The Chronicllle - ADTSEA · The Chronicllle Fall Issue 2009 ... Indiana University of Pennsylvania...

Driver

Education

Professionals

for

TTTThhhheeee CCCChhhhrrrroooonnnniiiicccclllleeeeFall Issue 2009 Volume 57 No. 1

In this Issue:

A Publication of theAmerican Driver & Traffic Safety Education Associationin cooperation with the Highway Safety CenterIndiana University of Pennsylvania

Greetings To ADTSEAMembers

2009 Kaywood AwardRecipient BarbaraBrody

Standards DocumentReleased

Strategies forTeaching EnglishProficiency inDriver Education

Does virtual realitydriving simulationtraining transfer to on-road driving in novicedrivers?A pilot study

In-Vehicle Cell PhoneBlocking Systems:Implications for TeenDriving Safety

Novice Teen DriverEducation andTrainingAdministrativeStandards

Fall 2009 The Chronicle for DE Professionals

The Chronicle ADTSEA

TTTThhhheeee CCCChhhhrrrroooonnnniiiicccclllleeee for Driver Education Professionals

Allen Robinson, Ph.D.Chief Executive, ADTSEA

IUP Highway Safety CenterIndiana, PA 15705-1092(724) 357-4051 (Office)(724) 357-7595 (Fax)

[email protected] (new)http://adtsea.iup.edu

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Editorial DeadlinesWinter ‘10 Issue Jan. 15, 2010Spring ‘10 Issue April 15, 2010Fall ‘10 Issue Oct. 15, 2010

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Table of ContentsFall 2009

Volume 57 Number 1

Greetings To ADTSEA Members.................................... 2Chuck Lehning, President

2009 Kaywood Award Recipient Barbara Brody... .2

Standards Document Released..................................... 3Allen Robinson, Ph.D.

Strategies for Teaching English Proficiency inDriver Education...........................................................4

Rich Miller, Danielle Parke., Jorge Osterling

Does virtual reality driving simulation trainingtransfer to on-road driving in novice drivers?A pilot study...........................................................................9

Caroline V. Cox, Richard Wharam, Ronald Mourant,

Daniel J. Cox

In-Vehicle Cell Phone Blocking Systems:Implications for Teen Driving Safety...........................10

W. E. Van Tassel, Ph.D. & E. E. Floyd-Bann

Novice Teen Driver Education and TrainingAdministrative Standards................................................11

Driver education is front and center...........................25

A Matter of Perspective...................................................25

Publishing InformationSend article submissions to: John Palmer, Ph.D, Editor

832 Halliday RoadSt. Cloud, MN 56301

[email protected]

The Chronicle for Driver EducationProfessionals is published threetimes a year in cooperation with theIndiana University of PennsylvaniaHighway Safety Center.

Executive CommitteeChuck Lehning President

Kevin Kirby Board Rep. NCRegion

Linda Donaldson SecretaryTreasurer

Roger Voigt Past-PresidentTom Prefling, Corp. Member

William Van Tassel Corp. MemberFred Nagao President-Elect

Board of DirectorsStanley Henderson NC Region

Catherine Broderick NEBarry Thayer NE Region

Judy Ode NW RegionWendy Bills NW Region

James Hathaway SC RegionGerald Dickinson, Jr. SC Region

Jo Ellen Suter SE Region Connie Sessoms Jr. SE Region

Shannon Woods SW RegionRolando Dace SW Region

for contact information go to:http://adtsea.iup.edu

This publication is prepared usingPageMaker 7.0

The Chronicle for DE Professionals Fall 2009

The ChronicleADTSEA

(go to page 3)

Greetings To ADTSEA MembersChuck Lehning, President

Barbara Brody’s Remarks Upon Receiving 2009 Kaywood AwardI am honored to have been

selected as the 25th recipient of theDick Kaywood award. I want tothank Pierson Prentice Hall for theircontinued support for this award. Iespecially want to thank Jan andJohn for their introduction. Jan andI have been ADTSEA roommates formany years and I could tell youmany stories of the experiences wehave shared but you know what theysay: “what happens at ADTSEAstays at ADTSEA. Although Jan andI can share many things we cannever share clothes. The one timewhen my luggage got lost believeme she was no help at all. Eventhough we do not see each otheroften throughout the year I cherishthe time we do share.

I am humbled to be here as the2009 Kaywood selection. To be inthe same company with leaders

such as Amos Neyhart, Dr. RichardBishop, Bill Chushman, Dr, NormanKey, and Dr. Robert Marshall, allindividuals who many of you,including myself, never had anopportunity to learn from and otherslike Dr. Frank Kenel, Dr. GaryBloomfield, Dr. John Palmer, Dr.Terry Kline, Dr, Maurice Dennis, Dr,Allen Robinson. Fred Mottola, DickTyson, Dr. Bob Gustafson and JohnHarvey who many of us, includingmyself, are students of and haveworked with in a variety of situations.Who would have thought this littlegirl would be standing here thismorning.

In 1972, the year I graduatedhigh school, Cissie Gieda waselected the first women president ofADTSEA. In 1983 Dick Kaywoodhimself wrote in the Journal of TrafficSafety an article entitled “Affirmative

Action. He stated that “the womendriver educators I know demonstrategreat enthusiasm and competencefor their instructional assignments”the article further expresses theneed to bring more women into thedriver education field as teachersand leaders. Women can add a newdimension to driving instruction, justas they have done in many otherprofessions. 22 years after CissieGieda was elected president, I waselected; an honor I still treasuretoday. We are fortunate to have asPast Presidents Sam Houston,Elizabeth Shepard and most recentlyCarol Harding. I admire all the workVanessa Wigand from the VirginiaDepartment of Education andresearcher Dr. Jean Shope from theUniversity of Michigan have downthroughout the years. Last year

On August 20th of this year Itraveled with Dr. Allen Robinson,CEO of ADTSEA, and ConnieSessoms, Southeast Region BoardMember, to Salem, Oregon to attenda memorial service to celebrate thelife of our fallen comrade, JohnHarvey. For those of you who didnot know Harv, before his death hewas serving as Director of Driverand Traffic Safety Education for theState of Oregon. He previouslyserved in leadership roles in thestate of Washington and the stateof Vermont. He was a long timeADTSEA member and recognizedleader in our profession.

As I reflect on the life of JohnHarvey I would like to share thesethoughts with you. My first thoughtof Harv was that he always seemedto have a smile on his face. Healways made you feel that he wasso glad to see you. You could readilytell that Harv loved life and howmuch he loved driver and traffic

safety education for young people.He believed strongly in the value ofdriver and traffic safety educationand it was his passion to share thisbelief with others. Harv didn’t justwant it to be good, he wanted it tobe the best. When Harv presentedat various conferences andworkshops you could feel hisexcitement. He was high energy, fullspeed ahead.

Here is my challenge to all of uswho work with young people in driverand traffic safety education, let usnever fail to provide anything but thebest for the students we serve. Letthe students know how strongly webelieve in the value of driver andtraffic safety education. Let themfeel our passion. As we teach letthem feel our energy andexcitement. I know that through theyears there have been manyindividuals who are no longer withus that made outstandingcontributions to our profession. To

their memory let us carry on thegreat passion that each of thempossessed.

I am encouraged by the ideaspresented in the development ofNational Driver EducationStandards. I am also realistic enoughto know that unless vast amounts ofmoney are provided to bring aboutmany of the standards presented,such as 45 classroom hours and 10BTW hours, we will continue to workunder the standards currently inplace. This is where the old coachin me kicks in. We must continuallystrive for higher standards, not gripeor complain about what we don’thave. With great energy and passionwe must strive to make what we dohave the very best it can be. This isthe challenge for all who work indriver and traffic safety education.On a personal note I hope this newschool year is going well for you. Iknow that each new year can bringwith it new and different challenges.

(go to page 5)



Standards Document ReleasedAllen Robinson, Ph.D. CEO ADTSEA

As you all know, the past severalmonths have been very difficult forour country. With all that has beennegative, it is necessary to describethe positive results of ADTSEA thispast year and to look forward withanticipation to the year ahead of us.Throughout 2009, you have beenreading and hearing about the DriverEducation National StandardsProject. This project began in thefourth quarter of 2008 and wascompleted in May of 2009. All of thematerial concerning this project isincluded stating on page 11 of thisChronicle. It is must reading foreveryone.

For the first time, we havewidespread agreement on a basicstructure for driver education. Thisis a structure we can build upon andprovide quality driver educationthrough public and private providers.Some say that we have gone too farand others say that we have notgone far enough. We certainly couldhave done more, but there wouldhave been minimal agreement withthe results. Standards do not haveto be met exactly as written. Thesestandards are a goal we should allstrive to achieve.

When asked “How can I improvemy driver education program?”, youcan answer by providing thesestandards as a blueprint for thefuture. If you believe thesestandards don’t go far enough, thenyou can exceed these standardsrecommendations. As you look atwho was involved in this project andview the support of the NationalHighway Traffic SafetyAdministration (NHTSA), you willsee a nationally combined effort toimprove the quality of drivereducation.

Our recent ADTSEA conferencein Charlotte, NC was successfulbeyond all expectations. With all ofthe state budget problems and travel

restrictions, we still registered 270people at our conference. In thepast ten years, there has been onlyone conference that had higherattendance, which was Honolulu in2005.

The North Carolina hostcommittee showed southernhospitality at its best. Southeastboard member, Connie Sessoms,planned, organized andimplemented a complimentaryairport shuttle that was more efficientthan anything I have ever seen by ahost committee.Chuck and Lynn Lehning plannedactivities for everyone to enjoy thatwas different than past years. Wehad great entertainment on Sundayevening and a tremendous outing tothe speedway. There were plenty ofspouse activities and a banquet weall enjoyed.

Our conference evaluationshave been exceptional. The programplanners provided content andinformation that was of interest andvalue to everyone. Thanks to thedivision chairs and all presenters forproviding such a high qualityprogram.

For the future, we also haveexciting plans. The Missouri hostcommittee is planning a greatwelcome to the Gateway To TheWest. The Hilton Frontenac Hotel isten minutes from the airport and thehotel has complimentary shuttleservice. The hotel will also provideshuttle service to nearby casinos.Parking at the hotel iscomplimentary.

Roger Voigt and the divisionchairs will be planning a program tomeet the needs of all attendees. Thenames and email addresses of thedivision chairs is on the web page.If you have a program idea or wishto present, please contact them.

To remember our great friendwho passed away in August, John

Harvey, we will name the Tuesdayluncheon the John HarveyLuncheon. Specific plans for thisluncheon are still being planned, butit will be in recognition of John andall who have served ADTSEA.

Thanks to Jan Meeker, NSSPhas been reinstated for 2010. TheNSSP Conference will begin onFriday before the ADTSEAConference in St. Louis andconclude on Monday. This will giveus all an opportunity to interact withour youth and to show NSSPmembers what ADTSEA is all about.Again, all conference information ison the web page at ADTSEA. Org.

Don’t forget the election that willbe conducted in March 2010. Allregions will be electing a new boardmember, as well as our threenational officers. Electioninformation will be available on ourweb page by November 1, 2009.

We are also anticipating anupdated version of the ADTSEA 2.0Curriculum by mid year. To helpmembers select additional teachingmaterials, we will offer products thatare developed by our corporatemembers on the ADTSEA Store.This is currently under developmentand will be available by the end of2009.

I encourage you to remainpositive during these difficult timesand help all of us work together fora better tomorrow.

It was so great to see those of youwho attended the conference inCharlotte. We in Charlotte enjoyedbeing host to those of you whoattended and felt it was a veryworthwhile conference. I hope youare already making plans to attendthe 2010 conference in St. Louis,Missouri. We need each of youthere to make it a truly successfulconference.

