liveBook · Manning

Driving school pairing style

As explained in "Looks Good to Me"

A pair-programming style in which the navigator gives the driver detailed, direct, and tactical instructions.

Driving school pairing is a pair-programming style where the navigator gives the driver detailed, direct, tactical instructions. It works best when the pair has already discussed and agreed on the solution. section 11.2.2

Use the style deliberately and review its effect on the team:

  • Apply it for a small task or a limited session rather than assuming it should govern every pairing session. section 11.2.2
  • Watch for an unintended shift when a stronger personality gives instructions to a more timid developer. section 11.2.2
  • Assess whether the team finds the approach useful and adjust when, how, and how often it is used. section 11.2.2

Agreed implementation

A pair first discusses the solution, then the navigator directs the driver through the implementation step by step while the driver follows those instructions. section 11.2.2

Table 11.1 Pair programming pairing styles
Pair style
How it works
Pros
Cons
Driver-navigator
One driver: focuses on writing the actual code
One navigator: focuses on reviewing the code being written in real time
Most common; the pair has equal chances to contribute and review
Uneven personality matches might result in a single driver the entire session; the passive navigator might not review as effectively
Driving school
One navigator: focuses on giving tactical, direct, and detailed instructions to the driver
One driver: follows the navigator’s instructions
Can be useful if the pair has previously discussed a solution about to be implemented
Stronger personality might unintentionally perform this style when paired with a more timid developer
Pomodoro
One driver, one navigator (as in driver–navigator style)
Pair program in 25-min intervals; 20 min coding, 5 min break. Then switch roles
Equal participation time between the pair; naturally breaks down pairing sessions into manageable chunks
Constant switching might be hard for some developers; can be difficult for pairs with different skill levels
Timing might be an anxiety driver (“I only have 5 min left to finish this”)
Tour guide
One driver: focuses on explaining and implementing code
Multiple navigators: passively listen to driver
Useful for onboarding or when new implementation has to be shared with the greater team
Passive listeners can grow bored or “zone out” as they don’t get to participate in actual code writing
Ping-pong
One writes a test; developers switch; currently active developer writes code to pass the test. Writes the next test and then switches; cycle continues
Great with Test-Driven Development; useful for range of skill levels
Constant switching might be hard for some developers; can be difficult for pairs with different skill levels
Tag-team
One driver, one navigator (as in driver–navigator style); switch driver role as the pair sees fit
Casual, free-form; developers decide when to switch
If one favors more control or is more passive, switching may not occur as frequently

Compare driving school with driver-navigator pairing and other pairing styles through their roles, benefits, and risks. section 11.2.2

How "Looks Good to Me" covers it

How deep it goes
Defines the roles and trade-offs, but stops short of prescribing implementation steps or detailed team protocols.
Examples
Uses an agreed solution, tactical navigator instructions, and stronger-versus-timid personality pairings as examples.
What it assumes
Requires prior discussion and agreement about the solution before implementation begins.
What you can do after
Apply it via deliberate pairing experiments, then assess team response and adjust its duration and frequency.
How it connects
Connects pair programming with driver-navigator pairing, personality dynamics, and team feedback.

Related concepts

This explainer was generated by Manning's knowledge graph from the text of "Looks Good to Me". The section links point to the parts of the book it draws on.