CURRICULUM, DRIVER EDUCATION AND
DRIVER TESTING
A comparative study of the driver education
systems in some European countries
Henrik Jonsson
Anna Sundström
Widar Henriksson
Em No 44, 2003
ISSN 1103-2685
ISRN UM -PED-EM--44--SE
Abstract
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 drivinglicense 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 non-
existent, 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.
Sammanfattning
Under de senaste årtiondena har ett antal komparativa studier genomförts i syfte att beskriva och jämföra förarutbildningssystemen i olika
länder (Lynam & Twisk, 1995; Siegrist, 1999). I dessa studier har man
också försökt relatera provtagarens prestation på förarprovet till antalet olyckor efter utbildningen. Vår uppfattning är dock att denna typ
av utvärdering utgör ett problem, eftersom de förare som misslyckats
med förarprovet, och därför kan antas vara mer olycksbenägna, inte är
en del av populationen förare. Istället bör provtagarens prestation utvärderas inom ramen för förarutbildningssystemet, vilket utgörs av
kursplan, förarutbildning och förarprov. Detta innebär att det bör finnas en överensstämmelse mellan kursplan, utbildning och prov och att
provtagarens prestation enbart ska relateras till utbildningens mål.
Det första syftet med föreliggande studie var att redogöra för förarutbildningssystemen i de nordiska länderna samt i Storbritannien och
Tyskland. Det andra syftet var att redogöra för de teoretiska och praktiska förarproven i dessa länder och även att granska dessa prov utifrån psykometriska kriterier. Det tredje syftet var att presentera tidigare studier som fokuserat på förhållandet mellan förarutbildning och
provprestation. Det fjärde syftet var att visa på studier som genomförts
i syfte att förbättra både förarproven och målen med förarutbildningen. Slutligen var det femte syftet att redogöra för olika länders möjligheter till utbildningskontroll.
Resultatet av föreliggande studie visar att det finns tre möjligheter till
utbildningskontroll; genom konventionella prov, genom utbildning
eller genom en kombination av dessa. Jämförelsen av de olika förarutbildningssystemen visade att tre olika system förekommer. Den första
kategorin innehåller system med lite eller ingen obligatorisk utbildning. I dessa system är privat utbildning tillåten. Den andra kategorin
innehåller system där både obligatorisk och privat utbildning förekommer. I den tredje kategorin finns system där den formella utbildningen är obligatorisk och där privat utbildning är förbjuden. I utbildningssystem där andelen obligatorisk utbildning är liten eller obefintlig blir förarproven det enda sättet att kontrollera om provtagaren har
de kunskaper och förmågor som föreskrivs i kursplanen. Som en följd
av den begränsade mängden obligatorisk utbildning blir kvaliteten på
proven helt avgörande för att kunna bedöma provtagarens kompetens.
Således, är kraven på provet i termer av reliabilitet och validitet
mycket höga.
I den andra kategorin finns de förarutbildningssystem som använder
sig både av obligatorisk och privat utbildning, vilket kan vara fruktbart beroende på hur de olika utbildningstyperna kombineras.
Den tredje kategorin innefattar de förarutbildningssystem där hela
utbildningen är obligatorisk och där privat utbildning är förbjuden. På
detta sätt ges systemägaren två möjligheter att kontrollera elevens
kompetens; genom den obligatoriska utbildningen och genom proven.
Utbildningens idé är att ge eleven tillräcklig utbildning för att på så
sätt kunna garantera att han eller hon besitter de nödvändiga attityderna, kunskaperna och förmågorna som formulerats i kursplanen och
som krävs för att kunna klara förarprovet.
Under de senaste åren har förarens attityder och självreflexiva förmåga betonats mer och mer i kursplanerna i olika länder. Eftersom det är
problematiskt att utvärdera dessa aspekter via prov ses obligatorisk
utbildning som en nödvändighet eftersom det är det enda sättet för
systemägaren att påverka och utvärdera studenternas attityder.
Slutsatserna av föreliggande studie är att en obligatorisk utbildning i
kombination med ett teoretiskt och praktiskt prov av hög kvalitet utgör
det optimala sättet för systemägaren att kontrollera att målen för utbildningen är nådda.