(from page 2)


The ChronicleADTSEA(more on page 8)

Strategies for Teaching English Proficiency in Driver EducationRich Miller, Ed.D., George Mason University, Danielle Parke, M.S., Loudoun County Public Schools

Jorge Osterling, Ph.D., George Mason University

Globally, people overcome thecomplexity of sharing nearly 7,000living languages. The U.S., alone,comprises more than 300 spokenlanguages—a reflection of thecountry’s dynamic complexion (DeBoer, 2001). Our diverse societypresents challenges to drivereducation teachers whose studentsmight be learning a new languageand culture in addition to the subjectmatter. Nearly 50% of Englishlanguage learners are U.S. bornwhile the others immigrated to thiscountry (Federal Interagency Forumon Child and Family Statistics, 2006).They need to acquire both social andacademic English to achieve inschool. Social English is practiced ineveryday conversations andinteractions with others. Acquisitiontakes place over six months to twoyears and comprises listening,comprehension and speaking skillsalthough this is dependent uponseveral variables (e.g., age,personality, determination, socialcontacts, etc.). Academic English, onthe other hand, is used for classroominstruction and readings and itrequires mastery of listening,speaking, reading, and writing invarious content areas. Acquisitiontakes place over five to seven yearsand is dependent upon the degreeof literacy the student has achievedin his/her primary language as wellas the student’s capabilities inlearning a language. For instance,older students who have developedliteracy in their first language willtransfer that knowledge into Englishmore readily than students who arelearning both a new language and anew concept concurrently. A key toacquiring academic English is theapproach a school uses to fosterEnglish literacy skill development(Gonzales, Gerabagi and Lopez-DeLa Garza, 2000).

English language learners cometo school with varying degrees ofEnglish acquirement as well asdifferent levels of primary languageproficiency. In response, schoolscan offer bilingual educationprograms within which instruction isprovided in both the primary andsecond languages. Anotherapproach would be allowingstudents to acquire English as theirsecond language. The commonelement to both responses issheltered instruction during whichEnglish learners have dedicatedclasses in mathematics, sciencesand/or social studies while beingmainstreamed into other classessuch as driver education.English Proficiency

English proficiency meanshaving a command of AmericanEnglish vocabulary and grammar.Through standardized tests,teachers certified in bilingualeducation and/or English as asecond language assess proficiencylevels and report them to theclassroom instructors. The numberof proficiency levels and theirrespective labels vary betweenschool systems. For the purpose ofthis article, we will recognize Englishlanguage learners at three levels ofproficiency: beginning, intermediateand advanced.

Beginning students have little ifany social or academic Englishproficiency. To them, the Englishsound system is unfamiliar thus theyunderstand little of what is spokenin English. This can be anintimidating experience resulting instudent reticence. Within a shorttime, these students rely on knownconcepts in their primary languageto better acquire the Englishlanguage. Beginning students canparticipate in learning activities thatinvolve pointing, drawing, matching,

IntroductionSimple tasks generally require

complex learning. Take driving, forexample. Making a right-of-waydecision at an intersection seemsautomatic to most drivers, but in fact,this task was preceded by well-planned instruction and practice.This is also true for communicatingin English—a routine skill for mostof us but one involving the masteryof vocabulary and grammar. Inreality, we are all English learnersregardless of native language orresident status. Although most of usspeak the language fluently we varyin proficiency. Surely, we drivereducation teachers can admit toinstances of misspelling judgment ormaneuver. Even our recentlyelected U.S. president, known forhis oratory skills, has slipped instandard American English:

“’So I make no apologies,’ he saidwith a laugh, ‘for being able to talkgood.’” (Mosk and Sleve, 2008)

We are also teachers of Englishregardless of our primaryprofessional roles andresponsibilities. While instructingdriver education, we will encounterabout 10 percent of students whoare learning English as a newlanguage (NCELA, 2006). Theseintelligent students are eager andready to learn driving and trafficsafety, but at the same time, theymust further developcommunication skills in English.

This paper focuses on strategiesand activities teachers can use tohelp students become moreproficient in English while learningdriver education. Instruction has tobe adapted to students at allproficiency levels. A sample drivereducation lesson is presented alongwith specific suggestions forsuccessfully implementing it.Social and Academic English


The Chronicle ADTSEA(more on page 6)

Mickey Johnson was the firstwoman to receive the Kaywoodaward. I am fortunate andappreciative that the committee didnot wait another 22 years to selecttheir second woman. I have nowords to express how I feel at thismoment. It is an amazing momentin my life.

I will tell you, though; Iremember an ADTSEA conferencein Spokane, Washington which Iattended in 1987 when Dr.Bloomfield gave a speech asPresident of ADTSEA that inspiredme to become actively involved withADTSEA and traffic safety. I felt itcould not get any better. Then atthe Banquet Amos Neyart who wasthe Kaywood selection that yearspoke. This is the only time I heardand met Amos and what a greattreat it was to hear his stories. Amoswas 89 at the time. That night Iheard how Driver Education gotstarted. Amos was a facultymember at Penn State and in 1933Amos was visiting his mom forThanksgiving and parked his carunder a light in front of her house.A drunk driver crashed into the rearof Amos’s car. Watching thisindividual receive medical treatmentAmos thought to himself this doesnot need to be. So he began lookinginto how people learned to drive andfound, not only was there no formaltraining in how to drive, but no onethought it was necessary for trainingto happen for something as easy asdriving a car. This led Amos todevelop the first text called “SafeOperation of an Automobile”. Amosprepared the first integratedclassroom and in-car drivereducation program in the US. In1936 he started working for AAA toteach teachers and took a leavefrom his university position to havesecondary schools across thecountry create a new secondarysubject called Driver Education. Hiscolleagues and neighbors thoughthe was crazy to leave Penn State

We should all be grateful to Amos andothers along with AAA for their insightand visions back then.

In the 1979-80 school year, theyear I began this journey, 79% ofpublic, private, and parochialsecondary schools offered DriverEducation in our school system. Thatnumber today is dramaticly lower.In 1983 Amos suggested that weneed to do the following to continueto be a vital part of our education

system.Provide better

preparation of drivinginstructors

Switch from timestandard to a performancestandard

Private businessesand organizations mustget back to a leadershipand financial role. Thefederal and stategovernment can not solveour traffic problems.

Driver Educationshould not be offered justto get a driver licenses.The license should be justa by-product

We as teachers mustraise our level ofprofessionalism

Today we are stillworking to achieve this. I,as well as many of you,am fortunate to havelearned from thecolleagues or students of

Dick Kaywood, Dick Bishop, andAmos Neyhard. I am here becauseof them and today I would like to thanksome of them personally. Many areformer Keywood Award winnersthemselves.

In 1994 I became president ofADTSEA and it was the exact sametime Dr. Allen Robinson wasappointed as executive director. Nowthose of you that know Allen and methought “Oh boy, this will work aboutas well as trying to mix water and oiltogether”. Well, to be honest, a few

and suggested to his wife thatmaybe Amos needs to be examinedby a psychiatrist. However within avery short time schools across thecountry were developing drivereducation programs. In a journalarticle Amos wrote in 1983 he said“It is not important who began DriverEducation or when it began, but itis only important why it began.” Toreduce driver error which was listedas the major cause of 85% of alltraffic crashes.

The first Driver Educationcourse back in 1933 had fourobjectives listed:

To point out the importance ofbeing in good mental, physical,and emotional condition whendriving an automobile.

To make sure the driverpossesses sufficient knowledge tokeep out of traffic trouble.

To make sure the driverpossesses sufficient skill to keepout of traffic trouble.

To develop good driver attitudes.

(from page 2)


The ChronicleADTSEA(continued on page 7 )

(from page 5)times it was. But for most of the time(even today) Allen and I work morelike the process by which Ben andJerry’s Ice Cream is made. You takethe best of different types ofingredients and mix them togetherto make a great flavor. We workedwell together then as well as now.Many of you may not know this but,at that t ime, and for awhileafterwards, ADTSEA was in financialtrouble. Allen, through his greatfiscal responsibility and dedication,guided us through this time andmade ADTSEA stronger. Today Iwant to personally thank Allen onbehalf of us all for the dedication andwork he has done to guide usthrough the good times as well asthe challenging times.

I first moved to Vermont in 1979to teach Physical Education andcoach. When I arrived I was told thatI also was going to teach DriverEducation and that I needed toattend the certification classes.There I learned about Zone Controland took many workshops andclasses from Fred Mottola. IronicallyFred was a professor at SouthernCT State College where I did myundergraduate work but I never tooka traffic safety course there and didnot know Fred until I moved toVermont and got involved inteaching Driver Education myself.After one year of teaching TrafficSafety part-time I was hooked andlooked for a fulltime position as aDriver Education Teacher. The nextyear I found one and cut back onathletic career to concentrate ontraffic safety.

In the early 80’s I had takenworkshops with Joyce Epstein, theguru in Parent Involvement, and Irealized that the only way DriverEducation could stay strong in theeducation community was to havean active parent involvementprogram. I knew about the elementsof parent involvement and hadcreated a parent program and

booklet but I was no Driver Educationexpert. So I contacted Fred and wemet for some time to create aPartnership booklet for teens,parents and teacher. Once Freddeveloped the book I took that firstedition and gave it to over 400parents in different schools and didsome research on how parentsviewed the booklet. This became mymaster’s degree project.

The book was very successfuland, among other things, we foundthat it was very beneficial to have anavenue where students could havere-enforcement of the lessons we asteachers were teaching them. It wasalso an avenue for parents to receivesome re-training and in the processlearn to drive more effectively.Another great side benefit I foundwas that parents wrote that the timewith their teen provided them anopportunity to communicate withtheir teen while they were in thevehicle on areas beyond driving.Imagine parents and teenscommunicating. Today Fred’sPartnership book is used worldwideand I still have mandatory parentinvolvement in my classes 27 yearslater. I still feel strongly that ParentInvolvement in a supervised programis the key to success in yourcommunity. I cherish my relationshipwith Fred and Pat and I appreciatehis willingness to include me in hisvarious projects and learningopportunities.

In 1992 I became the DriverEducation consultant for Vermont. Itwas there that I learned how to workwith political issues within thedifferent polit ical parties andgovernment in general. During mymasters program at Trinity Collegein Burlington, VT I learned thatlearning could be a wonderfulexperience. Up until then learningwas hard because I hadundiagnosed learning disabilitiesthat caused me to always struggle.

After I received my Mastersdegree I wanted to continue my

education in the traffic safety field so,in 1996, I applied for a doctorateprogram in a cohort experience atthe University of MN and StateCloud State University where Dr.Palmer was the director of theHighway Safety Program.

I had met John through ADTSEAand through working together onmany national initiatives. I gotaccepted and moved to MN. I alsowas hired as a faculty member in theCollege of Education working in theHighway Safety Center. I loved theprogram and working at St. Cloud. Iam blessed to have worked withgreat colleagues and members ofthe MN driver and traffic safetyassociation. I especially loveddeveloping curriculum material andteaching both at the high school labschool in Princeton MN and theclasses taught at St. Cloud state. Iam especially proud of theinstructional material we developedin the Sleep, Teens and Drivingproject we did with Hennepin CountyMedical Center. It was the firstinstructional material for DriverEducation programs that dealt withdrowsy driving and teen sleep issuesin the country. A piece on “Eye onAmerica” with Dan Rather wasbroadcast nationwide. If any of youare here today from MN pleasestand. Thank you for your kindness,care and dedication to Traffic Safety.MN will always be my adopted state

I also learned something evenmore valuable. During my first yearin MN I lived with John and Ellen andtheir children Silva, Sara andJoseph. When it was decided Iwould live with the Palmers manymembers of my family and thosewho knew the Palmers and myselfthought: “Wow, this will beinteresting.” You see The Palmersare very devoted to the Catholic faithand I am very devoted to the Jewishfaith. The Palmers are very devotedto the Republican Party and I am anindependent voter involved in an


The Chronicle ADTSEA(continue on page 8)

( from page 6)independent liberal political thirdparty. So there was much concernabout what would happen to meliving with the Palmers.

Well, not long after I arrived itwas my turn to cook the Sundaydinner. We decided to have abarbeque and the Palmers wantedPork Chops for dinner. As anobservant Jew, I had never cookedpork chops but what the heck. WhileI was cooking my dad called. He wasvery observant of the Jewish faith.He wanted to know how I wasgetting adjusted and what was Idoing. Well I could not lie to my dadso I said at the moment I wascooking Pork Chops. I heard athump and thought he had a heartattack but then I heard in a very loudvoice WHAT DID YOU SAY? I said Iam cooking pork chops. I am noteating them. I am just cooking them.On another grill I was also cookingSalmon but I did not have a chanceto tell him that. Sometime later I alsohelped John stuff envelopes andcampaign literature for a womannamed Joanne Benson who wasseeking the Republican nominationfor governor in MN. But that isanother story. Five years later I leftMN and we were still politically solidin our different views and still strongin our different religious beliefs.

What I learned more importantlyin MN is that people who come fromdifferent backgrounds and faiths,who have different approaches tosocial issues can live together, worktogether, care about each other andstill stay solid in their beliefs withoutharassing, hurting or beinginconsiderate to each other. What Ihave not learned is whygovernments, cities, towns and ourown communities cannot do thesame. I am so thankful for all thatJohn Palmer has done for me in myprofessional and personal life.

