Simple Ways to Stay Active as an ADI

Garry Thomas, ADINJC Committee Member

Introduction

Around this time of year, many of us find our New Year’s resolutions starting to wobble. The good intentions were there in January and, when our calendars quieten down, it is easy to think this will be the year we get fitter. The year we join the gym. The year we finally “sort ourselves out”.

But somewhere along the way, things get in the way. The gym membership feels expensive. The machines look intimidating. The diary fills up again. We tell ourselves we do not have time. Slowly, the resolution fades into the background.

Is the Label Part of the Problem?

I wonder if part of the problem is the labelling.

When we label something as fitness, it can start to sound like hard work. It becomes something that requires special clothing, special places and large amounts of free time that many of us simply do not have.

As driving instructors, we spend long hours sitting, often moving from lesson to lesson with very little space in between. Adding a full workout routine on top can feel like just another demand on an already busy day.

But what if we removed the label altogether?

From Fitness to Movement

What if, instead of focusing on “fitness” or “exercise”, we simply focused on movement?

Movement doesn’t require a membership. It does not need a plan. It just needs to happen.

During the recent NJC Big Team Challenge pilot, this became very clear. Those involved were not suddenly running marathons or transforming into elite athletes overnight. Instead, they made small, manageable changes. Taking the dog for an extra walk. Walking to the shops instead of driving. Parking a little further away. Stretching between lessons.

On their own, these actions may not look particularly impressive but together, they make a real difference.

And reassuringly, none of it requires Lycra, unless that is your thing.

Why Walking Works

Walking as a form of exercise has seen something of a resurgence recently, and for good reason. Research continues to show that steady, consistent walking, especially when it includes gentle inclines, can deliver meaningful health and fitness benefits without placing excessive strain on the body.

In other words, you don’t need to exhaust yourself in a 20-minute frenzy to make progress. A longer, steadier walk often delivers more sustainable results and feels far more achievable in the gaps between lessons or at the end of a working day.

For those of us who spend much of our time seated, this is encouraging news.

Small Moments Make a Difference

A short walk between lessons can reset both body and mind. A few minutes of stretching can ease the stiffness that builds up after hours behind the wheel.

These small moments of movement are not dramatic, but they are powerful. More importantly, they are sustainable. We can even incorporate them into lessons, encouraging learners to think about their own wellbeing and daily habits.

No Time Like the Present

The Big Team Challenge pilot showed that wellbeing doesn’t need to be complicated. We are hoping to roll the initiative out more widely in the near future so that more instructors can benefit.

But you don’t need to wait for a formal challenge to begin. Sometimes it’s as simple as taking the longer route home. Parking a little further away. Or adding one extra walk into your week.

No labels. No pressure. No memberships. Just movement.

Garry Thomas, ADINJC Committee Member

Charli Howe, ADINJC General Council

Introduction

One of the most engaging and forward-thinking sessions of ICE Live 2026 was 5 in 5: New Young Driver VR, presented by Kate Garrigan and Matthew Hyland.

Their presentation took us behind the scenes of a new virtual reality (VR) film designed specifically for young drivers and, more importantly, behind the thinking that shaped it.

The result is 5 in 5: a five-minute VR experience focusing on the five highest-risk behaviours for newly qualified drivers. It is short, deliberate, and grounded in behavioural science rather than shock value.

Designing Immersion with Purpose

The experience begins not with a headset alone, but with a physical setup: a simple van fitted with a few seats, mounted on a movable platform.

Participants wear VR headsets while the seats subtly move in sync with the film, adding a physical layer of immersion without overwhelming the senses.

This design choice is intentional.

Early VR crash films were often too realistic. While technically impressive, they sometimes produced unintended consequences.

Some viewers reported increased adrenaline-seeking behaviour, while others experienced distress or trauma.

In some cases, these shock tactics did more harm than good.

Research from behavioural scientists and safety experts, including work referenced by figures such as Elizabeth Box, shows that fear-based approaches can backfire, particularly with young people. Effective road safety education should support health, wellbeing and community liveability.

Moving Away From Shock, Towards Empathy

The 5 in 5 project reflects a clear shift in philosophy.

Instead of graphic crashes and catastrophic outcomes, it uses:

• Humour
• Relatable scenarios
• Role modelling
• Empathy

These elements are far more effective at engaging young drivers without triggering defensive or risk-compensating responses.

The core idea is simple: focus on fewer risks, communicate them clearly, and make them memorable.

Five Risks. Five Minutes. One Clear Message.

Rather than overwhelming viewers with information, 5 in 5 focuses on the five top contributing risk behaviours for young drivers each illustrated through a short, highly relatable scenario.

1. Distraction

The presence of same-age passengers is one of the strongest predictors of crash risk for newly qualified drivers.

Studies consistently show that carrying peer-aged passengers increases the likelihood of risky driving, distraction, and fatal collisions.

The VR clip reflects this reality perfectly: a car full of young adults, no seatbelts, loud music, fast food wrappers everywhere and escalating chaos.

In under 30 seconds, it captures a situation most young drivers instantly recognise, making the message land without needing explanation.

