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
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192 
the revolution in education has passed road transport by
Page 84
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
EDUCATION has been very much in the news lately, what with arguments about the two cultures, whether there should be more than one Minister responsible for education, the proper function of a university and the comprehensive versus grammar school controversy. The revolution which began perhaps half a century ago with the realization that it was better for pupils to enjoy education rather than merely to endure it is still continuing and is still producing big changes in the organization and methods of schools and colleges.
On the whole the revolution in education has passed road transport by. If one asks what facilities there are for instruction in road transport subjects the answer is much what it would have been shortly after the war or even before the war. Apart from training in vehicle maintenance and other technical matters almost the only classes available are those designed to culminate in the Royal Society of Arts examinations. The Institute of Transport schemes and the one or two university posts which have been created over recent years are in a somewhat different category.
The controlling body for the R.S.A. examinations is the National Committee on Road Transport Education, consisting almost entirely of voluntary. representatives from the various sections of the industry. Their work deserves respect and they are always ready to make changes if they think it necessary. Their scheme was revised in time for this year's examinations to make it possible for students to complete the course in two years instead of three. The curriculum is kept up to date and regular reports are issued.
It may still be the case that more drastic reforms would produce better results. The basic programme has remained the same from the beginning. The same kinds of questions have been asked year after year. Even the verdict of the examiners has tended to keep to a pattern. Symptomatic perhaps is the complaint made in almost every report, including the latest, that too many candidates cannot spell correctly or write grammatically. These faults are no doubt more prevalent now than at the beginning of the century but they have little to do with the ability of the candidates to make a career in road transport.
What should be of more concern is the small number of pupils taking the examinations, especially those covering goods transport. There were nine papers and on average only 160 candidates sat for each of them. Of the two papers on passenger transport operation 415 were worked but only 138 of the two papers on goods transport operation. Even this figure is better than the total of 113 for the previous year but it is below, the 1962 total of 140. For none of the three years can the statistical results be described as anything else than disappointing.
The one encouraging factor on the goods side is the high proportion of passes. Only 20 candidates failed the first paper on goods transport operation and 12 the second. This happened in Spite of the fact that the first two years' training had been telescoped into one with a single paper E4
at the end. The students from goods transport businesses who find their way to the classes and who stay the course obviously do not lack ability. The main problem is that there are not enough of them.
Once again it would not be fair to blame the committee. They have done what they can each year to bring the educational facilities to the notice of employers and employed within the road transport industry and even outside it. Most operators are at least aware that there are training courses and examinations. Some further inquiries could usefully be made into their apparent apathy and the absence of encouragement to junior members of their staff who could gain from tuition on their chosen career. There is no point in saying that the opportunities are there and that it is the fault of the industry if proper advantage is not taken of them.
Born not Made In the field of goods transport certainly there is a widespread opinion that academic training is useless and might even be harmful. The typical operator is still the man who learned the business the hard way and believes, so to speak, that a haulier is born and not made. He is unlikely to urge his staff to better themselves by study and he may have the additional, if illogical, fear that once a promising youngster has acquired a qualification he will be looking for another job and will be more likely to get it.
On the C licence side of the industry it too often happens that the owner of the business regards his traffic department as at best a necessary evil and at worst an activity requiring no special skill. The status of his traffic manager is no better than that of a clerk. In the atmosphere thus created there is no inducement to improve oneself. Education and examinations seem over-refinements.
Before an educational scheme can have any chance of substantial success many operators and traffic managers must be converted. The committee do not have the means to carry out such a task, nor is it their responsibility. The associations and other bodies which they represent should co-operate by bringing home to their members constantly the advantages that properly trained staff can give their businesses as well as the benefits to the people who receive the training. Those operators who already realize this and who even have training schemes of their own can be cited as examples.
There might also be scope for an overhaul of the teaching methods and of the textbooks. The criticism sometimes made that the courses are too academic may have some validity. It is little use condemning the candidates for bad spelling and defective grammar. These faults may indicate a general inability to cope with too much theory. As far as practicable each pupil should be encouraged to apply the instruction and the questions to his own place of work, which more likely than not is an individualistic concern with special problems. In addition an expert on modern methods of education might well be called in for consultation.