I have spent more time living inVermont than any other place. Mostof my professional career has beendeveloped in Vermont and the New

England area. I am proud to be theVice President of the New EnglandTraffic Safety Association andcherish my long standinginvolvement in this group. If you arefrom New England, can you pleasestand. I could not be here todaywithout the opportunities andlearning experiences I received fromall of you. Thank you all for yoursupport, connections and the care Ifeel every day. Lindsay andMarquita, Jim, Cathy, Nancy, Bev,Joe and John: you will always be inmy heart. I am grateful to the staffand administration at PeoplesAcademy in Morrisville VT where Icontinue to teach Driver and TrafficSafety. It is an amazing place toteach because it has a wonderfuldedicated faculty and staff that putstudents first.

As for you, my ADTSEA family.I have worked with many of you.Together we have served on theboard, attended NSSP conferences,worked on committees, attended allsorts of conferences and workshops,and I am here to say thanks to youall. I accept this award with greatpride.

However my biggest thanksgoes to my family and one othercolleague, an amazing friend. First,my dad who would have turned 93in a few days would have been heretoday to celebrate with me but heunfortunately became ill in May andpassed away. If he was here hewould first have corrected anygrammar or spelling errors and thenwould say this speech is way toosappy. I miss my Parents every daybecause, as former teachers whototaled 75 years of teaching day inand day out, they taught me thevalue of education and the value ofbeing in the teaching profession.This is for you mom and dad and mysiblings Richard, Linda andJonathan.

I am also so grateful that myPartner of 24 years, Martha Abbott,could be with me today to share inthis moment. Martha continues to

teach me the importance ofcommitment to issues and causes.Martha has fought for years in thepolitical arena in areas of economicopportunity, education, equality,health care reform and ourenvironment. Thank you for yourunconditional love and support.

Lastly, I need to tell you my lifechanged tremendously when I tookmy first Driver Education class in1979. That class was taught by JohnHarvey. My introduction today wasoriginally to have the three J’s. Butas you know John Harvey is very illand unable to attend thisconference. I owe my professionalcareer to John. I consider him partof my family. He not only gave methe opportunity to grow and developas a teacher but as a leader. He hasbeen with me every step of the way.He encouraged me to run forpresident of the Vermont Driver andTraffic Safety Association. Heencouraged me to develop theparent program, the peerintervention program and, in 1982,he sent me to learn about a brandnew program called ProjectGraduation. I came back to Vermontafter the workshop and developedProject Graduation for the State ofVermont. For over 6 years I workedwith schools all over New Englandand presented workshops all overthe country on this program and in1986 I was awarded the outstandingteacher award (wasn’t it calledTeacher of the Year) from my districtand the State of Vermont. Thisaward is given annually to a K-12teacher. Harv encouraged me to runfor the board of directors of ADTSEAand then for president of ADTSEA.

I remember that day well. It wasin 1991. I was teaching DriverEducation and during my third periodblock the school secretary took a calland all she heard was the personon the line was the president fromWashington DC. She quickly got theprincipal who announced over theloud speaker that I had an important


The ChronicleADTSEA

(from page 8)

(continue on page 19)

call in the office and needed toreport immediately to the office.Another person came in to watchmy class. I was in great concern asyou all would be as I thoughtsomething happened to a familymember. When I got there thesecretary said: “The president of theUnited States is on the phone foryou.” I said “For me? What couldthat be about?” I could not believeit. So I answered the phone and,yes, it was a president and, yes, hewas in Washington DC but it wasJohn Harvey as President ofADTSEA in Washington DC for ameeting who needed to know if Iwanted to be on the ADTSEA ballotas president-elect. I looked at allthe people in the office and said:“Mister President, thank you for theoffer but I need to respectfullydecline.” And then John and I spokefor a few minutes and I hung up thephone. The inquiring minds wantedto know so I said it was anopportunity from a president that,at this time in my life, I could notaccept. A few years later when Johnasked again I did accept thechallenge. John would always bethe first person to come up and hugme and tell me how proud he wasafter I did a presentation. Then lateron that evening he would meet withme again and sit down and give mesome pointers on how I could doeven better. His endless energy,dedication and encouraging waysjust made you want to continue onto a higher level reaching for ahigher goal.

John when you see this videoknow that everyone here is thinkingof you, praying for you and missingyou. I am here tonight as the 2009Kaywood award winner because ofyou. I am here because you sawsomething in me as you have donefor so many others and highlightedmy strengths and helped improvemy weaknesses so I could becomea teacher and a leader in Traffic

Safety. “You are, truly, the windbeneath my sail.”

This is an exciting time for DriverEducation. In February I along withmany others here attended ameeting on the National Standardsproject. Stakeholders from all areaswere in attendance and we workedhard to help edit these standards.ADTSEA members including Dr.Robinson, David Huff and JohnHarvey were part of the committeeto develop this work. The results ofthis work will be presented onWednesday morning at thesecondary division. Jim Wright fromNHTSA will also be presenting theHighway Safety Program Guidelinesthat were published in March as partof the Highway Safety Act. Bothdocuments are a great step forward.

Dr. Kaywood’s greatest love wasworking with teachers and preparingthem to be Driver Educators.Honoring teachers is so veryimportant and valuable in ourprofession. I am so thankful to AAAfor its continued sponsorship of theTeacher Excellence award programthat was created during my ADTSEApresidency. Congratulations toeveryone who will be honored next.For it is you, the teacher, that makesthe difference in the lives of ourstudents.(from page 4)selecting, circling, stating, choosing,acting-out, labeling, naming, andlisting. Intermediate students areproficient in social English but theyare challenged in academic English.They can likely converse andunderstand spoken English,however, reading and writing grade-level English are trying. Ifintermediate students are literate ator above grade-level in their primarylanguage, they can successfullytransfer reading and writing skills intoEnglish. Intermediate students canparticipate in learning activities thatinvolve recalling, retelling, defining,describing, comparing, contrasting,summarizing, and restating.Advanced students are proficient insocial and nearly proficient in

academic English. Whereas theyspeak English fluently their difficultyin reading and writing English isevident during test-taking. Thesestudents can vary in their primarylanguage literacy skills which factorsinto their academic English adoption.Advanced students can participate inlearning activities that involveanalyzing, creating, defending,evaluating, justifying, supporting, andexplaining (Gonzales, Gerabagi andLopez-De La Garza, 2000).Strategies and Activities

It’s marvelous to watch a drivereducation class successfullymaneuver and progress through aseries of challenging lessons.Academic progress is best facilitatedwhen the teacher uses a variety ofinstructional strategies within anapproved driver educationcurriculum. Having English learningstudents necessitates usingprinciples of second languageacquisition. There are variousprofessional models such as theSheltered Instruction ObservationProtocol (SIOP) that providesteachers the means for helpingstudents gain knowledge and acquireEnglish concurrently (Vogt andEchevarria, 2007). The protocolbegins with clearly explainingexpectations—what students are todo and how they are to do it. Whenthe steps involved are written anddisplayed, orally presented, andmodeled by the teacher andstudents, English learners at alllevels of proficiency are better ableto meet the lesson’s content andlanguage objectives. Listening to theteacher’s lectures is not enough tograsp driver education content. Anystudent, especially one at beginningor intermediate levels of proficiency,requires demonstrations, photos,illustrations, and models to makesense of the words being spoken.Theconcurrence of content and languageacquisition is represented in:objectives, content (concepts and



Does virtual reality driving simulation training transfer to on-road driving innovice drivers? A pilot study

Caroline V. Cox, Charlottesville H.S, Rick Moncrief, MBFARR LLC, Richard Wharam,, AlbemarleH.S.,,Ronald Mourant Northeastern University, Daniel J. Cox , University of Virginia Health System

Though there is some researchsuggesting that both physical andpsychological fidelity areprerequisites; the presence of bothdoes not necessarily guaranteeeffective transfer of training (Hays,& Singer, 1989; Waller, Hunt, &Knapp, 1998). There is a Dutchreport documenting that high fidelityVRDT performance by novice driversdoes correlate with on-road drivingevaluations (de Wintera et al., 2009).A recent Canadian controlled studydemonstrated that driving simulationtraining improved specific on-roaddriving parameters of senior drivers(LavalliËre, Laurendeau, Tremblay,Simoneau & Teasdale, 2009).However, to date there are nopublished experimental studies of thebenefits of VRDT for novice drivers.The purpose of this study was toinvestigate whether training of novicedrivers on a high fidelity virtual realitysimulator transfers to on-road drivingperformance in a randomized,blinded, controlled study.MATERIALS AND METHODS

Participants: All participantswere recruited at the localDepartment of Motor Vehicles(Charlottesville, VA), at the timewhen they had passed their drivereducation test and had received theirlearners permit. Parents andteenagers were approached,informed about the study, and, ifinterested, were e-mailed a consentform to review. During a subsequenttelephone call, the IRB- approvedconsent form was reviewed. Theconsent form was then signed at thefirst visit by both the parent and theadolescent. Twenty subjects (agerange=15.5 to 16.6 years) wereconsented. Ten of all participantswere females. None of theparticipants had previous on-roaddriving experience.

Procedure: On-road drivertraining/evaluation- All participantsmet with a certified driving instructorat the Albemarle High School’s(Charlottesville, VA) driving range,where the instructor oriented thenovice driver to a Ford Taurus sedanwith dual brakes. Next, the instructormodeled for the participant how todrive through the driving range, thatincluded two left turns, three stopsigns/lines and cones along thecenter lane. Following this thestudent drove the range twice, withverbal instruction from the instructorfollowing each lap. Next, theinstructor drove the participant to aquiet residential community, wherethe student drove down four cul-de-sacs, and negotiated four right turns,with verbal instruction while drivingand at the end of each cul-de-sac.Finally, the participant drove on abusy rural road for five miles, againwith verbal instructions. Verbalinstruction focused on the variableslisted in Table 1. At the conclusionof this drive the instructor rated thestudent on the seven parametersthat appear in Table 1(C1-C7). Theinstructor rated each item in termsof “How well did the driverperformÖ.” on a scale from -3 =“Very Poor”, 0= “Neutral” to +3 =“Very Good”.Driving Simulator: The virtual realityModel T3 high f idelity drivingsimulator provides 1800 field of view,with rear and side view “mirror”images, optional 5-speed manualtransmission, turn signal, real sizebrake/gas pedals and steeringwheel,“shoulder seat belt, and airconditioner for temperature control.Model T3 has equivalent drivingscenarios. Each scenario involvesa 12 mile course that includes 3miles of rural, 5 miles of highway,

I

INTRODUCTIONAutomobile crashes are the

leading cause of death for teens inthe United States. This appears tobe a global phenomenon as othercountries report similar statistics.Vehicle crashes are significantlyhigher among young drivers duringthe first year of licensure, and crashrisks decline with increasedexperience. However, the morenewly licensed teenagers drive, thegreater their risk exposure. Thisproduces an interesting dilemmaabout how to provide young driverswith driving experience withoutsignificantly increasing their crashrisk (Simons-Morton, Hartos, 2003).Driving simulation may be thesolution to this dilemma, sinceexposure to hazardous drivingconditions can be simulated in acontrolled and repetitive way withoutendangering the lives of the driveror of those on the road with them.Driving simulators can providenovice teen drivers with experientiallearning in typical teen crashscenarios which would be difficult,if not impossible, to rehearse in thereal world precisely because of theirinherent danger.

Research indicates that transferof training from simulatedenvironments to the real world ismaximized when training ischaracterized by a high degree ofboth physical and psychologicalfidelity. While training of novicedrivers on a single monitor desk toplow fidelity simulator was notassociated with fewer collisions,Allen, Park, Cook and Fiorentino(2007) reported that training on ahigh fidelity driving simulator wasassociated with 2/3 rds fewercollisions in the first two years ofIindependent driving compared tothe general teen age population. (more on page 21)


The ChronicleADTSEA

In-Vehicle Cell Phone Blocking Systems: Implications for Teen Driving SafetyW. E. Van Tassel, Ph.D. AAA National Office and E. E. Floyd-Bann, Ed.D.Stetson University

In an attempt to protect teendrivers, companies are releasingtechnologies designed to preventteens from text messaging whiledriving. These solutions generallyblock incoming and outgoing cellularsignals through a variety of means.This article discusses the availabletypes of systems and what questionssurround their use and justification.