2. Fatigue

Crash risk increases significantly at night, particularly for young drivers.

Sleep deprivation slows reaction time, reduces vigilance and impairs decision-making. Young male drivers are disproportionately involved in fatigue-related collisions.

The fatigue scenario uses light-hearted humour on the surface, but the underlying message is serious.

The contrast makes it memorable and reinforces the risk without lecturing.

3. Seatbelts

In 2022, four unbelted young people were killed or seriously injured every week.

Young men are especially likely to wear seatbelts inconsistently, particularly on short or familiar journeys.

This clip uses crash dummies and humour to illustrate the force of impact, linked to being hit by a charging rhino.

It’s playful in tone, but the physics are real and the impact is hard to forget.

4. Speeding

Speeding remains a major contributor to young driver fatalities. Inexperience makes it harder to judge safe speeds, especially on bends and at junctions.

Excess speed increases both stopping distance and crash severity, and many young driver crashes involve loss of control.

For me, this was probably the most impactful scenario.

Seeing a passenger being thrown around the back seat, desperately holding on, and finally asking, “Can you watch your speed a bit please?” captures a moment most people have lived through, but rarely talk about.

5. Mobile Phones

Young drivers are more likely to use mobile phones while driving.

Texting or phone use increases crash risk by at least four times, impairing lane control, reaction time, and situational awareness.

One of the strongest messages here is practical and immediate. If a driver accumulates six penalty points within their first two years, they lose their licence.

It’s a consequence many young drivers underestimate, until it’s spelled out clearly.

Passion Behind the Camera

Kate and Matthew also shared a behind-the-scenes video from the two-day shoot, offering insight into the process of filming the mini scenarios.

What came through strongly was the team’s passion, creativity, and genuine care for getting this right.

The actors, crew, and creators weren’t just producing content, they were thinking deeply about how young people experience risk, pressure, and decision-making behind the wheel.

Evaluation From the Start

A recurring theme across the ICE Live webinar was evaluation.

5 in 5 was no exception. Kate and Matthew confirmed that Ian Edwards MSc has been commissioned to carry out a full evaluation of the intervention.

This evaluation will measure:

• Participant reaction
• Learning and understanding
• Willingness to change behaviour

By embedding evaluation from the outset, the team is ensuring that 5 in 5 isn’t just engaging, but effective.

Thoughts

5 in 5 represents a mature evolution in young driver education.

It recognises that realism doesn’t need to mean trauma and that brevity, empathy, and relatability can be more powerful than shock.

In a space where well-intentioned interventions have sometimes missed the mark, This feels like a thoughtful, evidence-informed step in the right direction. It has real potential to influence how young drivers understand risk during the most dangerous years of their driving lives.

Wrap-Around Education

Virtual Reality has an incredible ability to immerse us. It can place us in situations we may never otherwise experience, evoke strong emotional responses, and make risks feel real.

But as Dr Jonathan Rolison explained during the closing session of the ICE Live webinar, VR on its own is not learning. Without the right educational framework around it, VR risks becoming little more than shock, novelty, or entertainment.

This is where wrap-around education comes in.

Wrap-around education transforms a VR experience into a meaningful learning intervention. It ensures that what the learner feels and sees is translated into understanding, safer decision-making, and real-world behavioural change.

The Risk of ‘Headset-Only’ Learning

When VR experiences are delivered without preparation or follow-up, learners often take away the wrong messages.

Research into experiential and emotional learning shows that strong emotions can either deepen learning or completely derail it, depending on how they are guided.

Without wrap-around education, learners may:

Focus on the wrong moments

They may remember the most dramatic or shocking scene rather than the key learning objective.

Leave with false confidence

For example, believing “I’d handle that better” instead of recognising how quickly situations escalate.

Blame individuals instead of systems

Learners might judge the characters’ behaviour rather than understanding environmental, social, or systemic risks.

Remember the shock, not the lesson

Shock can trigger a coping response where the brain distances itself from the content rather than engaging with it.

In short, VR without facilitation can feel powerful but still fail to change behaviour.

Charli Howe, ADINJC General Council

Charli Howe, ADINJC General Council

Introduction

One of the standout sessions at ICE Live 2026 was the Workshop on Evaluation for Intervention, delivered by Ian Edwards MSc.

It was a thoughtful, grounded, and at times challenging exploration of what it really means to evaluate virtual reality (VR) and other safety interventions.

This is especially true in road safety, where good intentions don’t always lead to good outcomes.

What Do We Mean by “Evaluation”?

Ian offered a refreshingly direct definition:

“Evaluation is a process that produces objective evidence of the outcome of an intervention.”

The key word here is objective.

Ian framed evaluation as a question:
Is there sufficient evidence to stand up in a court of law?
If the answer is no, then regardless of how convincing or innovative an intervention feels, it cannot be justified.

As Ian put it:

“If you can’t objectively demonstrate that something works, you may be wasting money and worse, you could be making the problem bigger.”

When Interventions Backfire

To underline this point, Ian shared an example from a review of novice driver skid-control programmes. These interventions were designed to improve vehicle handling and reduce crashes.

