This report is part of the Large-scale Evaluation of Driver Education Project being conducted by the Traffic Injury Research Foundation and Northport Associates for the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. The study is sponsored by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety; Centers for Disease Control, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control; National Highway Traffic Safety Administration; and Manitoba Public Insurance. Past studies have demonstrated that common-sense assumptions about what is effective in reducing young driver crash risk are not always well founded. Reviewers of the evaluation literature have typically concluded that beginner driver education has yet to demonstrate clear success in improving safety of new drivers. A few studies have shown positive effects, but these have been ignored by most reviewers and have not been followed up by either the research community or the program community. When looking critically at past evaluations, one is struck by how little they have contributed to developing and improving driver education. Evaluation research in driver education has been unsystematic, in the sense that studies typically failed to build on earlier research. Surprising negative findings, and even credible positive findings, were not followed up by further research. Scientific knowledge usually develops through systematic replication of research, but that has not yet happened in driver education evaluation research. Earlier thinking, including that behind the DeKalb project, seemed to favour a single massive development effort to achieve driver education safety goals in one big step. More recently, however, researchers and theorists have emphasized the importance of incrementally building knowledge, skills, attitudes, and motivations, as well as continuously developing and improving programs. Certainly there are perceptible trends and renewed development in most aspects of this increasingly diverse field. A renewal of federal leadership in the U.S., embodied in the new National Administrative Standards, and central direction in other countries bodes well for the future. However, most of the factors that have constrained healthy development in the past are still in place. Theory in driver education is still weak and shows little improvement. Driver education delivery is highly fragmented, and both consolidation and further fragmentation appear to be taking place simultaneously. Driver education needs to be more firmly based in sound research and theory concerning young drivers and, at the same time, in the principles of effective behaviour change. It needs better management of the linkage of driver education with parental and community influences, graduated licensing, and other behavioural influences such as incentives and cultural factors. Comprehensive and systematic evaluation research can be a constructive and important part of future development in driver education. A comprehensive approach to evaluation addresses program theory, context, products, processes, and management, as well as outcomes and impacts. The need for such research is increasing, as vigorous development is occurring in some public and private programs. The previously published AAAFTS Guidelines have provided new materials and direction, and support for more systematic evaluation appears to be growing. If the apparent trends toward data-driven development can be sustained and expanded, they could ultimately lead to improved safety outcomes. (Author/publisher)
Samenvatting