Numerous studies havedemonstrated that the use of cellphones while driving increasesdrivers’ risk. Some researchindicates that cell phone-usingdrivers are 400% more likely toexperience a collision (McEvoy, etal., 2005). Further, teen drivers havebeen shown to be very susceptibleto distractions, especially activitiesthat take their eyes off the road. Textmessaging has also been shown tobe very risky to teen drivers,although there is less research ontext messaging to date.

In response to these increasedrisks, many states prohibit teensfrom using cell phones while driving.Education efforts are also underway,including programs to help drivereducation instructors discuss thedangers of talking and textmessaging on cell phones whiledriving with their students (AAA,2007).

Technological solutions aimed atreducing the risks teen drivers faceare not new. For many years, “blackboxes” have been available toparents of teen drivers. Moreformally called event data recorders,these systems are capable ofcapturing data about how a teendrives, and of providing feedback toeither the driver, his or her parents,or both. These devices generallymeasure maximum speed, howaggressively the vehicle is driven(hard braking, acceleration andturning, measured viaaccelerometers), location (via GPS),and time spent driving. Somedevices also inform the driver whenhe or she is exceeding the speedlimit, and others are capable ofinforming parents when the teen

That is, are they reliable?Are parents willing to pay the

fees involved?To what degree might

parents who purchase such asystem use it as justification tobe less involved in the teen’slearning-to-drive process? Forexample, to what degree wouldthe parent conduct lesssupervised practice driving?

To what degree are attemptsto disable the system actuallydetected?

To what degree is it possiblefor a teen to actually defeat thesystem?

How likely are teens to justswap phones with a friend inorder to stay in touch whiledriving?

How do they affect therelationship between the teenand his/her parents?

Regardless of how thesesystems perform, distracted drivingremains an enormous threat totraffic safety. Teens, who areespecially susceptible todistractions while driving, deservespecial attention. Perhaps byapplying a multiple of approaches,including education, legislation andtechnology, the risks of distracteddriving among teens can bereduced. Hopefully, more researchwill be conducted soon on in-car cellphone blocking systems to assesstheir actual potential in reducingteens’ driving risk.

References

McEvoy, S.P.; Stevenson, M.R.;McCartt, A.T.; Woodward, M.;Haworth, C.; Palamara, P.; andCercarelli, R. 2005. Role of mobilephones in motor vehicle crashesresulting in hospital attendance: acase-crossover study. BritishMedical Journal 331(7514):428.

Text Messaging While Driving: “R UUP 2 Speed?” The ADTSEAChronicle, Fall 2008.

drives outside preset geographicboundaries (a.k.a., geofencing).Research continues on thesesystems, manufacturers of whichinclude Drivecam, GreenRoad, in-Drive and Tiwi, just to name a few.

The latest technological systemsare aimed squarely at cell phone usewhile driving. Using a variety ofapproaches, these in-car cell phoneblocking systems basically render adriver’s cell phone inoperable whilehe or she is driving. As a result, theteen driver cannot make or receivecalls, send or receive textmessages, access the internet, orsend or receive email. Oneexception: in case of emergency,drivers can still dial 911 or one ofseveral pre-programmed numbers(such as mom or dad) only.

These systems accomplish theirgoals through a variety ofapproaches, including:

Software integrated into thecell phone in concert with the cellphone service provider

Using a special housingaround the ignition key thatcommunicates to the system thatthe teen is driving

Creation of a no-cell “bubble”immediately around the driver

Locking the phone’s keypadwhen the vehicle exceeds 10mph and suppressing inboundcalls.Of course, any attempts to

“hack” the system to disable it areautomatically detected andimmediately reported to the parent-busted! Further, some of thesesystems also immediately alertparents of attempts to use the cellphone while driving, even if thesystem prevents its use.

In-car cell phone blockingsystems are relatively new to themarket. As such many questionsabout their performance andmarket potential still exist,including:

Do they do what they areclaimed to do? That is, are theyvalid?

Do they do so consistently?


The Chronicle ADTSEA(go to page 12)

A Letter to the Driver Education CommunityI am pleased to forward the recently published Novice Teen Driver Education and Training Administrative

Standards. This new document represents the best efforts of professionals from a wide spectrum of interests toprovide guidance that will enhance both the uniformity and professionalism of driver education across the Nation.

These administrative standards complete a set of three guidance documents that will assist States in planningand implementing effective driver education systems. Together with the model curriculum developed by theNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the American Driver and Traffic Safety Education Associationin 2005, and the model education standards introduced by the two organizations in 2007, these new administrativestandards provide a comprehensive framework for State driver education systems. The framework follows aprofessional education approach, allowing flexibility for local conditions and efficiency for periodic technical updates,while promoting consistency and quality assurance across programs and among States.

We called on leading experts in the driver education professional community to take on the task of creatingthese administrative standards – and we look for their assistance in implementing them. Ultimately, it will be thedriver education professional community that will play the key role in promoting and implementing the standards.The driver education state administrators, teachers (both private and public), curriculum developers, researchers,school owners, and association members must recognize the importance of agreeing on common principles inorder to move forward.

NHTSA will help. We will encourage the highway safety community to promote these standards and tosupport efforts to maintain, upgrade and expand their State driver education system. NHTSA will also take partin efforts to bring the wide spectrum of driver education professionals and organizations together to coordinateuniform delivery of driver education and acceptance of professional standards.

NHTSA supported the development of this document, but these standards are not NHTSA’s creation. Theyrepresent the best thinking of the driver education community. As a highway safety professional, you can play animportant role in implementing these standards and improving driver education systems across the nation. Ithank you in advance for your efforts. Brian McLaughlin, Senior Associate Administrator

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Novice Teen Driver Education and Training Administrative StandardsThis publication is distributed by the U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in the interest ofinformation exchange. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarilythose of the U.S. Department of Transportation or the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The United States Governmentassumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. If trade names, manufacturers’ name, or specific products are mentioned, it isbecause they are considered essential to the object of the publication and should not be construed as an endorsement. The UnitedStates Government does not endorse products or manufacturers.Forward

A driver’s license representsconsiderable freedom to a youngperson. Parents, too, may eagerlylook forward to the additional helpthat a teen driver provides to anAmerican household. In addition,mobility is an important factor fortoday’s teens as well as a key factorin the economic and social growthof our country. Teens view thismobility as evidence of becomingadults. Unfortunately, thesefreedoms and conveniences comeat a high price, which continues tobe paid via traffic-related fatalities,life-altering injuries, and economiccosts. Crashes continue to be theleading cause of death amongAmerican teens, accounting formore than one third of all deaths of

16- to 19-year-olds. The crash rateis greatest among 16-year-olds, whohave the most limited drivingexperience and an immaturity thatoften results in risk-taking behind thewheel.1 This segment of new drivershas been over-represented in U.S.crash statistics since tracking beganand continues this distinction incurrent driving populationdemographics. The social costs ofthese senseless tragedies areimmeasurable.

While the value of novice teendriver training and education haslong been a subject of debateamong researchers,2 educators, andothers in the transportation andtraffic safety community, it continuesto be the primary introduction to thedriving task for American teens.

McKnight3 (1985) writes, “…it isclearly something of a distortion toattribute accidents to drivereducation just because it leads todriving. Any group of people thatdrive will have accidents. Byagreeing to license them, societyaccepts that risk. Driver education issimply a means of achieving asocially accepted goal.” Enhancingconsistency and providing guidanceto States seeking to improve thenovice teen driver education andtraining experience was the goal ofthe Working Group as it convenedto craft the Novice Teen DriverEducation and TrainingAdministrative Standards.

The implementation of theresulting standards is a first step andis intended to assist driver education


The ChronicleADTSEA

(from page 11)

(more on page 13)

and training professionals inproviding the administrativeframework to teach novice teendrivers the skills and transfer theknowledge necessary to perform assafe and competent drivers, therebycontributing to the reduction ofcrashes, fatalities, and injuries. TheWorking Group deliberated,considered the current evidence,and reached consensus on thematerial that follows. It reflects thecollective knowledge andexperience of both research andpractice in driver education andtraining today.

This document represents acollaborative process by public,private professional, parental,government, nonprofit, and researchorganizations to identify anddevelop standards for an ideal Statedriver education and trainingprogram. This document is a startingpoint, and the Working Grouprecognizes that in some standardareas there is insufficient researchand data to determine the idealstandard. In these instances, thestandards represent the highestlevel of expert design upon whichthe Working Group could agree.

Much like the initiation andevolution of best graduated driverlicensing (GDL) practices, thesedriver education and trainingadministrative standards must beaccompanied by a commitment forongoing funding and research totest, refine, and redefine the bestpractices for the ideal State drivereducation and training program. Thenext step should include consensuscurriculum content standards andbenchmarks.Preamble

The Novice Teen DriverEducation and TrainingAdministrative Standards set forth inthis document serve to guide allnovice teen driver education andtraining programs in States strivingto provide quality, consistent drivereducation and training. While noting

American Driver and TrafficSafety Education Association;AAA Foundation for TrafficSafety; andDriving School Association of theAmericas.Identify differences in the

approaches currently used by Statesand other programs to determinewhat modifications are needed toensure uniformity and acceptanceby public and private drivereducation and training programs.

Assemble a Working Groupconsisting of program administratorsand driver education and trainingspecialists, both public and private,as well as other stakeholders, todevelop draft standards, guidelines,monitoring and evaluationapproaches, and oversighttechniques.

Devise standards and guidelinesfor overseeing public and privatedriver education and trainingprograms to ensure program qualityupon delivery, including monitoringand evaluation recommendations.

Present the Working Groupmaterial at a national conference ondriver education and trainingattended by key driver educationand training providers from Stategovernment driver education andtraining administrators and privateentities. Ensure conferenceattendees have the opportunity tocomment and provide feedback onthe draft standards; discussimplementation strategydevelopment; and recommendmechanisms for update, change,and follow-through on themaintenance of the standards.

The Working Group determinedthat standards should be establishedfor the following topic areas:

Program Administration;Education/Training;Instructor Qualification;Parent/Guardian Involvement;Coordination with Driver

Licensing.

that administering educationstandards and policies are a State’sright, these standards were createdto serve as an anchor for Statepolicies on driver education andtraining with the followingunderstandings:

The goal of driver education andtraining is to transfer knowledge,develop skills, and enhance thedisposition of the teen, so he/she canperform as a safe and competentdriver, thereby contributing to thereduction of crashes, fatalities, andinjuries.

Driver education and trainingshould be an integral part of the GDLsystem.

Driver development should be alifelong learning process.

Driver education and trainingshould be a phased educationprocess.

Driver education and trainingstandards should help anorganization be successful inadministering and/or providingquality and uniform driver educationand training, consistent with thelatest advances in methodology,subject matter, and technology.

Any standard promulgated fordriver education and training must besupported with a communicationstrategy for all stakeholders.BackgroundThese standards were developed byrepresentatives from the drivereducation professional communitywith assistance from NHTSA. Theapproach to developing thesestandards was as follows:

Review a cross-section of State-level driver education and trainingstandards, curriculum content, anddelivery requirements to determinehow they can help shape nationalstandards of oversight, delivery,monitoring, and evaluation of Stateand local driver education andtraining programs. Research, review,and compare driver education andtraining-related documents from thefollowing stakeholder organizations:

NHTSA;


The Chronicle ADTSEA(Continued on page 14)

(from page 12)The comments from conference

attendees were considered by theWorking Group and were includedwhere appropriate. Standards foreach topic area are presented on thefollowing pages.Dedication

The organizations involved increating these National Standardsacknowledged the exemplarycontributions of one of the authors,Mr. John Harvey. Of all thoseinvolved in the development of thefollowing National Standards, JohnHarvey embodies the collectiveeffort of all those who have toiled toelevate the status and effectivenessof driver education. John haslabored mightily for more than 40years in numerous states and at thenational level to make young driverssafe, as he does now as the DriverEducation Program Manager inOregon. He has inspired us to putaside differences, work together andfind common ground, for the sakeof the nation’s youth. We arethankful for his leadership and forthis we dedicate these nationalstandards to “Harv.”1.0 Program Administration

All entities delivering drivereducation and training should betreated fairly and equitably, meet thesame quality standards, and haveequitable access to State drivereducation and training resources.Most States may have a multitudeof public and private novice teendriver education and trainingprograms. Each State may havedifferent administrative andprovisional structures. Alternativedelivery (e.g., online, parent-taught,and correspondence) programs canbe either public or private, may nothave a physical location, and aresubject to varying requirements setforth by the State.1.1. Management, Leadership,and Administration

Each State should:1.1.1 have a single agency, orcoordinated agencies, informed by

an advisory board of stakeholdersand charged with overseeing allnovice teen driver education andtraining programs. That agencyshould have authority andresponsibility for theimplementation, monitoring,evaluation, and enforcement ofthese standards. This agencyshould also be charged withdeveloping and executingcommunication strategies to informparents and the public about drivereducation and training issues. Inaddition, the agency should informproviders in a timely fashion aboutchanges to laws, regulations, andprocedures.1.1.2 carefully choose a Stateagency that is best suited and ideallynot a direct provider of drivereducation to administer a statewideeducation and training program thatcan provide needed and appropriateregulatory environment, oversight,monitoring, evaluation, review andapproval processes, professionaldevelopment, and all otheradministrative actions that makeavailable a quality driver educationand training program to all age-eligible residents.1.1.3 have a full-time, funded Stateadministrator for driver educationand training. This individual shouldmeet or exceed the qualificationsand training required by the Statefor a novice teen driver educationand training instructor and/or schoolowner or possesses equivalentexperience or qualifications. Thisadministrator should be anemployee of the agency that hasoversight of driver education andtraining.1.1.4 have standardized monitoring,evaluation/auditing, and oversightprocedures to ensure that everydriver education and trainingprogram uses a curriculum withwritten goals and objectives.1.1.5 have a program renewalprocess to ensure that curriculummaterial and procedures are current.