Instead, the evaluation revealed the opposite effect.

The programmes:

• Encouraged drivers to underestimate danger
• Increased driver confidence without increasing judgement
• Led to higher speeds and increased collision rates

This is a well-documented phenomenon in road safety known as risk compensation. When people feel more skilled or protected, they may take greater risks.

Without evaluation, these unintended consequences would have remained invisible.

The Kirkpatrick Model: A Practical Framework

A significant part of the session focused on the Kirkpatrick Model (1959), a four-level framework widely used to evaluate training and interventions.

Ian highlighted its particular value for practitioners because it forces clarity about what is being measured and why.

Together, the four levels provide a structured way to assess impact.

Level 1: Reaction

This is the most basic and easiest level of evaluation.

• Did participants enjoy it?
• Was it engaging or immersive?
• Did they find it useful or thought-provoking?
• Would they recommend it?

Reaction data is helpful, but on its own it tells us very little about effectiveness.

Level 2: Learning

This level asks whether learning has actually occurred.

• Has understanding changed?
• Has knowledge increased?
• What new insights have participants gained?

Ian shared post-VR headset data showing clear increases in knowledge and understanding after participants experienced the VR content.

This is encouraging but still not enough.

Level 3: Behaviour

This is where many interventions falter. Learning does not automatically translate into behaviour change.
Ian used smoking as a simple example: most smokers understand the risks extremely well, yet behaviour persists.

Behaviour change:

• Is influenced by habit, context, incentives, and social norms
• Requires more than information alone

In the VR evaluation data, behavioural intention scores did increase, but not as strongly as learning outcomes, a pattern commonly seen across safety education.

Level 4: Results

The final and most important level asks:

• Did the intervention succeed?
• Were the outcomes what we expected?
• Did it reduce harm, risk, or negative outcomes?

This is also the hardest level to measure, as it often requires long-term data, comparison groups, and careful control of confounding factors.

Together, these four levels form the backbone of a robust evaluation.

Designing Evaluation the Right Way Round

A key theme running through Ian’s session was that evaluation must be designed before the intervention, not retrofitted afterwards.

The evaluation process should include:

What needs to be measured

• Choose an intervention that fits your objective, not the other way around
• Be clear on what success looks like and understand the entire intervention, not just the VR element

Evaluation design

• Decide early how outcomes will be assessed and compared

Data requirements

• Quantitative data (scores, measures, rates)
• Qualitative data (feedback, perceptions, lived experience)

Measures

Ensure measures are:

• Reliable
• Valid
• Capable of detecting improvement

Sampling

Effect size matters.

• Small effects require large samples
• Larger effects can be detected with smaller samples, but with higher risk of error
• As a rough guide, Ian suggested a minimum sample size of around 100 participants

Data analysis and reporting

• Results should be published where possible so others can scrutinise and learn from them
• In road safety, the Road Safety GB Knowledge Centre is a strong platform for sharing findings

Ethics and Legal Considerations

Evaluation isn’t just technical, It’s ethical.

Ian emphasised the importance of:

• Informed consent
• Minimising harm to participants
• The right to withdraw data
• Confidentiality and data protection
• Professional competence
• Openness and honesty in reporting results

These considerations are especially important when immersive technologies like VR are involved, where emotional and physical responses can be stronger than traditional training methods.

Practical Tools for Practitioners

For those looking to put this into practice, there is an interactive evaluation methods document available via the National Fire Chiefs Council (NFCC).

It provides structured guidance on evaluation design and is a genuinely useful resource for anyone working with interventions, not just VR.

You can find it here.

Final Thoughts

This workshop was a timely reminder that innovation alone does not equal impact.

VR can be immersive, engaging, and powerful but without rigorous evaluation, we simply don’t know whether it is helping, doing nothing, or quietly making things worse.

As Ian Edwards demonstrated so clearly, good evaluation isn’t about proving we’re right. It’s about making sure we’re not wrong and that’s a responsibility no safety practitioner can afford to ignore.

Charli Howe, ADINJC General Council

Introduction

In 2024, James Evans delivered an excellent and timely presentation on GIG Ride Smarter. This virtual reality-based risk reduction education programme is designed specifically for powered two-wheelers operating in the gig economy.

The programme represents a fully planned safety intervention led by Dr Elizabeth Box. It responds directly to a group of road users who are consistently over-represented in crash and injury data, yet chronically under-supported by traditional safety systems.

Why Focus on Gig-Economy Riders

Young male riders, often under the age of 30, are statistically more likely to be involved in serious motorcycle crashes.

Across multiple countries, males account for around 75% to 90% of powered two-wheeler fatalities, with younger riders disproportionately represented.

When this demographic overlaps with gig economy delivery work, the risk profile intensifies.

Gig riders typically experience:

• Elevated exposure: Long hours on the road, often during peak traffic periods
• Multi-apping: Working across several platforms simultaneously to maximise income
• Fatigue and time pressure: Tight delivery windows that directly incentivise speed
• Urban density: High interaction with vulnerable road users, junctions, and complex traffic environments

Research consistently shows that fatigue, time pressure, and divided attention significantly increase crash risk.

