In the last ten years a couple of comparative studies have been conducted in order to describe and compare the driver education systems of different countries (Lynam & Twisk, 1995; Siegrist, 1999). These studies have also made attempts to evaluate the test-takers’ performance in terms of their accident-rate after the education. Our opinion is that this kind of evaluation is problematic, since drivers that fail the driving test, and therefore are supposed to have a high accident rate, are excluded from the population of drivers that are allowed to drive independently. Instead, the performance of the test-taker should be evaluated within the driver education system, which comprises the curriculum, the driver education and the driving-license test. This means that there should be an agreement between the curriculum, the education and the driving-license test and that the performance of the test-taker should be related to the objectives of the education. The first purpose of this study was to present the design of the driver education in the Nordic countries, Great Britain and Germany. The second purpose was to describe the theoretical and practical driving license tests in these countries, as well as to compare the tests with regard to psychometric criteria. The third aim was to present studies that have focused on the relationship between driver education and performance on the driving-license test. The fourth purpose was to present previously conducted studies in order to improve the objectives of the driver education as well as the driving-license test. Finally, the fifth purpose was to describe the opportunity for the countries in question to assess the results of driver education. The results of this study showed that, in the countries we have studied, there exist three ways of evaluating whether the objectives of the curriculum have been met: conventional tests, education or a combination of both. When comparing the driver education systems in the different countries three categories of systems were found. The first category contains systems with little or no compulsory education. In these systems private education is allowed. The second category consists of systems with some compulsory education as well as private education. In the third category of systems the formal driver education is compulsory and private education is forbidden. In driver education systems where the level of compulsory education is minimal or nonexistent, the driving-license test is the only way to verify that the testtakers have acquired the knowledge and abilities specified in the curriculum. As a result of the restricted use of compulsory education, the quality of the student evaluation depends solely on the quality of the tests. Thus, the demands on the tests in terms of reliability and validity are high. In the second category of driver education systems, both compulsory and private education is used, which might provide a fruitful combination depending on how the education is arranged. The third category of driver education systems, in which the entire education is compulsory, the system owner has two ways of verifying that the student is competent enough to drive independently: through compulsory education and through testing. The idea behind the education is to provide the student with sufficient education to guarantee that he or she possesses the necessary attitudes, knowledge and abilities to pass the theoretical and practical test. During the last few years, a number of countries have made attempts to improve the students’ attitudes and capacity for self-evaluation by emphasising such areas in the curriculum. Since it is difficult to evaluate these aspects through testing, the best way for the system owner to affect and evaluate the students’ attitudes is through compulsory education. The conclusion of the study would therefore be that compulsory driver education combined with a theoretical and practical test of high quality constitutes the optimal approach for the system owner in terms of verifying that the student has reached the level of competence specified in the curriculum. (Author/publisher)
Abstract