I totally get that you are saying what 'should' have been taught, but I do know what 'was/wasn't' taught!! LOL Albeit a long time ago and probably less 'managed' by DSA or whoeverThe Spin Doctor wrote: ↑Tue Jul 06, 2021 7:04 pmFair enough... I wasn't there etc. I know what SHOULD be covered... and I know what may get skipped too. So fair enough sounds like you got some poor basic training. And when it happens, not only is the trainee short-changed, but the negative comments about training generally set the tone for the way people see post-test training as "more of the same"... which isn't necessarily true.Noggin wrote: ↑Tue Jul 06, 2021 3:55 pm This is kinda what some of my posts have been - I didn't have good instruction at test level. I learnt the vanishing point from the friend that I went out with. I learnt a lot more from him that in my Direct Access course
Sure, the instructors 'should' have taught me the basics. Yes there were quite a few things I 'should' have learnt in that week
But I did just learn to pass my test. The rest I learnt as I went along. Regardless of the posts saying I learnt the basics etc, IMO the basics were how to pass my test! I mist have had the bad or the ugly!! It was a long time ago though!
However, as I've said often, this did not set a tone for me not to get more training - completely the opposite. I totally believe in further/advanced training BECAUSE I'm aware of how little I learnt in the Direct Access. And then I had a 6 year break because I broke my back and couldn't get a bike after I recovered (off work for a few months then a job change, so not possible to buy a bike!). Also, because of the track instruction I have had I can appreciate that I improve every time I've been out with an instructor. So, with a good road instructor, I know I will learn and at the very least, gain confidence in what I do
I am trying to put a positive look on advanced/further training!!