1.1.6 adopt an instructorcertification renewal process.1.1.7 approve driver education andtraining programs that conform toapplicable State and nationalstandards.1.1.8 deny or revoke approval ofdriver education and trainingprograms that do not conform toapplicable State and nationalstandards.1.1.9 ensure that programs reflectmulticultural education principlesand are free of bias.1.1.10 administer applications forlicensing of driver education andtraining instructors, including owner/operators of public and privateproviders.1.1.11 develop and executemonitoring, evaluation, and auditingprocedures to ensure standards aremet by public and private providers.1.1.12 adopt goals, objectives, andoutcomes for learning.1.1.13 develop criteria to assessand approve programs, curricula,and provider ef fectiveness.Financial and/or administrativesanctions for non-compliance withthe State application and approvalprocesses and/or standards shouldbe provided to all applicants andprovide remediation opportunities todriver education and trainingprograms when sanctions areissued.1.1.14 establish and maintain aconflict resolution system fordisputes between the State agencyand local driver education andtraining programs.1.1.15 require, provide, or ensurethe availability of ongoingprofessional development forinstructors to include updates inbest education and trainingmethods and material.1.1.16 require all public and privatedriver education and trainingproviders to report program data tothe designated State agency so thatperiodic evaluations of the State’sdriver education and training


The ChronicleADTSEA

programs can be completed andmade available to the public.1.1.17 ensure that studentinformation submitted to the agencyor used by the agency remainsconfidential, as required byapplicable State and Federalregulations.1.1.18 ensure that all novice teendriver education and trainingprograms, instructors, andassociated staff possess necessaryoperating licenses and credentialsrequired by the State.1.1.19 ensure that each drivereducation and training provider hasan identified person to administerday-to-day operations, includingresponsibility for the maintenance ofstudent records and filing of reportswith the State in accordance withState regulations.1.1.20 ensure that all materials,equipment, and vehicles are safeand in proper condition to conductquality, effective driver educationand training.1.1.21 refer to a general standardfor online education such as thoseestablished by the North AmericanCouncil for Online Learning in theabsence of national standardsspecific to the delivery of onlinedriver education or online teacherpreparation.1.1.22 ensure that the instruction ofnovice teen drivers is completedusing concurrent and integratedclassroom and in-car instructionwhere the bulk of the classroominstruction occurs close in time tothe in-car instruction to ensure themaximum transfer of skills.

The in-car instruction can beenhanced with simulation or driving range instruction.2.0 Education/Training

2.1 Each State should:2.1.1 have driver education andtraining that meets or exceedscurrent nationally accepted contentstandards and benchmarks.2.1.2 approve curricula that are

based on nationally recognized standards such as ADTSEA andDSAA – Attachments E and F. EachState retains authority in determiningwhat curricula meet its Statestandards. Other resources includeAAA4 and NIDB.5

2.1.3 regulate the use of simulationand driving ranges.2.1.4 require an approved end-of-course knowledge and skillassessment examination based onthe stated goals and objectives tograduate from the driver educationand training program.2.1.5 require a course provider toconduct valid post-courseevaluations of driver education andtraining programs to be completedby the students and/or parent for thepurpose of improving theeffectiveness of the program (aresource for help in conducting theseevaluations is the AAA Foundationfor Traffic Safety6).2.1.6 require core driver educationalhours that focus on the driving taskand safe driving practices sufficientto meet the criteria established bythe end-of-course examination. Toenable States to select theappropriate guidelines for contacthours to meet the desired outcomes,the following instructional timeshould be:

First stage education:Minimum of 45 hours of

classroom/theory;Minimum of 10 hours of behind

the wheel instruction;10 hours in-car observation;

2.1.7 require distributive learningSecond stage education;Minimum of 10 hours; and.

3.0 Instructor Qualifications3.1 Each State should:

3.1.1 require the followingprerequisites for instructors receivingcertification and recertification:a) possession of a valid driver ’slicense, as recognized by the State.b) have an acceptable drivingrecord as determined by the State.c) pass a Federal and State

criminal background check.d) meet health or physicalrequirements as determined by theState.e) achieve a minimum academiceducation requirement asdetermined by the State.f) meet a minimum agerequirement as determined by theState.3.1.2 require instructors to completeapproved standardized instructortraining that applies to instructorsand teachers in all public and privatedriver education and trainingprograms. This preparation shouldinclude a course of study that is noless than 120 hours of preparatorytime. (See Attachment B, InstructorQualifications Statement)3.1.3 require instructors to receivetraining in accepted best practicesin course delivery and evaluationsusing various delivery modalities.3.1.4 require that an instructor passa State-approved practical and/orwritten exam (e.g., Praxis II, NationalTeacher Certification Program[available at www.ADTSEA.org]).3.1.5 require annual continuingeducation and professionaldevelopment hours for instructors.3.1.6 require an annual drivingrecord review for instructors.4.0 Parent Involvement

4.1 Each State should:4.1.1 require the parent of a teendriver education and training studentto attend a parent seminar, pre-course, or the initial session of theteen’s driver education and trainingcourse. This session should outlinethe parent’s responsibility andopportunity to reduce his or herteen’s crash risk in several ways,including modeling safe drivingbehavior. Information conveyed tothe parent in this session shouldinclude, but not be limited to, thefollowing known best practices ofGDL and parental involvement:a) Manage the novice driver ’slearning-to-drive experience to

(from page 13)

(continued on page 15)



determine the readiness of the teento begin the process, and supervisethe teen’s driving so that the parentcan better determine the teen’sreadiness to advance to the nextlicensing stage and assume broaderdriving privileges;b) Supervise an extended learnerpermit period of at least six monthsthat provides at least weeklyopportunities for the novice driver toaccumulate a minimum of 50 hoursof supervised practice driving in awide variety of increasinglychallenging circumstances. Hoursof supervised practice drivingrequired in GDL should not bereduced by a novice driver ’sparticipation in other drivereducation and training programs,nor should any other activity beconsidered a substitute.c) Supervise an extendedintermediate license period thattemporarily restricts drivingunsupervised with teen passengersand during nighttime hours until theState’s GDL requirements havebeen met and the parent determinesthe teen’s readiness to driveunsupervised in these high riskconditions; andd) Negotiate and adopt a writtenagreement between the teen andparent that reflects the expectationsof both teen and parent and clearlydefines the restrictions, privileges,rules, and consequences that willserve as the basis for the teen toearn and for the parent to grantprogressively broader drivingprivileges.4.1.2 require a parent to complete adebriefing with the driver traininginstructor to inform the parent of theprogress and proficiency of the teendriver. This final session shouldinclude a reminder that it is theparent who must ultimatelydetermine the teen’s readiness toobtain a license with full drivingprivileges and of the parent’ sresponsibility and important role in

helping the teen to become a safedriver.5.0 Coordination With DriverLicensing 5.1 Each State should:5.1.1 have a formal system forcommunication and collaborationbetween the State driver educationand training agency and the Statedriver licensing authority. Thissystem should allow sharing ofinformation between drivereducation and training program/course administrators and theState’s driver licensing authority.5.1.2 have a GDL system thatincludes, incorporates, or integratesdriver education and training.Completion of driver education andtraining should not reduce the timerequirements in the GDL process.5.1.3 provide information andeducation on novice teen drivingrequirements and restrictions tojudges, courts, and law enforcementofficials charged with adjudicating orenforcing GDL laws.5.14 ensure that sanctions fornoncompliance with GDLrequirements by novice teen driversare developed and enforceduniformly.5.1.5 require a parent to submitState-specified documentation thatcertifies completion of requiredsupervised hours in a manner thatreduces the possibility of fraudulententries.5.1.6 ensure that State licensingtests are empirically based andreflect performance competencies ofthe standards-based drivereducation and training programoutlined in the previous sections ofthis document.5.1.7 develop and implement a validand reliable driver’s knowledge andskills test that assesses factorsassociated with the novice teendriver’s ability to reduce driving risks.Attachment A – DefinitionsAdministrator – manager (affairs, agovernment, etc.); having executivecharge of.

Advanced driving skill program – anadditional driving program designedto promote safe driving skills outsideof the novice training.Alternative delivery – delivery of thetheory portion of driver educationusing channels other than thetraditional classroom, such asInternet-based, correspondence-based, and parent-taught.Behind-the-wheel – actualinstructional driving time duringwhich the novice teen driver driveson streets and highways, and isguided by an instructor in the frontpassenger seat. Observation is notincluded in behind-the-wheel time.Certification – to award a certificateto a person attesting to thecompletion of a course of study orthe passing of a qualifyingexamination.Classroom content – that part of thedriver education and trainingprogram that imparts the knowledge,theory, principles, laws, rules, bestpractices, and related curriculumcontent through student-centeredactivities, lecture, media,programmed instruction,independent study, correspondence,and other effective techniques.Classroom setting – the delivery ofthe classroom portion of thecurriculum is not limited to atraditional physical location, butincludes the services of aprofessional instructor/facilitator in avariety of physical, real-time, online,and video settings. It may includehome-based and parent-taught orparent-facilitated venues in whichcase the services of a professionalinstructor may or may not berequired depending on State law. Itdoes not include observation time orbehind-the-wheel instruction.Concurrent instruction – the practiceof using in-vehicle, classroom,simulation, and driving range-basedteaching methods simultaneously.Confidential – spoken, written, actedupon, etc., in strict privacy.