For gig riders, these are not occasional hazards, they are structural features of the job.

Risk is Normalised by the System

Risk-taking behaviours such as speeding, running red lights and mobile phone use are widely reported among delivery riders.

Crucially, these behaviours are not just tolerated. They are often implicitly rewarded.

Algorithmic management plays a major role. Delivery platforms rely on metrics such as acceptance rates, delivery times and customer ratings.

Riders report a constant fear of losing work or being de-prioritised by the algorithm. This can normalise unsafe behaviour in the name of efficiency.

Many riders describe feeling:

• Easily replaceable
• Weakly protected
• Rarely challenged or even discouraged when taking risks

Traditional occupational health and safety frameworks are largely absent in this space.

Gig riders are typically classified as independent contractors, placing them outside standard employer-led risk management systems.

Even enforcement presents challenges. Compulsory Basic Training (CBT), for example, was never designed for commercial delivery riding, and monitoring compliance within a fragmented gig workforce is extremely difficult.

Why Virtual Reality?

This is where GIG Ride Smarter takes a different approach.

There is growing evidence that education-based interventions, when well designed, can positively influence rider behaviour. This is particularly true when they focus on hazard perception, self-reflection and decision-making rather than punishment alone.

VR offers a unique advantage here.

Using VR, riders can be exposed to dangerous scenarios:

• Immersively
• In a controlled environment
• With minimal physical risk

They can experience near misses, distractions, poor decisions, and their consequences without being harmed.

On its own, VR education is unlikely to produce long-term change. However, when combined with other interventions; policy, enforcement, platform engagement, and cultural shifts, it can become a powerful tool.

From Theory to the Roadside

One of the most compelling elements of the programme is that it has moved beyond theory. GIG Ride Smarter has already been rolled out as diversionary education at the roadside by police.

Instead of relying purely on punitive enforcement, riders were offered proactive educational engagement. Early outcomes were overwhelmingly positive in most cases.

This approach aligns closely with Vision Zero principles, acknowledging human error while designing systems that reduce the likelihood and severity of harm.

Early evidence suggests that VR:

• Increases engagement
• Improves recall of safety messages
• Encourages reflection rather than defensiveness

Importantly, it meets riders where they are, both literally and cognitively.

Modular, Targeted, and Scalable

The VR content is topic-specific and designed to be delivered as a short educational series, covering areas such as:

• Hazard perception
• Distraction and mobile phone use
• Road rules
• Personal protective equipment (PPE)
• Motorcycle maintenance
• Fatigue management

Platforms can embed these modules directly into their apps, allowing riders to engage while waiting for deliveries.

The content is concise, accessible, and doesn’t require riders to step away from work for extended periods.

A Personal Take

During the webinar, we were shown one of the VR videos.

I watched it on a large monitor rather than a headset, and even then it was deeply immersive to the point of feeling slightly sick from the 360-degree movement.

That, in itself, speaks to its realism.

What stood out to me the most was that it wasn’t staged or sanitised. It featured real riders, real situations, and real emotions. The opinions felt authentic, and the risks felt immediate.

It didn’t lecture; it invited reflection.

Platform Involvement: Progress and Pushback

Uber Eats currently supports GIG Ride Smarter by providing QR codes on stickers placed on doors and windows, directing riders to the free content.

However, the program is not embedded within rider management panels, largely due to ongoing pushback around platform ‘responsibilities’ and liability.

At present, it has not yet seen widespread adoption by police in this format, and one of the biggest challenges remains getting the content to the right people at the right time.

Worth a Look

If you’re interested in proactive, evidence-informed road safety interventions for vulnerable and under-served road users, GIG Ride Smarter and the broader Vision Zero framework are well worth exploring.

The videos alone are a powerful reminder that safety isn’t just about rules and enforcement, but about systems, incentives, and the very human realities of work on two wheels.

Charli Howe, ADINJC General Council

Introduction

Another standout session at ICE Live came from Rebecca Gill, who took us through the evolving journey of Virtual Reality Therapy.

Crucially, she focused on how we can make VR safe, ethical and effective for everyone, not just the “average” user.

The SPARK Framework

Rebecca’s work recognises a critical truth supported by growing evidence: People experience VR very differently. Factors such as sensory sensitivity, neurodiversity, trauma history, age and physical comfort all shape how immersive technology is perceived and processed.

Without thoughtful design, VR risks excluding the very people it aims to support. To address this, Rebecca introduced SPARK. This is a practical, person-centred framework for delivering VR responsibly.

S – Sensory Exploration

Sensory exploration focuses on understanding what the experience feels like, not just what it shows.

Research suggests that between 20% and 40% of VR users experience some level of cybersickness, including nausea, dizziness or headaches. This is particularly common when motion, visual flow and vestibular cues are misaligned.

Sensory overload can also increase stress, anxiety and disengagement, especially in road safety contexts where environments are already complex and emotionally charged.

