New Members.

[crr003]

...

Also one to one allocation helps as you build up a relationship with the Associate.

Excellent comment, as I was just going to make it. One builds a rapport. And if I was signed up with a mass guidance group, I'd be tempted to think the Observers will be there anyway, so it doesn't matter if I drag myself out of my pit.

Although I've just read recently that 1 to 1 isn't as good as mass guidance observing, as apparently 1 to 1 Observers spend their time trying to create clones! Unless I misunderstood!

[Horse]

...

Also one to one allocation helps as you build up a relationship with the Associate.

Excellent comment, as I was just going to make it. One builds a rapport. And if I was signed up with a mass guidance group, I'd be tempted to think the Observers will be there anyway, so it doesn't matter if I drag myself out of my pit.

Although I've just read recently that 1 to 1 isn't as good as mass guidance observing, as apparently 1 to 1 Observers spend their time trying to create clones! Unless I misunderstood!

1:2 can work well. Rider following can relax / mentally 'rest', but still learn from debriefs.

Flip side is that ideally it's a reasonably matched pair.

[GTR1400MAN]

I don't know of any groups that do multiple associates to one Observer. Whether groups allocate an associate to one Observer or flip them around a team, ON THE ROAD it is 1 to 1.

[exportmanuk]

We offer "Mass Guidance" as the IAM calls it but it is 1-2-1 with an observer on the day. Each associate is allocated a NO as a mentor. The Mentors role is to check all the ride reports ( we submit them electronically as no one could read my writing ) and talk to the associates assigned to them, make sure everything is going well, discuss any issues. The associate gets a different observer for each training module. This way we avoid any potential for a riding clone, a different observer may explain something in a way the associate er understands better. To some extent the examiner becomes just another observer.
All associates have the contact details of the committee and are told they are free to contact any of them if they wish too, and we all try to attend the monthly social evenings.
We have a few examiners so we don't coach to a particular examiners quirks, and our modules are based around the system, not road features.

Every month we send an email to all the associates on the course asking them to confirm their availability for the scheduled ride dates, ( we do have some that cant make them as working so we make arraignments to cover that) based on the response we allocate the Observers and a week before the ride the observers get the electronic reports for the associates previous rides. The first thee course modules the associates are given set routes in advance so they can practice the route that way they are giving their attention to the ride not fretting to see if they have missed the observer turn signal.
The admin is probably a little more than some groups but for us this works.

[Horse]

I don't know of any groups that do multiple associates to one Observer. Whether groups allocate an associate to one Observer or flip them around a team, ON THE ROAD it is 1 to 1.

Well, if you get overrun with Associates, keep it in mind as an option. It works, albeit needs extra care and consideration on delivery.

[GTR1400MAN]

Although we do 1 to 1 with a fixed Observer, we do have classroom theory sessions run by a mix of Observers. Also we do x-checks with a National Observer before test as a quality check both of the Associate and the Observer.. We train all our Observers to prepare people for everyday riding and avoid any training for test or telling associates "the examiner likes to see".

[Horse]

.. avoid any training for test or telling associates "the examiner likes to see".

Errr ... really? That's what you do. From your link:
The Associates
... the goal being the IAM test

So, you must be training for what an examiner expects to see. As per the recent discussion here about Associates who don't want to ride up to the speed limit.

[jcochrane]

.. avoid any training for test or telling associates "the examiner likes to see".

Errr ... really? That's what you do. From your link:
The Associates
... the goal being the IAM test

So, you must be training for what an examiner expects to see. As per the recent discussion here about Associates who don't want to ride up to the speed limit.

I try to make it clear, when teaching, what is expected/looked for on test and what might be a better way. I feel I need to do this as the Associate has paid for a course that prepares them for a test they have already paid for. I also feel I should help them and advise them how to be the best driver they can be.

[Horse]

Yes, I agree with that approach. The test requirements don't mean - hopefully - that nothing else can be covered.

But ... how much time and input does "how to be the best driver they can be" take? For some, it could probably be years?

And, along the way, you'll presumably include all the elements necessary to pass?

[jcochrane]

Yes, I agree with that approach. The test requirements don't mean - hopefully - that nothing else can be covered.

But ... how much time and input does "how to be the best driver they can be" take? For some, it could probably be years?

And, along the way, you'll presumably include all the elements necessary to pass?

Yes, cover what is needed to pass the test but also give further development points and in particularly try to provide the tools for identifying their own weaknesses and to be able to work out how to eliminate them. It is true though that you never stop learning if you adopt this position. Which is the aim, to continually improve.