(from page 14)



The ChronicleADTSEA

Consistent – agreeing or accordant;compatible; not self-contradictory;constantly adhering to the sameprinciples, course, form, etc.Content – the subject matter taughtin driver education and training.Correspondence-based drivereducation – a driver educationprogram in which the classroom/theory portion is completed by thestudent at the student’s homelocation and at the student’ spersonal pace.Credential(s) –evidence of authority,status, rights, entitlement toprivileges, or the like, usually inwritten form.Curriculum – the overall program ofinstruction, including classroom,behind-the-wheel, observation,simulation, or driving rangeinstruction. Generally required to beapproved by the State in which theprogram is delivered.Distributive learning – where theacquisition of knowledge and skillsis spread over a longer period ofdays and weeks with fewer hours ofinstruction in a day, as opposed tofewer days and weeks, but moredaily hours of instruction resulting inthe same amount of hours.Driving log – a written record ofsupervised motor vehicle operationtime maintained by the student andauthenticated by the parent/drivingsupervisor.Driving range – a defined roadwaycourse closed to public traffic andallowing for the re-creation ofvarious basic driving scenarios,used for driver training.Driving range instruction – use of aclosed course to instruct novice teendrivers.Evaluate (evaluation) – to examineand judge carefully; appraise,usually applied to studentsthroughout their driver andeducation and training program.Graduated driver licensing (GDL) –a State-run and enforced systemunder which novice teen driver

privileges are granted in phases torestrict beginners’ initial experiencebehind the wheel to lower-risksituations. The restrictions graduallyare lifted, as experience is gained sonovice teen drivers are moreexperienced and mature when theyget their full, unrestricted licenses.Immediately sequential – occurringwithin 72 hours of the first phase.In-car instruction – consists ofbehind-the-wheel training andobservation training time.In-vehicle assessment techniques –approach used by an instructor tomonitor and objectively measurestudent vehicle operation and safedriving behaviors.Instruction techniques – approachused by an instructor to transmitinformation to students.Instructor – the person who deliversthe curriculum; includes certifiedclassroom and behind-the-wheelinstructors.Intermediate permit – the mid-phasedriving permit in the GDL system.Knowledge – the fact or state ofknowing; the perception of fact ortruth; clear and certain mentalapprehension; acquaintance withfacts, truths, or principles, as fromstudy or investigation.Learner permit – the initial drivingpermit in the GDL system.Licensing (for novice teen drivers) –formal permission from agovernmental authority to operate amotor vehicle on public roadway.Licensing (for driving schools) –formal permission from agovernmental or other constitutedauthority to operate a driving school.Lifelong learning – the ongoingformal and informal acquisition ofknowledge or skills.Measure – to ascertain the extent,dimensions, quantity, capacity, etc.,of, especially by comparison with astandard; to judge or appraise bycomparison with something orsomeone else.Monitoring, evaluation/auditing– recording, regulating, or controlling

a process or system.Multistage driver education – asystem where combined phases ofclassroom/theory and behind-the-wheel instruction are delivered atdifferent times to enhance learning.That is, a portion of the requiredclassroom and behind-the-wheelinstruction is completed, then theparent conducts supervised drivingfor a specified time or amount, thenthe novice teen driver returns for theremaining classroom and behind-the-wheel instruction.Novice teen driver – any teen whofalls under the jurisdiction of theState’s GDL system.Novice teen driver education andtraining – classroom instruction andsupervised driving practice withinstructors, training material, andprocedures to reduce risk-taking andimprove safety decision-making forthese drivers.Observation time – instructional timewhereby novice teen drivers observea behind-the-wheel lesson andreceive perceptual practice in howto manage time and space for riskreduction outcomes.Online – a driver education programin which the classroom/theoryportion is delivered via the Internet.Parent - a parent, guardian or othermentor responsible for managing anovice teen driver’s learning-to-driveexperienceParent-taught driver education – asystem whereby parents/guardiansare authorized to be their noviceteen drivers’ driving instructors andable to perform either or both theclassroom and behind-the-wheelinstruction responsibilities.Phased education – the incrementalintroduction of concepts, skills, andtechniques based on the acquisitionof foundational knowledge.Private driving school – a drivereducation program that is deliveredby a business entity.Professional development – theongoing acquisition of knowledge,skills, and awareness of new or

(continued on page 17 )

(from page 15)



emerging issues by drivinginstructors, generally required as acondition of certification as aninstructor by a State.Program – the full scope of deliveryof novice teen driver education,including both classroom/theory andbehind-the-wheel instruction.Provider – the legal entity (“private”or “public”) that offers a drivereducation program.Public driving school – a drivereducation program that is deliveredby a political subdivision of the State.Report – to give or render a formalaccount or statement of.Second-stage driver education andtraining – education and training thatoccurs after formal driver educationand training is completed. This caninclude classroom and/or behind thewheel and is conducted under thesupervision of a qualified drivereducation and training instructor.Simulation – using interactivecomputer programs which imitatereal or imaginary driving scenarios.Often used to create events thatwould normally be impossible,difficult, or dangerous to the noviceteen driver ( www.learning.ac.nz/mod/glossary/view.php).Simulator – a replica of basic vehiclecontrols and instruments that allowsstudent response to drivingsituations. An electromechanicaldevice designed to represent thedriver ’s compartment of theautomobile and with the use of films,video programs, or computer-generated multimedia attempts todevelop judgment, decision-makingskills, behavior response, andmanipulative skills essential inlearning to drive.Skill – the ability, coming from one’sknowledge, practice, aptitude, etc.,to do something well; competentexcellence in performance.Standard – something considered byan authority or by general consentas a basis of comparison; anapproved model; a rule or principle

that is used as a basis for judgment.Standardized – to bring to or makeof an established standard size,weight, quality, strength, or the like.Theory – while “theory” specificallyrefers to the general principles of thebody of knowledge related to driving,including the ideal set of facts,principles and circumstances fordriving, it is sometimes used as asubstitute for “classroom” whenreferring to driver education - as in“...the classroom or theory portion ofdriver education.”Attachment B - InstructorQualifications StatementQuality instructor training is thebackbone of quality driver educationand training; therefore it is animportant component for helping toproduce a safe teen driver.1.1 Instructors should be required tocomplete approved standardizedinstructor training that applies toinstructors/teachers in all public andprivate driver education and trainingprograms. This preparation shouldinclude a course of study that is noless than 120 hours of preparatorytime.1.2 Courses to prepare instructor/teachers should include both theoryand laboratory education. Thefollowing competencies forclassroom and in-car instructionshould be achieved:

Ability to recognize and explain thegeneral nature of the drivers’ taskwithin the highway transportationsystem and the consequences ofsystem failures;

Ability to apply risk management skills to the task of driving as adriver or passenger;

Ability to apply and explain theprinciples of perception to riskmanagement when operating amotor vehicle;

Ability to apply and explain thetechniques for managing risk whenoperating a motor vehicle over pre-selected on- and off-street activities;

Ability to recognize and identifyphysical, social, and psychological

influences that can affect motorvehicle operator performance;

Ability to demonstrate conceptsand generalizations that enable oneto make objective decisionsregarding the:

use of alcoholic beverages anddrugs;

use of occupant restraints andprotective devices;

consequences of speed selection;consequences of fatigue, drowsy

driving, and road rage;environmental factors that

influence the decision-makingprocess;

use of visual skills to obtainappropriate information to makereduced-risk decisions in low,moderate, and high risk drivingenvironments;

management of time, space, andvisibility when operating a motorvehicle;

interaction with other roadwayusers in a positive manner;

demonstration of balanced vehiclemovement;

additional skills practice withparents/guardians/mentors;

identification of laws, rules, andregulations that govern the smoothmovement of traffic;

use of current methodologies forproviding classroom instruction indriver education includingorganization, classroommanagement, and technologies; and

use of current methodologies forproviding in-car instruction in drivereducation including routedevelopment, giving directions,positive evaluation feedback, andevaluating driver performance;

Ability to identify and support rulesand regulations governing a State’sGDL program;

Ability to demonstrate knowledgeof the State-specific rules of theroad;

Ability to demonstrate vehicleoperation and control from the rightpassenger position;

(from page 16)

(continued on page 18 )


The ChronicleADTSEA

Ability to provide oral instruction;Ability to develop training routes;Ability to develop task breakdown

explanations;Ability to conduct performance

assessments and evaluations; andAbility to contact first aid resources

in the event of an emergency. 1.3 Each State should require thatcourses offered to fulfill instructorpreparatory requirements includethe following outline and topics:1.3.1 Driver task analysis: a coursethat is designed as a prerequisite toprovide instructors with the contentknowledge and skills necessary toteach driver education and to attainestablished instructorcompetencies. These suggestedtopics are a minimum and may beexpanded:

Preparing for State-administeredwritten examination;

The task of the driver in thehighway transportation system(HTS);

Personal factors influencingoperator performance;

Motor vehicles laws, regulations,and their application;

Managing risk within the HTS;Sensory perception and

performance of the driving task;Improving driver performance;Motor vehicle performance

capabilities and maintenance;Legal and moral obligations

relative to using the HTS;Trip-planning;Student learning styles;Instructional technique and

pedagogy;Student evaluation and

management;Instructor/ student-centered

activities; andPreliminary driver performance

audit.1.3.2 Vehicle operational andinstructional skills: a course that isdesigned to provide instructors withthe knowledge and skills necessaryto successfully conduct in-car

instruction, provide a safe learningenvironment while doing so, andevaluate new driver performance.

Risk management principles indriving situations;

Factors that influence learning andhabit development;

Standards for driver performance;Laboratory learning environments;Planning and preparing for

instructional performances andoutcomes;

Planning vehicle operationalexperiences;

Planning off-street laboratoryexperiences;

Planning on-street laboratoryexperiences;

Techniques for studentperformance assessment;

Involving mentors in the learningprocess;

Local curriculum and programneeds; and

Crash avoidance.1.3.3 Classroom knowledge: acourse designed to provide theinstructor with the knowledge andskills necessary to provide qualitystudent centered classroominstruction, successfully manage theclassroom, and provide forappropriate student evaluation andassessment.

Course introduction, schedulingand grading;

Risk management principles in alldriving situations;

Influencing learning and habitdevelopment;

Standards of driver performance;Classroom learning environments;Planning for classroom

experiences;Planning for computer-assisted

instruction;Instructor characterist ics and

techniques;Planning for simulation-based

instruction;Assessment of student

performances;Course assessments;

Planning for local curriculum andprogram needs;

Classroom lesson plandevelopment;

Classroom lesson presentation;and

Knowledge of State rules of theroad, driver licensing, and penaltiesfor improper driver behavior.

Attachment C - The WorkingGroup

Bud Chauncy, Owner, First ClassDriving School, Bossier City, LA; PastPresident, Driving School Association ofthe Americas (DSAA)

Troy Costales, Governor’sRepresentative and Director, OregonDOT, Traffic Safety Division

Barbara Harsha, ExecutiveDirector, Governor’s Highway SafetyAssociation (GHSA)

John Harvey, Program Manager,Driver Education, Oregon DOT, TrafficSafety Division; Past Chairman of theBoard, Driver Education and TrainingAdministrators (DETA)

David Huff, Director, Montana Officeof Public Instruction, Traffic EducationProgram/Driver Education; Chairman ofthe Board, DETA

John Kennedy, Group VicePresident, National Safety Council

Kevin Lewis, Vice President ofDriver Programs, American Associationof Motor Vehicle Administrators(AAMVA)

Dan Mayhew, Senior VicePresident, Traffic Injury ResearchFoundation

Jim Nichols, Highway SafetyResearcher

Debbie Prudhomme, Owner,Training Wheels Driver Education,Maple Grove, MN; Central VicePresident, DSAA

Kevin Quinlan– NationalTransportation Safety Board (NTSB)Marshal Rafael – NTSB

Allen Robinson – Chief ExecutiveOfficer, American Driver and TrafficSafety Educator Association (ADTSEA)

John Svensson, President, Training& Research Institute of Advanced DriverDevelopment (TRIADD); President,DSAA

William Van Tassel, Manager ofDriver Training Operations, AAA

(from page 17)



(from page 8)subject), methods (adaptations andmeaningful activities), materials (andsupplements) and evaluation. Thelesson should not only belinguistically appropriate (teachingand emphasizing key vocabulary)but culturally relevant (connectingthe lesson to students’ backgroundsand past learning experiences).During implementation, the teachershould:

maintain a speech appropriatefor student proficiency levels (i.e.,slower rate, enunciation,and simple sentences forbeginners);

explain clearly the academictask(s); and

reinforce the lesson’s conceptsand content through modeling,realia, visuals, h a n d s - o nactivities, demonstrations, gestures,body language, etc.

While content objectives areassessed during and at the end ofthe lesson, the teacher candetermine who has met them andwho has not. To ensure achievementby all students, differentiatedinstruction might be necessary.Differentiated instruction means allstudents progress toward the sameobjectives, but in different ways, invarying grouping configurations, andperhaps with modified texts andinstructional materials.

Although reading materials instandard driver education curriculaare appropriate for students at theadvanced student proficiency level,the readings and worksheets areprobably not suited for beginningand intermediate level students.Thus, the materials, includinghandouts and tests, must beadapted for English learners’comprehensibility and accessibility.While doing so, the driver educationteacher must guard against“dumbing down” the concepts andcontent taught to English learners.This is unacceptable since allstudents, regardless of home

language, must have access toappropriate grade-level contentconcepts and vocabulary.

Students acquiring English mustpractice the language. The drivereducation teacher can facilitateEnglish proficiency by providingactivities and opportunities thatpromote the frequent use of English.Simply put, the more a student usesEnglish the more proficient he/shebecomes.Sample Lesson

Here is a sample lesson on right-of-way principles that has beendesigned to meet the learning needsof students at all proficiency levels.Note how the lesson encouragesstudents to learn both the drivereducation content and the Englishlanguage concurrently. The contentobjectives are specific to right-of-way principles and consistent withthe DMV Driver’s Manual that isgenerally written at the sixth gradereading level (Miller, 2006).Language objectives are especiallymeant for English learners todevelop their ability to usevocabulary as it relates to who yieldsthe right-of-way to whom in varioustraffic situations. A total class timeof 50 minutes has been allotted tothe lesson.