DRIVER EDUCATION IN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES.................... 1
PREVIOUS COMPARATIVE STUDIES .......................................................................... 1
PURPOSE ............................................................................................ 6
CONTENT AND ORGANISATION OF THE REPORT ................... 6
SWEDEN ............................................................................................. 7
THE HISTORY OF THE SWEDISH DRIVER EDUCATION ................................................ 7
THE FIRST PRACTICAL CURRICULUM ..................................................................... 10
THE FIRST THEORETICAL CURRICULUM ................................................................. 12
THE FIRST INTEGRATED CURRICULUM ................................................................... 13
DRIVER EDUCATION IN 1988 ................................................................................. 18
THE CURRICULUM OF TODAY................................................................................. 22
SUGGESTIONS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF DRIVER EDUCATION ............................. 25
FINLAND .......................................................................................... 29
THE FINNISH CURRICULUM.................................................................................... 29
THE FIRST STAGE ................................................................................................... 30
THE MID-STAGE ..................................................................................................... 33
THE SECOND STAGE ............................................................................................... 34
THE THEORETICAL TEST ........................................................................................ 34
THE PRACTICAL TEST ............................................................................................ 35
DENMARK........................................................................................ 41
THE DANISH CURRICULUM .................................................................................... 41
THE THEORETICAL TEST ........................................................................................ 45
THE PRACTICAL TEST ............................................................................................ 46
NORWAY .......................................................................................... 49
THE NORWEGIAN CURRICULUM ............................................................................ 49
THEORETICAL EDUCATION .................................................................................... 50
PRACTICAL EDUCATION......................................................................................... 54
THE THEORETICAL TEST ........................................................................................ 57
THE PRACTICAL TEST ............................................................................................ 58
ICELAND .......................................................................................... 64
THE ICELANDIC CURRICULUM ............................................................................... 64
PRACTICAL PART ................................................................................................... 66
EVALUATION OF THE EDUCATION .......................................................................... 67
THE THEORETICAL TEST ........................................................................................ 68
THE PRACTICAL TEST ............................................................................................ 69
GERMANY........................................................................................ 72
THE GERMAN CURRICULUM .................................................................................. 72
THE THEORETICAL TEST ........................................................................................ 77
THE PRACTICAL TEST ............................................................................................ 78
GREAT BRITAIN ............................................................................. 83
THE BRITISH CURRICULUM .................................................................................... 83
THE THEORETICAL TEST ........................................................................................ 87
THE PRACTICAL TEST ............................................................................................ 88
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE THEORETICAL TESTS .................................................... 90
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PRACTICAL TESTS ........................................................ 93
SUMMARY OF THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEMS........................ 96
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DRIVER EDUCATION AND
TEST PERFORMANCE................................................................... 99
IMPROVING GOALS FOR DRIVER EDUCATION .................... 101
IMPROVING DRIVER TESTING.................................................. 103
SUMMARISED CONCLUSIONS .................................................. 107
REFERENCES................................................................................. 114
Driver education in European countries
Previous comparative studies
Over the past decade a couple of comparative studies have been conducted in order to describe and compare the driver education of different countries. Lynam and Twisk (1995) conducted a survey of cardriver licensing systems in European countries. The primary objectives were to define similarities and differences between the systems
in different countries as well as to assess whether initiatives already
developed in some countries should be encouraged more generally.
The secondary objective was to make recommendations about which
areas should be developed further to improve systems generally.
In the study by Lynam and Twisk (1995) the different driver education systems were compared with regard to the age at which accompanied and unaccompanied driving during training was allowed. The
comparison also examined the extent of theoretical and practical training as well as testing. The availability of private practice was also examined. One conclusion from these comparisons was that two differing philosophies have emerged regarding the training of new drivers –
one focusing on improving the control and quality of professional
training and the other seeking a reduction of formal education and
wider opportunities for private practice. An analysis of young-driver
accidents was also included in the study. When comparing the accident rates of different countries there was no evidence that the differences in the national systems produce any major differences in terms
of the number of casualties suffered by the nation. The conclusions of
the study (Lynam & Twisk, 1995) resulted in some recommendations
on areas where best practice and further research should be encouraged. Training techniques was one area that ought to be improved by
putting more emphasis on cognitive skills such as hazard perception,
drivers’ ability to assess their own skills and development of responsible attitudes towards driving. It was also stated that research is required to identify ways to improve the value of private practice and
that the education of instructors will probably need to be extended to
1
enable them to deliver the content of the driver education effectively.
In addition, it was also suggested that the process of the practical and
theoretical test should be improved.
Another comparative study (Siegrist, 1999) that focused on the driver
education in Europe was also presented a few years ago. The objective
of the study was to assess different methods of driver education and
testing with respect to their safety benefit and to produce recommendations for best practice. In the first part of the report (Assailly, 1999)
it was stated that road fatalities are the main cause of deaths in the EU
in the age group 15 to 24. Compared to other causes of death, traffic
accidents produce a much higher average number of potential years of
life lost. Compared to older drivers, young drivers are also overrepresented in road fatalities. In order to improve the road safety and
health situation in this age group it was stated that improvement of
driver education is an important element. The young novice-driver’s
safety can be addressed in two ways. One, which has dominated research up to now, is to reduce the factors that increase accident involvement. The other, which has occasionally been discussed, is to
increase the influence of factors that define safe drivers.
