Title: Driver Education Justification
1Driver Education Justification
- The Philosophy and Rationale supporting Driver
Education for High School Youth
2Driver 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.
3Driver 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.
4Driver Education Justification
- Driver Education is not a function of the schools.
5Countering 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.
6Driver Education Studies
- 1963 Illinois study
- 1964 Connecticut Department of Motor Vehicles
- 1973 Ohio study
- 1979 AETNA news release
7Countering 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?
8Countering 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?
9Countering 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.
10Philosophical 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.
11Philosophical 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.
12Objective Rationale for Supporting Driver
Education
- High school educated drivers are safer drivers
- Insurance companies have granted 5 to 20
reductions to young drivers who have successfully
completed an approved driver education course.
13Objective 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.
14Objective Rationale for Supporting Driver
Education
- The public high school is the best place to teach
driver education - Unbiased educational approach
- Best prepared teachers
- Best facilities and equipment
15Objective 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 - Less expensive for society as a whole
- Students are available in organized groups
16Countering 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.