Rebecca emphasised the importance of asking learners upfront about:

• Sensory sensitivities
• Triggers such as bright lights, loud or sudden noises
• Physical comfort and tolerance levels

Simple adjustments, such as offering a fidget toy, reducing volume, controlling brightness or slowing movement, can significantly reduce distress.

Creating a low-demand environment and allowing learners to preview what they are about to experience before full immersion supports psychological safety and informed consent.

Accessibility is not an add-on. It is a foundation.

P – Personalised Experiences

Personalisation is one of VR’s greatest strengths and one of its most underused features.

By identifying what an individual needs to feel supported, facilitators can put coping strategies in place before challenges arise.

Evidence from therapeutic and educational VR shows that personalised experiences reduce anxiety, resistance and shutdown. This increases the likelihood of meaningful engagement.

Key principles include:

• Starting where the individual feels comfortable
• Gradually introducing challenge
• Reflecting on experiences and adapting sessions over time

When VR connects to a learner’s personal goals and values, it becomes more relevant and more effective.

Used in this way, VR does not replace an intervention. It strengthens it.

A – Adaptive Engagement

Flexibility is not just good practice, it is a safety feature.

VR sessions should typically last between 5 and 30 minutes, depending on the individual. Longer sessions increase fatigue, sensory overload and discomfort. Studies show that attention and learning quality often decline after prolonged immersion.

Rebecca highlighted an important reminder: behaviour is communication.

Facial expressions, body language, posture and movement all signal how someone is coping.

VR should be designed for nervous systems, not for a generic “user”.

This means:

• Reading the room, not the script
• Responding in real time
• Pausing to check in, reflect and adjust

Conversation, feedback and reflection during and after the experience help relieve stress, restore engagement and consolidate learning.

R – Resilience Building

Resilience is built through choice, not performance.

In road safety education, for example, sitting through a 30-minute VR experience may be overwhelming for some learners. Completing the session isn’t always the right measure of success.

Success might instead look like:

• Observing traffic calmly
• Identifying hazards
• Discussing safer options and decision-making

VR can be especially valuable for learners who struggle with perspective-taking. By safely exploring different viewpoints, individuals can build empathy, awareness and confidence without the real-world risks.

K – Key Moments

One of the clearest messages from the session was this:

“VR without reflection is entertainment”

Empowerment and independence come from guided reflection and feedback.
Identifying key moments within the experience and unpacking them together, is where insight, understanding and behaviour change begin.

Without this step, VR remains a novelty rather than a learning tool.

SPARK in Practice: Safety Essentials

Delivering VR safely requires robust systems and skilled professionals.

Rebecca outlined essential safeguards, including:

• Clear legal responsibility and whistleblowing policies
• Online safety with controlled access throughout sessions
• Age-appropriate use, considering physical and emotional risk factors
• Regular breaks, typically every 15 to 20 minutes
• Formal risk assessments
• A strong focus on emotional wellbeing, supported by trained and experienced staff
• Additional assessments where needed, including medical or individual considerations

Organisations such as the NSPCC and the Child Safety Initiative provide guidance on headset sizing, supervision and safeguarding.

What We Can Start Straight Away

Create a Sensory Checklist

A sensory checklist helps identify risks before they become barriers. It can be quick, simple and highly effective.

Some key areas to feature in your checklist include the following:

Motion and Nausea

Ask about motion sensitivity, previous VR experiences and susceptibility to dizziness. Adjust movement speed, reduce simulated motion or choose static experiences where appropriate.

Comfort and Control

Some learners regulate better with tactile input. Offering options such as a fidget toy, seating choices, or the ability to stand or sit can reduce anxiety and increase focus.

Volume Control

Loud or sudden sounds can be overwhelming. Allow learners to control volume themselves to support autonomy and comfort.

Brightness Control

Bright or high-contrast visuals can trigger headaches or sensory overload. Giving users control over brightness supports comfort and accessibility.

Safety and Autonomy

Learners should always know they can remove the headset immediately. This sense of control significantly reduces anxiety and increases trust.

Build Pause Protocols into Every Session

Pause protocols normalise stopping, checking in and adapting. These can reduce pressure to ‘push through’, support emotional regulation, and encourage greater communication.

Pausing should be framed as a strength, not a failure.

Redefine Success in Your Evaluations

Traditional measures often include:

• Completion rates
• Time spent
• Task performance

These do not always reflect meaningful outcomes.

Success might instead include:

• Increased confidence
• Improved awareness
• Willingness to engage
• Quality of reflection and discussion

Redefining success ensures evaluations reflect human outcomes, not just technical ones.

Key Takeaway

The central message from Rebecca Gill’s session was clear and empowering.

‘VR can be accessible to anyone when it is designed and adapted to complement individual needs.’

Sue Duncan, General Secretary ADINJC

Introduction

After a well-deserved holiday in India, I thought I’d share a light-hearted look at what might be considered the “rules” of driving out there. Let’s just say it was an experience!

The Rules:

1. Officially, driving is on the left.

2. But if it’s quicker to get where you want to go, you can drive against the traffic.

3. On a two-lane road, it’s acceptable to drive three abreast, four if some are tuk tuks. Bikes… as many as fit in the gap.

