1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176 
Vital for progress: Co-ordination of transport education and training
Page 51
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
I F progress was to be made co-ordination between providers of transport training and education was essential. There was no place for sectarianism. The cost and effort would be heavy. The results would not show a profit on any balance sheet. But the real return of improving the image of transport as a step towards professionalism would bring incalculable dividends not only to operators but to the community as a whole.
So claimed Mr. G. F. A. Wilmot, assistant director, extra-mural department, University of London, when addressing a conference on transport training and education in London on Wednesday organized by the Metropolitan section of the Institute of Transport and the North-Western Polytechnic.
Three aspects of the critical problem were involved in improving the image of transport through education.
The standard of recruits to the industry from schools and universities should be improved; serious steps should be made to raise standards of "literacy" among the intelligent public concerning transport operation and administration and its role in the wider realm of planning; and the teaching of transport should be improved by new methods and ideas.
If transport management was to be brought into a professional mould, Mr. Wilmot insisted, the "stage and auditorium must be set correctly and efficiently as well as the actors".
Because the hard slogging groundwork of improving the image of transport had not been done we were not getting the right type of material for transport management, nor was transport regarded as a profession.
Interviews with headmasters, careers masters and university appointments officers exemplified thd poor image of transport. The least promising pupils were diverted towards transport as a last desperate resort and the more promising pupils, with a leaning towards transport, were being persuaded to take up so called "safe and more pleasant" occupations. Needed were more visits and talks to school staff and boys. Help should be given on transport exercises and transport problems should be included in civic and general knowledge. Another step was to capture a boy's hobby interest in transport and divert it to more serious study.
Mr. Wilmot said transport studies should be included in university first degree courses and transport should be a general subject not only for those who wished to make it their chosen career. There was also a need for university adult education.
The drawback to the London Certificate and Diploma in Transport Studies was that it was only available to those in the Greater London region but, Mr. Wilmot continued, there were plans to make the course available to the rest of the country by linking arrangements with other universities. At present other university adult education was rather "a random hotch-potch" and more liaison was needed with branches of the Institute of Transport.
Probably the most crucial factor of all was the teaching of transport. Without dedicated teachers to inspire those within the industry and inculcate an awareness and understanding of transport problems to those outside, the hopes of improving the image of transport would be dashed.
Expressing an employer's point of view on training, Mr. J. A. Neale, staff and training officer, London Transport Board, said that the transport industry appeared to be in just the situation for which the Industrial Training act was designed.
Some employers were doing a lot; many apparently were doing very little. There was much parochialism, with emphasis on practice and experience rather than on systematic study. Yet the industry faced the need for radical change and full development and use of training and education was vital to facilitate rapid and successful change.
Mr. Neale then spoke of his own experience of the Engineering and Construction Industry Training Boards. There were items on the credit side but his own experience of these two Boards had been on the whole depressing. This was because of the exceedingly rough justice of the levy grant arrangements in one instance and the inherent complications of the whole process of both Boards. He believed the whole purpose of the Industrial Training Act could become obscured by too great a pre-occupation with the levy/grant aspect.
Quoting the survey of transport educational
facilities made in COMMERCIAL MOTOR in February, 1965, Mr. Neale outlined current needs
in this field. The development of the content of the subject demanded research, text books and teachers. This in turn required a different attitude in universities and colleges.
But employers had to place a higher value on education for transport and be ready to invest much more for transport research and to release suitable people within the industry as students. Here Mr. Neale suggested that there was at present a greater preparedness to release the engineer or technician rather than the operator or administrator.
Mr. Neale recommended that more transport men should join in with managers of other industries in the many courses already provided such as those at Henley and Ashridge.
Reviewing awards in transport studies, Mr. A. F. Beckenham, senior lecturer, Transport Studies, North-Western Polytechnic, questioned whether entry requirements were appropriate and whether any changes were needed. In considering any changes now thought necessary the time factor was important in getting all concerned in a position to operate the changes satisfactorily. He then dealt with the possibility of setting up a national council of all interested bodies to keep under review entry requirements and examination content. It was difficult to equate the various awards one with another although they fell into three distinct groups: preliminary, professional and non-vocational adult education.
Mr. Beckenham said there was a need to study transport subjects in greater depth.
Supporting the need for training, Mr. R. W. Birch, chairman of the Polytechnic Board of Governors, emphasized that with the greater accent on industrial training there must in future be a far greater degree of co-operation between operators of all types of transport and the country's educational establishments.
While the present role of the Institute of Transport was rightly being examined there was some criticism of the absence of a university degree in transport but, Mr. Birch claimed, the IoT examinations were certainly the equivalent of this and formed the basis of all major training schemes.
In the opening paper, Mr. K. C. Turner, chairman of the Road Transport Industry Training Board, gave a comprehensive survey of that Board's activities and future plans.