Driver Education Justification The Philosophy and Rationale supporting

Driver Education Justification The Philosophy and Rationale supporting Driver Education for High School Youth

Driver Education Justification Arguments against Driver Education typically fall into one of the following four general categories: There is no scientifically convincing evidence to prove that driver education reduces traffic accidents and the resulting deaths and injuries.

Driver Education Justification There are too many weak and ineffective programs in our schools and colleges, thus driver education is not meeting its traffic safety goals. The public is opposed to increased spending and driver education may not be worth the cost.

Driver Education Justification Driver Education is not a function of the schools.

Countering the No Evidence Objection There exists an equally powerful argument that there is no convincing evidence to prove that HSDE does NOT reduce accidents. Past research has illustrated the effectiveness of driver education.

Driver Education Studies 1963 Illinois study 1964 Connecticut Department of Motor Vehicles 1973 Ohio study 1979 AETNA news release

Countering the Ineffective Programs Objection No other high school course is evaluated on the same terms as driver education. Are the criteria applied to driver education realistic?

Countering the Ineffective Programs Objection Should the program be responsible only for whether its students can drive safely and responsibly or whether they actually do drive in this manner?

Countering the Costs Too Much Objection The program is cost effective – NHTSA report that indicated that the crash reduction savings gained in the first year of licensing alone is enough to offset the cost.

Philosophical Basis for Supporting Driver Education If you believe that the passenger car is a necessity rather than a luxury for the majority of Americans to live the “good life, ” and if you believe that the basic function of the American system of public education is citizenship preparation; then it follows logically that every public school system is obligated to teach young people how to drive safety, efficiently, and enjoyably.

Philosophical Basis for Supporting Driver Education Traffic Safety is a major national program priority. Therefore, if the major purpose of the American system of public education is citizenship preparation, the public schools must inform each student of the seriousness of the national traffic safety problem, probably causes and possible solutions.

Objective Rationale for Supporting Driver Education High school educated drivers are safer drivers: l Insurance companies have granted 5 to 20% reductions to young drivers who have successfully completed an approved driver education course.

Objective Rationale for Supporting Driver Education Illinois study of young driver. This study showed that high school educated drivers had ¼ as many convictions for moving violations and accident involvement rates as uneducated young drivers. This is the only study to include commercial school evidence.

Objective Rationale for Supporting Driver Education The public high school is the best place to teach driver education: Unbiased educational approach l Best prepared teachers l Best facilities and equipment l

Objective Rationale for Supporting Driver Education The public high school is the best place to teach driver education: Students are at the optimal age for learning, both psychologically and physiologically l Less expensive for society as a whole l Students are available in organized groups l

Countering the Not a Function of the Schools Objections Driver education does not subtract a substantial amount of time from other academic subjects. It can be argued that driving is the most important skill in contemporary society, insofar as the threat to human life is concerned. In any case, it is too important to learn by chance or in a haphazard fashion.