4. If you want to turn right, just do it. Oncoming traffic will stop if you’re brave enough.

5. On a dual carriageway, drive in the right-hand lane so others can overtake on the left.

6. On other roads, you can overtake on either side wherever there’s space.

7. There’s no such thing as the two-second rule… two millimetres, possibly (How anyone has any door mirrors is a miracle).

8. If you want to park and the kerb’s a bit high – just find a rock to drive over.

9. A motorbike will comfortably hold a family of five (child in front, dad driving, another child, mother sitting sideways holding the baby).

10. It’s a legal requirement to wear a helmet on bikes and scooters. But out of town, no-one does, because they won’t get caught.

11. No children wear helmets, ever.

12. If a policeman tries to stop you for not wearing a helmet, just drive at him and then drive off.

13. Pedestrians crossing the road – be brave, saunter, don’t run, and if a car comes towards you just put your hand up and keep going. (works for them but we didn’t try it!)

14. Sounding horn is obligatory – tuk tuks have it written on their back, as do trucks. There is a code depending on length of hoots, but we never worked it out.

15. There’s no size limit on loads. just pile it as high as you can, whether bike or lorry. Fridges and washing machines can be delivered by push bike towing a cart.

16. If you’re a passenger on a bike and it rains, just put your umbrella up.

17. There are driving schools, poor buggers.

18. Our driver said you need 3 things – good brakes, a good horn and good luck.

Takeaways:

India was a brilliant holiday, and two weeks is not enough!

People will get by the best they can but without rules and an infrastructure to enforce them, people will take risks that to us seem unacceptable.

I loved India, both the place and the people, and I can’t wait to go again!

Sue Duncan

Charli Howe, ADINJC General Council

Introduction

The ICE Live 2026 session opened with Dr Elizabeth Box… and what an opening it was.

In case you are wondering, ICE stands for Immersive Community Education, which is another way of saying virtual reality, or VR as we’ll refer to it from now on.

Her presentation offered a thoughtful, evidence-led exploration of VR:

• What it promises
• What the evidence actually tells us
• How we can use it responsibly in the context of road safety

Rather than positioning VR as a silver bullet, the session challenged us to think critically about how and why we use immersive technology, and how it can genuinely support safer outcomes on our roads.

Why VR Is So Popular and Why That Matters

VR is often described in three powerful ways: immersive, innovative and emotionally powerful.

These qualities explain its rapid uptake in learning and safety contexts.

When done well, VR captures attention, feels realistic and can create memorable experiences. However, as the session highlighted, powerful experiences can also have powerful unintended effects. In some cases, VR can be:

• Overwhelming, where sensory load can crowd out perception and learning
• Distressing, as experiences can feel too real, particularly when users don’t fully process them as simulations
• Fatalistic, reinforcing the idea that crashes or harm are inevitable, which is unhelpful for behavioural change
• Confusing in terms of realism, leaving people feeling they’ve experienced something “real” without clarity on what to do differently

A key reminder from the session: engagement is not the same as effectiveness.

What the Evidence Really Says About VR

Research shows that VR is strong at driving engagement, attention and recall. Learners are often highly focused, and the experience stays with them.

However, when it comes to behaviour change, the evidence is mixed. One of the main challenges is cognitive overload. When emotional intensity and information compete, learning can suffer.

Studies consistently show that VR works best when it is:

• Embedded within a wider learning programme
• Supported by reflection and facilitation
• Treated as part of an intervention, not the intervention

In other words, VR is most effective when it is designed as part of a learning system rather than a standalone experience.

When VR Works Best

Evidence suggests that VR is particularly effective when it supports learning through experience, such as:

• Skill rehearsal
• Hazard perception, with low-risk consequences
• Perspective-taking, used carefully to build empathy and awareness without causing unnecessary distress

Strong outcomes are more likely when learners receive some pre-training, get immediate feedback, and when VR sessions are used consistently rather than as a one-off novelty.

Importantly, VR works best for “how to act”, not “what to believe”. It does not replace reinforcement, moral messaging or broader behaviour-change strategies, but it can meaningfully support them.

As one of the key takeaways made clear:

• VR isn’t ineffective… it’s just not sufficient on its own.

The Right Questions to Ask Before Commissioning VR

To avoid VR becoming a costly novelty, the session emphasised the importance of asking the right questions upfront:

• What problem are we trying to solve?
• What behaviour or skill needs to change?
• How will VR sit alongside other activities or interventions?
• What happens when the headset comes off?
• How will we know if it worked?

These questions help ensure VR is used deliberately, ethically and proportionately.

Supporting Evidence-Led VR Design

This is where tools like Co-Pilot can play an important role.

Co-Pilot supports evidence-led VR design and evaluation, helping organisations make informed decisions rather than starting from scratch. Its research library brings together existing evidence, saving time and supporting more robust programme design.

Similarly, the Vision Zero Toolbox focuses on both design and evaluation, helping practitioners assess where VR may add value and where it may not. This balanced approach supports safer, more effective interventions aligned with long-term road safety goals.