The lesson opens with abrainstorming activity that allows theteacher to determine students’entering behavior (i.e., existingcontent knowledge and languageproficiency) by posing pictures andasking questions related to students’perception, interpretation andunderstanding of traffic situationsrequiring right-of-way decisions.This might require increased waittime for students to understand whatis expected of them and preparetheir responses. Next, the instructordelivers a lecture on the 9 principlesof right-of-way accompanied byteacher demonstrations usingmagnetic cars on the marker-board(i.e., manipulatives). All the while,the teacher refers to key vocabulary

terms conspicuously posted in theclassroom. After that, students workcooperatively in small groups toanswer a fill-in-the-space worksheeton right-way decisions in 9 trafficsituations. With time remaining, onestudent from each group, preferablyan emerging English learner, isencouraged to present his/hergroup’s responses from theworksheet. The students can alsoexpect an end of unit test on thematerial covered. A homeworkassignment is issued directingstudents to interview their parent(s)about the latter’s experiences infollowing right-of-way principles onthe road. To clearly communicateexpectations for this assignment, theteacher can enter into a “mock”interview in front of the class byplaying the role of parent and havinga volunteer student pose thequestions.

Throughout this lesson areopportunities for the teacher toreinforce key vocabulary andencourage student expressionsthrough social and academicEnglish. For example, all studentscan maintain a personal dictionaryof driver education terminology.During the brainstorming activity,students at all proficiency levels aresolicited for their initialunderstanding of right-of-way inintersections. If a student hesitatesand displays difficulty in describingthe illustration, the teacher can directhis/her attention to the postedvocabulary while enunciating therespective term(s). If necessary, theinstructor can rephrase rather thanrepeat what is expected of thestudents.

While lecturing on the 9principles of right-of-way, the teacherexplains concepts, delivered at anappropriate pace, and demonstratesthrough magnetic cars andillustrations on the marker board. Astudent appearing either inattentiveor confused can be asked to assist



The ChronicleADTSEA

( from page 19)


the teacher in demonstrating whoyields to whom in given situations.To engage more students in thelecture, the teacher can rely onhand-signaling, a series of handgestures originally designed forbehind-the-wheel instruction ofhard-of-hearing students (seeappendix to this article). The smallgroup work should probably becomposed of students of allproficiency levels with membersurged to talk amongst each other.The teacher can experiment withother configurations (e.g.,cooperative groups, in pairs,working with teacher, etc.). Whereaseach group member benefits fromthe supportive and informativenature of the group dynamic, theultimately goal is for each studentto be able to represent his/her groupin reporting results to the wholeclass. Some students may needmore group work. Others mightrequire more modeling by teacherand other students. Eventually, eachstudent should rely less upon thegroup as he/she moves towardworking independently. Of course,the end of the unit test would be ameasure of content mastery. Thehomework assignment is anopportunity to connect both learningof content and language to thestudents’ cultural backgrounds. Byinterviewing parents and thenwriting a transcript, the studentspractice their reading and writingskills.Lesson: Right-of-WayContent objective(s)

The student will be able to listand describe the right-of-wayprinciples at intersections, mergingzones and railroad crossings.Language objective(s)

The student will be able torecognize, pronounce and write thefollowing key vocabulary words:intersection, merge, privilegerailroad crossing, right-of-way, yield,and zone.

Concepts:Right-of-way rules determine

who should yield at an intersectionor merge area.In every situation, right-of-way is aprivilege to be given and not one thatis taken by a driver.

At times drivers must yieldaccess to the roadway to other users.Right-of-way principles are based ongiving the privilege of passage toothers and drivers should realizeright-of-way can not be taken. Right-of-way is determined by a set ofestablished rules to be followed ingiven traffic situations:1. Intersections controlled by signsand signals.2. Single or two-lane roadintersecting with multiple-lane roads.3. Mult i- lane intersections notcontrolled by signs and signals.4. Turning left.5. Private roads and driveways.6. “T” Intersections.7. Entering or leaving controlled-access highway.8. Driving on multiple-lane roadways.9. Railroad grade crossings.

Brainstorming: Before lecture,instructor displays pictures of right-of-way traffic situations askingstudents. For example:Have you ever seen this (yield) sign?What is the meaning of a yield sign(what does it say)?What is this? (a traffic signal)What is a traffic signal trying to say?Here is a walker (pedestrian). Whenshould the pedestrian enter theintersection?

Lecture: Teacher presentsmaterial on right-of-way principleswith references to hand-out as wellas to posted key vocabulary. Teachermodels right-of-way decisions usingmagnetic car and intersectiondrawings on marker board.

Throughout lecture, the teacherenunciates key vocabulary words:intersection, privilege, merge,railroad crossing, right-of-way, yield,and zone, etc.Small group work: Each student

refers to the hand-out on right-of-way principles. Then groupmembers help each other completea fill-in-the-blank worksheet on 9right-of-way traffic decisions.Students report their small groupwork results to the class.Enlargedpictures on poster board ofautomobile and pedestrian traffic inintersections, and railroadcrossings.Students’ personal vocabularydictionaryHand-out containing the 9 right-of-way principles in enlarged font withkey vocabulary words highlightedMagnetic carsFill-in-the blank worksheetBrainstorming allows instructor toassess students’ content knowledgeand linguistic skillsTeacher observes students whomight be inattentive or confusedabout the content.Teacher collects each student’sworksheet and checks forcompletion and accuracy.Students will be administered anend-of-unit test

Homework assignment(s):Students interview their parent(s)regarding right-of-way experiences.The student asks parent(s) torespond to 9 different trafficsituations requiring a right-of-waydecision. Then the student asksparent(s) about personal right-of-way experiences. Afterward, thestudent writes a summary of theparent(s)’ experiences.Conclusion

Teaching driver education toEnglish learners might seemformidable. However, well-plannedlessons with strategies and activitiesrelevant to proficiency levels shouldfacilitate what comes naturally tomost instructors. Simply, we need tobe good teachers who use a varietyof methods to help students meetboth content and languageobjectives. We should modelexpected behaviors and encourage



( continued on page 22)

(from page 20)students to return ourdemonstrations. All the while weshould provide opportunities forstudents to practice English throughreading, writing, listening, andspeaking.References

De Boer, B. (2001). The originsof vowel systems. Oxford, U.K.:Oxford University Press.FederalInteragency Forum on Child andFamily Statistics. (2006). America’schildren: key national indicators ofwell-being, 2006. See Internet site<http://childstats.gov/>.

Gonzales, F., Gerabagi, S.D.,and Lopez-De La Garza, L. (2000).Tips for teachers of language-minority students. InterculturalDevelopment Research Associates,San Antonio, TX.

NCELA. (2006). NationalClearinghouse for English LanguageAcquisition and LanguageInstruction Educational Programs.U.S. Department of Education,Washington, D.C., http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/expert/faq/

Miller, R.E. (2006). Safetyliteracy at the DMV. The Chronicleof the American Driver and TrafficSafety Education Association, 54(3),3-5, 10.

Mosk M. and Sleven, P. (2008,Tues. Feb 19). Clinton steps upattacks on Obama. WashingtonPost.

Transparent Language. (2007).Take the English proficiency test.http://www.transparent.com/tlquiz/proftest/english/tlengtest.htm

Vogt, M. and Echevarria, J.(2007). 99 ideas and activities forteaching English learners with theSIOP model. Boston, MA: Pearson.*The authors want to recognizeMargaret Duarte’s, M.Ed. (FairfaxCounty Public Schools Deaf andHard of Hearing Program)contribution to the suggested handsignals for driver educationinstructors. These signals are notnecessarily standardized toAmerican Sign Language.

Instructors should confer and reachconsensus with interpreters, parentsand the hearing impaired studentsbefore using these signals behind-the-wheel.

and 4 miles of urban driving, takingapproximately 5-6 minutes totraverse each segment. Although alldriving scenarios involve the sameroad course, the traffic patterns anddriving demands differ betweenscenarios, e.g., each scenario hasone signaled sudden stop (such asa lead car’s brake lights suddenlycome on and rapidly decelerates),and two sudden stops that are notsignaled (such as a car in a parallellane suddenly pulls into driver’slane).Simulation Adaptation Syndrome(SAS) Prevention Protocol: SASrefers to nausea, disorientation,headache, and problems withfocusing, sometimes experiencedwhile or shortly after operating asimulator. In order to minimize oravoid SAS, we employed thefollowing protocol:1. All components of the projectedimage were displayed at the correctgeometric angle. As a result, visualflow was not compressed orexpanded from that normallyexpected and experienced duringon-road driving.2. The air conditioner in the ModelT3 was activated before each drive,maintaining air movement andcomfortable temperature.3. In order to desensitizeparticipants to the simulator, thedriving scenario was initial lyintroduced in 3 minute “doses”, aftereach of which subjects looked awayfrom the screen, relaxed, and wereasked to rate their SAS symptomson a “0” (feel fine) to “4” (feel so bad,I have to stop right now) scale.These scenarios involved no traffic.4. Participants were introduced tothe simulated scenariosprogressively. During the initialexposure to the Model T3 only thecenter projector was illuminated.

Once the center screen could beviewed for 3 minutes without SAS,the two side projectors wereactivated with half brightness for thenext 3-minute dose. Subsequently,the side projectors were turned upto full brightness for the next dose.

Virtual Reality Driver TrainingProcedure: VRDT was administeredby a peer (a 16 year old female whohad had her independent driver’slicense for four months at the timethis study commenced). Trainingemployed a simulated rural, highwayand urban road course. During lowdemand/no traffic conditions,subjects practiced:1. Maintaining center lane positiona. while driving on a straight roadand curvy roadsb. when executing both right andleft hand turns2. Maintaining speed control withthe acceleratora. following posted speed limitsb. detecting and responding tospeed limiting / altering conditions,e.g. road construction and schoolzones3. Appropriate application ofbrakesa. stopping at stop linesb. smooth deceleration at signaledstops and rapid deceleration atsudden stopsc. avoidance of foot confusion, thatis not hitting the clutch or the gaspedal when applying the brakessuddenly4. Appropriate use of turn signalsa. Using signals at every turn andlane mergerb. Using signals sufficiently beforethe maneuver so that the rear trafficwas adequately notified of thepending maneuver5. Appropriate use of side and rearview mirrorsa. Periodic checking of mirrorsb. Checking mirrors when passinga slow lead vehicle and merging intotraffic

(from page 8)


The ChronicleADTSEA(continued on page 23)

Table 1: Participants’ characteristics, ratings and performance with group meansfor individual driving parameters and means +SD for six cluster variables

Variable Groups Means P level

A. Demographics

VRDT 10Sample size

Controls 10

VRDT 16Mean age

Controls 18.2

VRDT 50% Females

Controls 50

B. Simulator Variables Mean ratings: scale= 0= “Not at all” to 4= “Very”

How do you feel right now? (SAS post drive) VRDT 0.1

How useful was driving the Road course to improve

you’re driving skills?

VRDT 3.3

C. On-road Driving Performance Variables: scale= -3= “Very Poor” to +3= “Very Good”

VRDT 3.0 +3.9C.1 Composite Steering Variables

Means +SDHow well did the driver ….

