LuigiVampa

My experience is limited to NASA and PCA. In both organizations I have seen some really big failures within regions.

When I was in HPDE3 a different PCA region asked me to instruct a green. I had no instructor training at the time and said no. This was not an isolated instance.

+1

If you can't teach student to drive safely than is it really driver EDUCATION?

ProCoach

Great post, and parallels my experience.

altonj

That is exactly what I did, and what others did as well. We have also hosted quite a few events, but being spoiled we are able to hire a team/company to book the track, provide insurance and supply their professional instructors who work for them.

vellek

In principle, this is great.

In practice, it's more complicated. I'm CDI for a PCA Region and we recently hosted the PCA National Instructor course, which was quite good. But, it's not enough to qualify a person to be an instructor in our club. We are fortunate to have enough to have enough qualified candidates that we can prescribe a higher standard and still have plenty of instructors. However, I know of regions that are so desperate for instructors that they take anyone with any racing or DE experience as an instructor.
I'm not sure that this program will addresses that fundamental problem.

Manifold

IMO, those regions shouldn't attempt to run a DE program. If you can't meet the minimum standards for doing something properly, just don't do it. In engineering and other professions, it's considered unethical and sometimes illegal to practice outside one's areas of expertise.

The drivers in those regions have the option of attending events with plenty of other organizations who do meet the minimum standards.

And frankly, if PCA has regions which are doing those very substandard things, PCA national needs to get its house in order and reform or shut down those DE programs. Substandard PCA regions and instructors not only generate excessive safety risk and liability, they also tarnish the name of PCA and its instructors.

CosmosMpower

I would DEFINITELY not do this if I volunteered to instruct and had to pay fees to do so AND paid for track time. I don't instruct just for free track time but I'm not going to lie, it does help.

ProCoach

Bingo.

Regarding your statement in bold, while I agree that this does occur in "club" settings, this discipline is not technically a profession for the volunteers or the non-profits that organize the events, National, zone-level or regional... So while it's a good guiding principal, not sure how that idea can be applied, much less implemented. I'm glad you stated that, though. Not sure most are aware of that.

I was pleased to address a combination of Boston Chapter BMWCCA and two regions of the PCA last year in Massachusetts for an instructor clinic and briefing. The best organizations are congruent in their goals and standards.

NaroEscape

Here's one of the issues with PCA (and I'm sure other clubs.... SCCA definitely): while there are fairly strict standards that a PCA region is supposed to adhere to regarding how a DE is run, there is no way to totally enforce it. In fact, there's no good way to totally enforce ANY event a PCA region runs.

PCA is VERY lean in the hierarchy ranks: Region's role up to a Zone Rep (who could have 14+ regions of responsibility) who report up to the National Board. And being all volunteers...you can't be at and know everything. We try, but....

But as I stated before, PCA is not necessarily the target market for this Instructor Cert Program. PCA has its own program, so it doesn't need this. Its all the rest of the stuff out there. And regardless of if PCA got on board or not, those offending regions/organizations that do not want to (or know how to) follow the rules will continue to not follow them.

Manifold

Agreed on all counts. Though volunteer-based instruction can't be considered a profession, the risks of DE are significant, so I gave the example of the professions to illustrate the principle that there should be cognizance of one's limitations in expertise and the need to not do work outside those limitations. IMO, unwary and trusting students eager to try to this track thing have a right to expect that instructors and event organizers (and tracks) meet some minimum standards for qualifications and safety.

needmoregarage

Looks like level 2 is $200. One full day of class and track.

Plus travel costs (if any).

I wonder what the annual fee will be to keep the certification level(s). Could add up significantly.

Also wonder if Level 1 is required prerequisite to attending Level 2. (Would assume yes)

Matt Romanowski

Where did you see it is $200 for level 2?

ExMB

Those that have been instructing for years, can be “grandfathered” in, though completing Level 1 certification is mandatory to become accustomed to the language, definitions, and approaches that the Motorsport Safety Foundation has created.

So my guess would be Yes. Level 1 still doesn't make any sense to me.

DTMiller

Been following this with great interest as someone just starting to instruct.

I question the wisdom of creating the organization and definitely question the wisdom of labeling the people who pay the fee and take the course "Certified." [Side note: I'm a retired lawyer as is my wife, I mentioned the whole concept to her and she said "great, now the estate has a new entity to sue."]

Anyway, I cracked open my wallet and coughed up the $50 to see what was what. At my level of "expertise" any little bit can help so let's do this. My thoughts:

1. The course materials is, literally, Ross Bentley's Instructor Manifesto either delivered via video clips of Ross speaking or powerpoint-esque slides containing the text of the Manifesto.
2. The quizzes/review questions in the course materials are worded weirdly at times but it literally doesn't matter if you get it right the first time; if you get it wrong you go back and select the right answer and then move forward. These quizzes are NOT graded in any way. For example, a question asking who is primarily responsible for safety on the track. The student, you or both? Well, are we asking about "reality" where the student has the wheel, "mindset" where the instructor is in charge or "culture" of an event where we are all in charge of safety? All those answers are "correct" in certain ways. There are others like that. But, again, this is from the quizzes section where it doesn't matter if you get the answer right the first time.
3. The final test is graded and you don't know whether you got an answer right or not at any point, you just get a grade at the end. Most of the questions are straight from the course materials although some of them are not. I got a 98% (49/50 correct) so you can be a mildly brain damaged chimpanzee and get 48/50 correct (I'm not brain damaged, but I am a chimpanzee). You have to get 90% to pass; I don't know what happens if you don't. I wasn't willing to risk it!

Summary: I was invited to attend an instructor clinic over the winter and began instructing this year. There wasn't anything in the course that was new to me, but I had already reviewed Ross's Instructor Manifesto a few times over the course of the past few months.

The biggest flaw that I see in this whole structure is the disconnect between who gets to take it/should take it and who is able to. I think everyone is able to take it so long as you have $50. That's not clear. Possibly related note -- there was a 24 hour delay between registering on motorsportsreg.com and getting an email with a link to the course. Is there some form of vetting happening in that time? I have no idea. But I know that whether you are well suited to instruct isn't something that MSF and/or motorsportsreg.com has visibility to. Beyond some of my driving history I'm just literally a number. Every program I know of has a process of some sort that selects candidates based on experience, personality, other relevant experience, etc. I would think that component should remain a prominent part of instructor selection/promotion and this system doesn't obviously include that component. Indeed, there is a strong argument that to the extent that this certification is required, it shouldn't be something you pay for. I'm still baffled why it costs $50 but whatever, I don't think I'll lose the house. [AND, if I paid my $50 and passed and then was told sorry, you can't take an instructor clinic despite your new sweet certification, I'd be mildly chapped.]

But, I have a certificate that says I'm Level 1 certified. Have to decide how to get that framed.

multi21

^^^^^^ So.... perhaps the insurance of Level 2 instructors previously discussed could be associated with "liability" insurance for the foundation? We already know that BMWCCA and PCA both cover instructors for incidents on track. If you make someone "certified" and something goes wrong, the additional entity to sue is the MSF, hence the need for additional insurance?

ExMB

I still haven't seen anybody in the know (nudge, nudge, hint, hint scotelkins) post what a "level 1 instructor" is allowed to do since their original proposal said one has to be "level 2 instructor" in order to instruct students on track.