Challenge pieces also play a vital role. By questioning assumptions and emotional responses, they help keep decision-making evidence-led rather than emotion-led. This reinforces the need for thoughtful design, rigorous evaluation and continued development.

Key Takeaways

• VR is powerful when used deliberately
• Design and content matter more than novelty
• Evidence and evaluation protect impact
• VR works best as part of a broader learning system

Ultimately, this session wasn’t about being for or against VR. It was about staying on track using immersive technology ethically, proportionately and responsibly, in support of the shared road safety outcomes we are all working towards.

When guided by evidence and thoughtful planning, VR can be a valuable tool. Not the whole solution, but a meaningful part of it.

Dave Allen, ADINJC General Council

Introduction

Building a house and teaching someone to drive, why are they so similar!
This concept was explained to me a number of years ago by the Head of Training at British School of Motoring (BSM), and it has always stuck with me.

The Foundations

Let’s explain the similarities. I should say from the outset that I’m not a house builder, so bear with me.

A house needs solid foundations to support the entire structure that will be built on top of it. The walls, ceilings, windows and roof – in fact, everything above ground level – depend on those foundations.

If the foundations are weak, the structure won’t be strong enough. It will wobble, tremble and may even collapse when put under pressure.

Now let’s compare this to learning to drive.

A learner’s foundations are the proficient use of the controls that change the speed and direction of the vehicle. This includes the clutch, gears, accelerator, brake and steering. I would also include mirror use and basic road positioning as essential foundations.

If these core skills are built well, and time and effort are invested so the pupil can control the vehicle confidently, later topics such as emerging, crossing traffic at busy junctions and negotiating roundabouts become much easier.

How many times have we seen pupils hesitate at roundabouts or T-junctions because they lack confidence in clutch control and are frightened of stalling.

I’m not saying this is the only reason, as hesitation can have many causes, but clutch control is something that can take some pupils several lessons to truly master.

Classic manoeuvres such as practising the turn in the road and hill starts can really help develop this skill. Instructors can also assist by controlling the steering so the pupil can focus solely on the clutch, or by controlling the clutch while the pupil concentrates on steering correctly.
Using a quiet or deserted area gives you the time and space needed. Angle starts also work wonders for improving coordination.

Walls and Scaffolding

Now let’s look at scaffolding and support structures.

Once the foundations are in place, scaffolding is used to help build the walls while keeping the builders safe. When the walls are secure, the scaffolding is removed.

In learning to drive, the scaffolding represents the level of help we provide to build a pupil’s knowledge, skills and understanding. As with building a wall, once the structure is secure, we gradually reduce that support – or remove it altogether – when the pupil can cope independently.

Roof

Finally, the roof of a house protects everything underneath it.

In driving, this is similar to the higher levels of the GDE matrix. A pupil’s thoughts, beliefs and values shape their driving behaviour, helping to protect them, their vehicle and other road users.

Takeaway

For example, a nervous pupil is likely to make mistakes like stalling, hesitation or a lack of progress.

An overconfident pupil, on the other hand, may take risks such as moving off without proper observation, emerging when they shouldn’t, or driving too fast for the conditions.

I always remember the phrase:

“To teach John to drive, first you must know everything about driving – but equally important, you must learn everything about John.”

In other words, understand what motivates your pupil and how they learn best. 👍

Liam Greaney, ADINJC General Council

Introduction

In the UK context, a national, fully implemented Graduated Driver Licensing (GDL) system does not yet exist.

As it currently stands, as soon as your learner passes their driving test they are allowed to drive a 3.5 tonne vehicle (or 4.25 tonne if electric) on any public road in the country and in any conditions, and with up to eight passengers.

Now like most instructors, I have a chat with my pupils about the New Drivers Act and remind them that now they’ve got rid of me, they need to make sure that they don’t require my services again.

I also talk to them about their first solo drive and the adjustment to driving independently.

Many young drivers can’t wait to pass their test so they can enjoy the freedom of the open road, often keen to drive in a way that feels fitting for someone who has just passed.

But from the 1st October 2026 a number of reforms are being introduced across the UK in what is hoped to be the biggest shake-up in road safety for years.

In Northern Ireland, alongside other measures, Graduated Driver Licensing will be introduced.

The Case for GDL

The statistics are stark: 8% of young drivers aged 17–23 are involved in 24% of road traffic collisions.

GDL aims to introduce driving in phases by applying additional restrictions, easing young drivers into higher-risk driving situations more gradually.

Alongside other measures being introduced across the UK — including logbooks, minimum learning periods (MLP), minimum hours and a structured syllabus — this approach should lead to improved road safety.

One caveat with the MLP is whether it simply becomes a recognition of a 24-week waiting period, and who is responsible for completing and validating logbooks showing that the syllabus has been covered and minimum hours completed.

That said, you have to start somewhere.

Benefits of GDL

The current UK system uses provisional (learner) licences that come with both restrictions and freedoms.

Restrictions include the minimum age of 17 and vehicle requirements that clearly indicate the vehicle is being driven by a learner. There must be a supervising driver aged over 21 with at least three years’ driving experience.

