Simulators, driver education and disadvantaged groups: A scoping review

This paper examines simulators to deliver driver education programs for two very different populations (a) those who have specific impairments or intellectual disabilities and (b) those who may suffer disadvantage associated with their ethnicity. To do this we addressed two research questions (a) What role, if any, can simulation play as an education and/or training intervention for individuals disadvantaged because of individually-orientated concerns such as intellectual impairment or ADHD? (b) What role, if any, can simulation play as an education and/or training intervention for those who are disadvantaged because of their indigenous ethnicity? Technological developments have enabled the incorporation of driving simulators into driver education programs. A review of major databases using keywords identified 2,420 records. After duplicates were removed and screening occurred, thirteen studies were included in the review. The disadvantaged populations for the driver education initiatives that incorporated a simulator were very specific (e.g. intellectual disabilities) with no interventions for those disadvantaged because of ethnicity. A second search identified six papers that discussed interventions for indigenous populations. None of these interventions had a simulator component. The review highlights the need for high quality empirical research in the area of simulators, driver education and disadvantaged groups in order to inform policy development within this area. While there are some preliminary results indicating potential benefits, there is limited research evidence for an initiative of this type making it difficult to develop evidence based policy and practice. Therefore, when these types of initiatives are introduced, they need to be evaluated</p

A mixed-methods study of driver education informed by the Goals for Driver Education: Do young drivers and educators agree on what was taught?

Evaluation research suggests that professional driver education and training has little effect on reducing the crash involvements of young drivers. Driver education and training programs have been criticised as being unsystematically designed and lacking an empirical or theoretical basis. The Goals for Driver Education (GDE) is a theoretical framework developed to address these criticisms. The GDE defines four hierarchical levels of driving behaviours and influences on driving and three individualised Person-specific factors that should be considered in driver education and training programs. The aim of this study was to compare and contrast, in a methodologically rigorous manner, the perceptions that young drivers (n = 22; Mage = 17.80 years, SD = 6.54 months) and driver educators (n = 10; Mage = 54.5 years, SD = 9.21 years) have of a professional driver education and training course they participated in or facilitated. Eight semi-structured focus groups were conducted and the GDE was used to direct the collection and analysis of the data. Young drivers mainly discussed basic driving skills located on the lower levels of the GDE rather than higher level abstract factors that increase risk for young drivers. Driver educators tended to group particular GDE levels and Person-specific factors together when discussing the driving course and paid limited attention to Goals and contexts of driving. Results suggest that driver educators should provide direct instruction regarding the more abstract social and contextual factors that influence driving to potentially increase the efficacy of driver education and training as a safety countermeasure

Parental Perceptions of the Learner Driver Log Book System in Two Australian States

<div><p><b>Objective:</b> Though many jurisdictions internationally now require learner drivers to complete a specified number of hours of supervised driving practice before being able to drive unaccompanied, very few require learner drivers to complete a log book to record this practice and then present it to the licensing authority. Learner drivers in most Australian jurisdictions must complete a log book that records their practice, thereby confirming to the licensing authority that they have met the mandated hours of practice requirement. These log books facilitate the management and enforcement of minimum supervised hours of driving requirements.</p><p><b>Method:</b> Parents of learner drivers in 2 Australian states, Queensland and New South Wales, completed an online survey assessing a range of factors, including their perceptions of the accuracy of their child's learner log book and the effectiveness of the log book system.</p><p><b>Results:</b> The study indicates that the large majority of parents believe that their child's learner log book is accurate. However, they generally report that the log book system is only moderately effective as a system to measure the number of hours of supervised practice a learner driver has completed.</p><p><b>Conclusions:</b> The results of this study suggest the presence of a paradox, with many parents possibly believing that others are not as diligent in the use of log books as they are or that the system is too open to misuse. Given that many parents report that their child's log book is accurate, this study has important implications for the development and ongoing monitoring of hours of practice requirements in graduated driver licensing systems.</p></div

What do driver educators and young drivers think about driving simulators? A qualitative draw-and-talk study

Evaluation research suggests that professional driver education and training has little effect on reducing the crash involvements of young drivers. Driver education and training programs have been criticised as being unsystematically designed and lacking an empirical or theoretical basis. The Goals for Driver Education (GDE) is a theoretical framework developed to address these criticisms. The GDE defines four hierarchical levels of driving behaviours and influences on driving and three individualised Person-specific factors that should be considered in driver education and training programs. The aim of this study was to compare and contrast, in a methodologically rigorous manner, the perceptions that young drivers (n = 22; Mage = 17.80 years, SD = 6.54 months) and driver educators (n = 10; Mage = 54.5 years, SD = 9.21 years) have of a professional driver education and training course they participated in or facilitated. Eight semi-structured focus groups were conducted and the GDE was used to direct the collection and analysis of the data. Young drivers mainly discussed basic driving skills located on the lower levels of the GDE rather than higher level abstract factors that increase risk for young drivers. Driver educators tended to group particular GDE levels and Person-specific factors together when discussing the driving course and paid limited attention to Goals and contexts of driving. Results suggest that driver educators should provide direct instruction regarding the more abstract social and contextual factors that influence driving to potentially increase the efficacy of driver education and training as a safety countermeasure