In the second part of the report the driver education was discussed
(Hatakka, Keskinen, Gregersen, & Glad, 1999). Guidelines for driver
education can be derived from traffic-psychological and recent theoretical approaches in the psychology of learning and education. The
theoretical framework used in this study stated that driver behaviour is
organised into four hierarchical levels. The curriculum of the driver
education should cover all levels, starting with the acquisition of the
necessary basic vehicle-manoeuvring automatism and continuing with
the mastery of traffic situations. The two higher levels are not accessible with teacher-centred methods but require active learning methods.
Driving is viewed as a multi-level task and the driver should be able to
learn from experience about risks connected with motives and goals at
the highest hierarchical levels. Practising self-evaluative and metacognitive skills should therefore be included in training. In the study
the content of the driver education systems in the different countries
was related to the hierarchical model mentioned above. When the content of the driver education was compared with the model, one conclusion was that future education should aim to include the two higher
levels, which place more emphasis on driving goals and context as
2
well as goals for life, risk awareness and self-evaluation (Hatakka et
al., 1999).
In the third part of the report (Gregersen, 1999) the driver education
systems were divided in five categories: one-phase systems, one-phase
systems with probationary license, two-phase systems with probationary license, two-phase systems with provisional license and graduated-licensing systems. One general conclusion that could be drawn
from the review was that the systems that have shown safetyincreasing effects are systems that have not only increased the amount
of formal education, but also introduced other components such as
graduated licensing, increased experience through private practice or
risk awareness training. Other measures, aimed at improving the driving behaviour of novice drivers, were two kinds of school-based approaches. School-based pre-training education should be an instrument for preparing young people for their roles as car drivers. According to expert opinion, the advantage of proper traffic education at
school for subsequent car driving is that it enables and enhances the
effectiveness of later driver training. In school-based driver training,
the training itself, and possibly also the testing, is integrated in the
school system. The aims are to make the learning process more detailed, to stress the social dimension of driving and to widen the training objectives (Gregersen, 1999).
In the fourth part of the report, the objectives of the driving test were
addressed. According to Goldenbeld, Baughan and Hatakka (1999) the
main objective of driving tests is concerned with road safety, which
means that those who lack the required competence to drive in traffic
are not permitted to enter the system. Another function of the driving
tests is to influence the training undertaken by learner drivers. The
content and structure of the theoretical and practical tests in different
countries were described. In addition, the reliability and validity of the
driving test was discussed1.
1
The reliability of a test is its ability to produce consistent results. Sources of unreliability might be that one examiner not always assesses a given test-drive in the same
way and that the examiner would disagree with the assessments made by all other
examiners. Other factors affecting the reliability of the test would be errors in the
marking systems and the fact that the test-taker’s task performance is unstable due to
limited practice. The validity of a test is the extent to which it measures what it purports to measure. In the case of a driving test, this might be defined in terms of competence and of propensity towards being a safe driver.
3
There are some methodological problems with the validity assessment. One problem is that drivers who fail an established driving test
and are therefore expected to have a poor accident record are, in fact,
excluded from the population of drivers who drive unsupervised and
can play no further part in a study of the test’s ability to predict accident liability. However, considered as an instrument for attaining certain goals, there is a sense in which a test may be judged to be valid if
it meets its objectives. Thus a driving test would have good consequential validity if, when introduced into a driver education system, it
influenced the amount and quality of training and practice undertaken
by learner drivers so as to achieve acceptable levels of competence.
Some conclusions of the analysis of driving tests were presented.
Apart from the problems of reliability and validity, the driver-testing
in Europe has some practical limitations such as relatively short testing time and short time for feedback. Finally, some suggestions for
good practice were presented. One suggestion for example is that it is
important to improve the coverage of higher-order skills such as hazard perception and self-evaluation in tests. Another suggestion was to
attempt to find ways of including attitude-related items that predict
future driving behaviour and accidents.
In the last few years some countries have altered their driver education
and driving-license test, which means that the results from the studies
presented above are out of date for those countries. However, recent
initiatives have been taken to compare the present driver-education of
the European countries.
Recently, an initiative was taken to study the quality of driver examination in Finland, Sweden, Norway and Northern Ireland (Uusitalo &
Mynttinen, 2002). The preliminary results showed that there are both
similarities and differences between the countries regarding the driving-license test. All countries require a candidate to pass a theoretical
test before taking the practical test. In addition to this, Finland, Sweden and Norway require a candidate to take certain courses or a minimum number of hours of practical training before taking the driving
test. As for the driving test, Finland and Sweden do not use fixed
routes, but Norway and Northern Ireland do.