The rules that apply to supervising drivers also apply during supervision — for example, learners cannot be used as designated drivers to take someone to the pub.

Learners are only permitted to drive on motorways when accompanied by an approved driving instructor in a dual-controlled vehicle, and motorway driving is not tested during the practical test.

One of the freedoms within the current system is that there is no obligation to take lessons with a professional driving instructor. As long as a learner holds a valid provisional licence and has passed the theory test, they can book a practical driving test.

From 1 October, new requirements will include a minimum learning period, logbooks and a structured syllabus. However, none of these changes mandate the use of a professional driving instructor, nor do they require the test to be taken in a dual-controlled vehicle.

Provided the vehicle is legal and roadworthy and meets a few other requirements, it’s test ready.

Once these requirements are met — and the candidate has been resident in the UK for at least 185 days — they may take the test. On passing, they are subject to a two-year probationary period.

But what will happen on the 1st October 2026 in Northern Ireland?

According to the press release:

• A six-month night-time driving restriction will apply to drivers under the age of 24
• Age-related passenger restrictions will apply, except for family members, unless passengers meet the learner supervising driver criteria

Problems with GDL

There are, however, legitimate concerns.

Would rural areas be unfairly penalised?

Could restrictions on night-time driving create an economic barrier for young people, particularly given how early it gets dark during winter months?

Enforcement is likely to be event-driven rather than process-driven.
In the event of a serious collision, what appetite would there be to enforce rules that could substantially reduce compensation paid in a non-fault accident?

There is also the issue of the so-called “cliff-edge effect” — what happens when the restrictions are suddenly lifted?

The last point might already apply when learners pass their test anyway, are we just postponing the problem?

Takeaway

“As per the PACTS Road Safety Manifesto, to which ADINJC is a signatory, we support wider continuing discussion and debate around the potential introduction of GDL in this country.”

Introduction

Not all superheroes wear capes; some of us are ADIs and PDIs just doing our jobs.

I’ve told everyone that I meet in the course of my normal day that I saved a life, and now I want to share my story with you.

I was in my professional role as an ADI and out on a lesson with a pupil.

My Story

We were parked on the common on the left-hand side of the road with a crossing point in front of us called ladies mile that is quite popular.

A man walked out in front of us, who was preceded by two small dogs that should have been on leads but were not.

The pupil and I had a short conversation about whether dogs should be on leads and what the Highway Code says about this.

I explained how, a few years ago, another pupil and I had run a dog over, but fortunately it survived.

I related how the crowd had gathered around the injured hound and its owner.

After sorting out my pupil, I explained how I felt I had no choice but to go over to the injured animal and its owner, which I did.

Fortunately, the owner immediately admitted to the crowd that he should have had it on a lead and that he only took his eyes off it for a second.

His kind actions probably saved me from the lynch mob.

We contacted each other the next day, he to tell me that the dog was making a full recovery and me to say that my pupil informed me that she had spent the night praying for the dog.

I was pretty pleased with myself because we had done everything right, and the dog was going to be alright.

It starts to get dangerous.

At this point, my pupil, who was looking at me with rapt attention, starts screaming “oh no, oh no”.

There is a small boy of about three running along and heading straight out into the road, following the man with the dogs, who I assume to be his father.

I looked up into my interior mirror, and there was a car heading straight down the road toward where the small boy was about to run out.

Because of the parked cars behind us, the small boy could not see the car coming toward him, and by the same token, the driver of the moving car couldn’t see the small boy.

I reached over and gave the horn a loud blast, which froze the little boy in his tracks.

His mum and dad, on different sides of the road, both a little distance away, just looked over and stared.

I choose not to get into any discussion with the boy’s parents over what just happened.

I’d like to think that they were about to have a full and frank discussion on parental responsibility.
My pupil, who has a small child of a similar age, made the point to me that her child is kept in a buggy for just the reason we had just witnessed.

I praised her for helping to save the small boy’s life.

What are the takeaways from this?

Life can change in an instant:

• For that small boy, being hit by a moving car at head and chest height would probably have been fatal
• Maybe I’m wrong about the possible outcome, the boy might have stopped, or the car might have gone past without hitting him
• One of his parents might have called out and stopped him

There might have been all sorts of reasons that the boy’s parents didn’t have him under control:

• Maybe one thought the other was doing the job
• They could have argued and not concentrated
• Poor parents
• Good parents, but having a bad day

Having a safe way of doing things keeps you safe

• The routine of always doing something means you don’t have to think about it
• A split-second lapse can be life-changing
• Driving is full of routine POM, MSM, PSL and LADA

For me, the instinctive reaction of a mirror check saved that boy’s life as it allowed me to get to the horn.

I’ve probably been driving for something like fifty years, and never has a mirror check made such a profound difference.

In some ways, I’m thinking I’ve been wasting my time for the last fifty years with those mirror checks, but that day they paid off in the biggest way possible.

The problem with all our little routines is that we never know when they are going to be needed.

But when they are needed, the payoff can be life itself.

Conclusion

Not all superheroes have capes; sometimes, a green or pink badge says it all.

Liam Greaney
ADINJC Committee Member