK Driving Test system if they believe the Practical Test to be the hardest out of the three exams but turns out to be easier than The Hazard Perception Test in the eyes of some drivers. The unfair thing for these learners is that they have to pass both the multiple-choice computer theory test and The Hazard Perception Test before you can sit The Practical Test. I think that's ridiculous. I can understand why you would have to sit the multiple-choice computer theory test before The Practical Test...but The Hazard Perception Test?? A test that has no relevance whatsoever to driving on the real roads in the UK?? Yes, to be fair, The Hazard Perception Test does have some relevance, but that test is poorly made. You can't assess someone by mouse clicking on a computer screen. The Hazard Perception Test should be done by a paper test (maybe a written test) or it should be just be binned in my opinion. There are so many great drivers who didn't sit The Hazard Perception Test because it wasn't available decades ago and they have not broken any driving laws and they have drove fine all their lives. In The Hazard Perception Test, EVEN when you've noticed the hazard TOO EARLY and have correctly found the hazard BEFORE the computer has then the computer would give you a mark of zero!!! Yes, you heard me right. You have to click within the computer's timeframe. Too late, and you get zero points for the particular computer screen scenario...that's fine, because you're too late. But even TOO EARLY you can get zero points JUST BECAUSE you found the hazard and assessed the hazard and worked out the hazard EARLIER than the computer did!!! That is a ridiculous flaw in The Hazard Perception Test that needs to be worked on or bin the whole Hazard Perception Test altogether. You should be REWARDED for working out a hazard and assessing the hazard and reacting to it earlier than the computer, not PUNISHED for it!!!
The DVSA (I think they're the ones who decide what tests should be used for driving) have still not helped with the problem with learners pretending to be nice people on tests by just answering the questions correctly and pretending to drive nicely on both the computer tests and The Practical Test but then driving like mad, dangerously fast road ragers on the roads once they've passed The Driving Test. The DVSA needs to focus on getting safe, competent drivers on the road...not ridiculous, useless tests like The Hazard Perception Test that have little relevance in real driving in the UK. There have always been reckless, impatient, dangerous drivers in the UK...for decades...even with all the DVSA test changes over the years...and the road raging and dangerously aggressive driving and attitude from these people have not stopped. The DVSA is not doing a good enough job. Their focus is in all the wrong places. Instead of putting their focus on silly, flawed tests like The Hazard Perception Test, they should focus more on the practical side of driving and trying to improve and better the learners in their driving. There are many driving instructors who just like to charge excessively high prices on learners and then chat with the learners and hardly do anything because they know they're getting paid a lot. Actually, sometimes learning driving with a parent can be more useful and less expensive way of learning to drive than learning with a driving instructor. Driving instructors used to be cheap, according to my mum, but the prices have rocketed and driving instructors seem to have got more greedy and time wasting. I personally had a good driving instructor, and I'm glad of that. Fortunately, he did the driving things I wanted to do, but some others are not so lucky and they get instructors who just waste time or shout or get angry or worked up for no reason.
The DVSA should bring back learning Turn In The Road and Reverse Around The Corner (which was another thing taken off the UK Practical Test by DVSA for some unknown reason) and it should improve The Hazard Perception Test to make it more relevant or it should remove The Hazard Perception Test altogether. Also, when you pass the computer tests (i.e. theory multiple choice and Hazard Percerption test), then it should be in a way that when you pass the computer tests then you don't need to sit them anymore because since you've passed it once you don't need to sit them again. Currently, the DVSA say that if you pass the computer tests but then don't pass The Practical Test within the next two years then you have to resit the computer tests again, which I think it unnecessary, ridiculous and unfair to learners. Basically they're saying that the computer tests (theory and Hazard Perception) have a two-year time limit. It shouldn't be a two-year time limit, when you pass the computer tests that should mean that you don't need to sit them ever again.
Log in to comment