Controls -2.7 +2.8

P=.001

VRDT 1.8maintain lane position, i.e. not swerving

Controls -1.3

VRDT 1.2maintain center lane position, i.e. not hugging the midline

or the curb Controls -1.3

VRDT 8.7 +6.4C.2 Composite Turning VariablesMeans +SD

How well did the driver ….Controls -0.3 +7.1

P=.006

VRDT 1.8execute turns in terms of timing, i.e. neither too quickly ortoo delayed execute turns in terms of steering, i.e. neither

too sharp or too wideControls -1.2

VRDT 1.4execute turns in terms of speed, i.e. neither too fast or too

slow

Use of turn signalsControls -1.3

VRDT 1.6execute timing of turn signals, not too early or late execute

turns in terms of timing, i.e. neither too quickly or toodelayed

Controls -1.3

VRDT 2.7execute turns in terms of steering, i.e. neither too sharp or

too wide Controls 2.1

VRDT 1.1execute turns in terms of speed, i.e. neither too fast or too

slow Controls 1.4

Once these basicskills weremastered, traineesapplied these skillswhile negotiatingp r o g r e s s i v e l yheavier and moredemanding traffic.Training on thesemore demandingscenarios focusedon tactical drivingskills, such as:6. D e c i s i o nmaking on how tomanage distractingactivities on the sideof the road.7. Complex drivingmaneuvers such ashow to pass a slowlead car or how tomerge onto thehighway.Trainees wereasked to apply theacquired skills toprogressively moredemanding trafficscenarios using thefollowing 5 trainingscenarios shown inthe order they werepresented to theVRDT subjects:(a) Course 1A4 hadno traffic.(b) Course 1A3 hadonly oncomingtraffic.(c) Course 1A2 hadoncoming, samelane and crosstraffic.(d) Course 1A1 hadoncoming, same lane, cross andsignaled sudden stop traffic.(e) Course 1A had oncoming, samelane, cross, signal sudden stop, andnon-signaled sudden stop traffic.After each drive the instructorreviewed the successes andshortcomings of the trainee’s

performance. Immediately prior tobeginning a new scenario theinstructor reviewed goals for theupcoming trial.RESULTS

Demographic statistics arepresented in Table 1A Group

comparisons of the seven compositescores“(Table 1, C1-C7) were madeusing unpaired t-tests. Compositescores were participants’ summedscores across instructor’s ratings forthe respective variables that appear

(from page 21)



(continued from page 22)

(continued onpage24)

Table 1: Participants’ characteristics, ratings and performance with group meansfor individual driving parameters and means +SD for six cluster variables

Variable Groups Means P level

VRDT 6.6 +7.2C.3 Composite Speed Control VariablesMeans +SD

How well did the driver ….Controls -4.0 +4.0

VRDT 2.6maintain appropriate speed relative to posted speed limit,

i.e. did not drive over the speed limit Controls 1.7

VRDT -0.1maintain appropriate speed relative to posted speed limit,

i.e. did not drive under the speed limit Controls -2.2

VRDT 1.0maintain steady speed, i.e. speed variability

Controls -1.7

VRDT 1.1appropriate speed in turns, i.e. decelerate in turns andaccelerate coming out of turns Controls -1.2

VRDT 2.0appropriate speed when approaching same-lane objects like

bicyclist, joggers, pedestrians, i.e. slow down when

approach, give plenty of room and accelerate after passingControls -0.6

VRDT 5.4 +3.3C.4 Composite Braking VariablesMeans +SD

How well did the driver ….Controls 0.3 +4.1

VRDT 2.6make stops at intersections smoothly, i.e. passenger did not

larch forward Controls -0.1

VRDT 0.3make stops at intersections at appropriate distance, i.e.

neither too far away nor too far past stop bar Controls -1.7

VRDT 2.6make stops at intersections completely, i.e. came to 0 mph

Controls 1.0

VRDT 5.9 +3.1C.5 Composite Vision VariablesMeans +SD

How well did the driver ….Controls 1.2 +2.3

VRDT 2.3visually focus 20 seconds ahead of car

Controls 0.4

VRDT 2.3visually focus on appropriate objects/potential threats

Controls 1.1

VRDT 2.6visually was inattentive, i.e. eyes off the road

Controls 2.0

VRDT -1.3appropriate use of mirrors, i.e. periodically checking

mirrors Controls -2.3

below the composite variable. Sinceit was predicted that VRDT wouldimprove driving performance, one-tailed p levels were used. Oneparticipant from each group wasdropped from data analysis

because of violating the “parking lot”only driving restriction before the on-road evaluation.Reactions to the simulator: Only onefemale participant reported a mildSAS response to the VRDT: a ratingof 1 on the 0-4 scale (Table 1B).

VRDT participants rated the utility ofthe simulator in improving theirdriving skills a mean score of 3.3(maximum score = 4).

VRDT Effects: As seen in Table1, C1-C7, participants receivingVRDT performed better than

controls on all on-road ratings andthat all sevencomposite scores

were highly s i g n i f i c a n t l ydifferent (all pvalues= < 0.006).

This was true forboth specificdriving maneuvers,such as “steering”,as well as forbroader conceptssuch as attention toand attitudestoward driving.DISCUSSION

A l t h o u g hvirtual realitytraining has beenused extensively inthe military, andwith professionalpilot and truckdriver training(Hays, Jacobs,Prince, Salas,1992), this is thefirst controlledstudy investigatingwhether VRDTactually improveson-road driving ofnovice teenagers.Considering that:(1) VRDT wasinstructed by ar e l a t i v e l yi n e x p e r i e n c e dteenage driver, (2)all VRDT involveddriving the same12-mile roadcourse, (3) thesimulated roadcourse did not


The ChronicleADTSEA

ADTSEA State Affiliates

Corporate Members of ADTSEA

AAA Foundation for Traffic SafetyAdvanced Auto Parts

Country Insurance & Financial ServicesDelmar

Doron Precision Systems,Inc.Driving Schools Associations of

the Americas

National Road Safety FoundationNTSA International

Prentice HallMotorcycle Safety Foundation

Raydon CorporationSimulator Systems International

State Farm Insurance CompaniesU-Haul International

California Georgia

IdahoIllinoisIndiana

Iowa

KansasMichigan

MinnesotaMontanaMissouri

North CarolinaNorth Dakota

South CarolinaTexasUtah

VermontVirginia

WashingtonWest Virginia

Wisconsin

(from page 23)

(more on page 25)

VRDT 5.3 +2.2C.6 Composite Attention VariablesMeans +SD

How was the driver’s attention to….Controls 3.3 +2.4

VRDT 2.2speed limits

Controls -0.1

VRDT 2.4stop signals

Controls 1.1

VRDT 2.3side traffic

Controls 1.1

VRDT -1.1rear traffic

Controls -2.3

VRDT 6.6 +2.2C.7 Composite Attitude VariablesMeans +SD

How was the driver’s attitude toward….Controls 3.3 +2.4

VRDT 2.8Appreciation for the potential dangers of driving, e.g.

“How dangerous is driving?” Controls 1.0

VRDT 0.9Appreciation for their driving skills, e.g. “How good of a

driver do you think you are?” Controls -0.4

VRDT 3.0Appreciation for the need to drive defensively, e.g. “Even if

you follow the rules of the road, is it your responsibility to

be attentive to other drivers who are not following the rules

of the road?”

Controls 2.8

parallel the actual on-road course,and (4) the on-road examiner was

blind to the two study groups, it isimpressive that participantsreceiving VRDT performed

significantly better on all variablesunder study while driving on road.These independent findings were

affirmed by participants’ratings of the VRDTusefulness, whichcould reflect the highfidelity / realism of thesimulator. It is,however, important tonote that the worstperformance of theVRDT participantsinvolved use of rearview mirrors. This maybe due to inadequateinstruction to usemirrors, or a reflectionof the low f idelitymirrors. While side andrear view mirror imageswere generated andprojected on thescreen, these imageswere not in their typicallocation on physicalsurfaces 18-24 inchesin front of driver’s eyes.However, the newestversion of the Model T3does use LCD monitors



(from page 24)

Driver education is frontand center in the largertransportation community andbecoming more so on Main StreetUSA. It is important that drivereducators and driver educationadministrators are part of thediscussions. USA Today says“Driver’s Education set for revival inpublic schools” (9/29/09)

Whether you choose to attend ornot, you should also be aware thatthe Transportation Research Board,on Saturday, January 9, 2010 willhold an all day human factorsworkshop on driver education.

Throwing the Baby Out with theBathwater: Overhauling DriverEducation (a Human FactorsWorkshop session) Saturday,January 09, 2010, 9:00 a.m.-6:00p.m., Marriott Daniel V. McGehee,University of Iowa, presiding.

This workshop explores thechallenges that driver educationfaces and offers key discussionareas on potential opportunities for

beginning a new model in drivertraining. Discussion topics willinclude national standards, parentinvolvement, simulation and virtualworlds, in-vehicle technology,instructor training and motivation,and outcome assessment.Point to http://pressamp.trb.org/c o n f e r e n c e s / p r o g r a m s /session.asp?event=508&session=16850for additional information on this pre-conference session.

A Matter of PerspectiveA man was being tailgated by a

stressed out woman on a busyboulevard. Suddenly, the light turnedyellow, just in front of him. He did theright thing, stopping at the crosswalk,even though he could have beatenthe red light by accelerating throughthe intersection.

The tailgating woman wasfurious and honked her horn,screaming in frustration, as shemissed her chance to get through theintersection, dropping her cell phoneand makeup. As she was still in mid-rant, she heard a tap on her windowand looked up into the face of a veryserious police officer. The officerordered her to exit her car with herhands up.

He took her to the police stationwhere she was searched,fingerprinted, photographed, andplaced in a holding cell. After acouple of hours, a policemanapproached the cell and opened thedoor. She was escorted back to thebooking desk where the arrestingofficer was waiting with her personaleffects.

He said, ‘I’m very sorry for thismistake. You see, I pulled up behindyour car while you were blowing yourhorn, flipping off the guy in front ofyou, and cussing a blue streak athim.’ I noticed the ‘What Would JesusDo’ bumper sticker, the ‘Choose Life’license plate holder, the ‘Follow Meto Sunday-School’bumper sticker,and the chrome-plated Christian fishemblem on the trunk; naturally...Iassumed you had stolen the car.’

located in positions similar to rearand side view mirrors.

It is of interest to note that theVRDT protocol could not bereplicated in the real world. That is,it would not be safe for the driver tofocus exclusively on mastering laneposition while ignoring otherelements of driving when negotiatingactual roads, with traffic, road signsand other obstacles to negotiate. Invirtual reality, there is the opportunityto master one driving skill at a time,and then combine that skill with otherskills in an additive manner in acontrolled and safe sequence.

There are limitations to this studythat should be noted. There was noplacebo condition, where drivingtraining time was controlled. Analternative design would be to havecontrol subjects play video drivinggames, or read driving instructionmanuals for two hours. Additionally,this study looked at the impact ofVRDT in the short term, 2-4 daysafter concluding training. There isno data on whether the effects of thistraining would persist beyond initialon-road training.

While the effects of VRDT mayhave been enhanced if aprofessional driving trainer wereused, more varied and extensivedriving scenarios were used, a morerealistic driving simulator with anacceleration base and more realisticmirrors were used, these pilot dataare sufficiently impressive to justifyfurther investigation into the benefitsof virtual reality driving training, andto determine whether it should beused in driver education to the extentthat virtual reality training isemployed in the aviation industry orthe military. A final cautionary noteis that these results can not beextrapolated to all “drivingsimulators” but only to the immersiveModel T3, its scenarios and theabove described training protocol.REFERENCES

Allen RW, Park GD, Cook ML,Fiorentino D The Effect of Driving Simulator

Fidelity on Training Effectiveness. DSC2007 North America – Iowa City –September 2007

de Wintera J, de Groota S, Mulderb M,Wieringaa PA, Dankelmana J and MulderbJA Relationships between driving simulatorperformance and driving test results.Ergonomics. 2009, Vol. 52 (2), 137–153

Hays RT, Jacobs JW, Prince C, SalasEduardo. Flight simulator trainingeffectiveness: a meta-analysis. Mil Psychol.1992;4, 2: 63-74.

Hays, R. T., & Singer, M. J.. SimulationFidelity in Training System Design. 1989,New York: Springer-Verlag.

LavalliËre M, Laurendeau D, TremblayM, Simoneau M and Teasdale N,MULTIPLE-SESSION SIMULATORTRAINING FOR OLDER DRIVERS ANDON-ROAD TRANSFER OF LEARNING,“PROCEEDINGS of the Fifth InternationalDriving Symposium on Human Factors inDriver Assessment, Training and VehicleDesign, 2009, Montana

Simons-Morton, B.G., Hartos, J.L. “Howwell do parents manage young driver crashrisks?” Journal of Safety Research, 2003,34, 91-97.

Waller, D., Hunt, E., & Knapp, D. . Thetransfer of spatial knowledge in virtualenvironment training presence.Teleoperators and Virtual Environments,1998’7(2), 129-143


The ChronicleADTSEA

Doron Same aslast issue



AAA


The ChronicleADTSEA

SSI

PRESORTED STDU.S. POSTAGE

PaidSt. Cloud, MN

Permit No. 2135

AMERICAN DRIVER AND TRAFFICSAFETY EDUCATION ASSOCIATION

c/o Highway Safety CenterIndiana University of Pennsylvania

R & P Building629 Fisher Avenue

Indiana, PA 15705-1092

2010 ADTSEA CONFERENCESt. Louis, Missouri

HiltonSt. Louis Frontenac

July 24to

July 29, 2009

The Chronicllle - ADTSEA · The Chronicllle Fall Issue 2009 ... Indiana University of Pennsylvania...

Documents

Transcript of The Chronicllle - ADTSEA · The Chronicllle Fall Issue 2009 ... Indiana University of Pennsylvania...