In the case of Norway and Northern Ireland, the quality control of the
test is arranged by standardising the routes and by making the selec4
tion random. Finland and Sweden use varying content for the driving
test. In Finland the content is randomly chosen from among the three
different alternatives and in Sweden the content of the test is chosen
according to a fixed pattern where all the traffic situations stated at the
form used at the assessment should be carried out with in four different driving tests. All countries use comparative statistics to monitor
examiner’s evaluations. Other methods used include centrallyorganised auditing, in-car supervision during a test and comparing
examiners’ evaluations.
In 2002 the Department of Educational Measurement at Umeå university arranged a conference regarding the driver education and theoretical driving-license test in the Nordic countries. The presentations and
discussions held at the conference were presented in a report (Henriksson, Sundström, & Wiberg, 2002). One conclusion of the report
was that there are both similarities and differences between the driver
education and theoretical test of the Nordic countries. Some countries
include compulsory parts in the driver education and in some countries the driver education are voluntary. In driver education systems
where the education is voluntary, the only way to ensure that the applicants have the knowledge and abilities stated in the objectives of
the education is by driver testing. In driver education systems with
compulsory parts, the level of knowledge and ability can be evaluated,
not only through driver testing but also through the education itself.
Related to the discussion of reliability and validity in the study by
Goldenbeld, Baughan and Hatakka (1999), the possibility of assessing
the effects of education might have implications for the reliability and
validity of a driving-license test. In driver education systems where
the education is non-compulsory, the only way of verifying the students’ knowledge and abilities is through testing. This means that
there should be higher demands on the tests, in terms of reliability and
validity, in these systems since the test is the only way to ensure that
the student is competent enough to drive independently.
In order to explore the driver education and driver testing in the Nordic countries further this comparative study was initiated. Some European countries were also added in order to give a more comprehensive
view of driver education and driver testing.
5
Purpose
The first purpose of this study was to present the design of the driver
education in different European countries. The second purpose was to
describe the theoretical and practical driving-license tests in different
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 drivinglicense test. The fourth purpose was to present studies that have been
conducted 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 possibility for different countries to assess the results of
driver education.
Content and organisation of the report
This report is based on information regarding driver education and
driver testing provided by different authorities in the Nordic countries,
Germany and Great Britain. In addition, the report is also based on
information from websites as well as previous studies. As a result, the
content of the presentations of the driver education systems depends
on the amount of information that was available.
In the first part of the report the curriculum, the driver education and
the driving-license tests of the different countries is presented. In the
second part of the report the different driver education systems are
compared regarding the amount of compulsory education and the
characteristics of their driving-license tests. In addition, studies that
focus on the relationship between type of driver education and test
performance, ways of improving driver testing and goals for driver
education are presented. Finally, some summarised conclusions and
suggestions for areas that should be developed are presented.
6
Sweden
The history of the Swedish driver education
In the beginning of the 20th century, not many people had their own
car (Franke, Larsson, & Mårdsjö, 1995). Private cars were still highly
unusual and the means to actually own one were something that only
the upper class possessed. It would take several years before cars became what they are today, the “property of everyman.” Naturally, the
laws and regulations regarding owning and operating a car were
poorly developed at the time.
In 1906, the only requirement for being allowed to drive a car was a
special vehicle certificate that proved that its bearer had shown
enough theoretical and practical knowledge regarding the operation of
the vehicle (Molander, 1997). This certificate could be given to anyone who was at least 18 years old and had been examined by a special
inspector.
Even though the law contained some regulations regarding the
examination and the issuing of driving certificates, real guidelines
were still non-existent (Molander, 1997). There was no need for
anyone to prove that he or she was personally suited to undergo the
examination and/or operate a vehicle. It was not until 1916 that the
driving license was introduced. At this time it was being issued by the
county administration, which also approved people as drivers. In order
to get a driving license one had to undergo a medical examination and
prove oneself to be competent as well as personally suited to handle
one’s vehicle. Those already in possession of the old certificate were
able to exchange it for a driving license.
In 1920, the first real directions regarding the examination of driving
license applicants were published (Molander, 1997). They prescribed
that certain tests should precede graduation. Moreover instructions
published in 1923, containing information and guidelines for traffic
inspectors, recommended that the applicant should be familiar with
different warning signs and signals. It was also suggested that a theoretical test should be performed in order for a person to be approved
as a driver (Franke et al., 1995).
7
During the beginning of the 1920s, a large number or driving schools
were opened (Franke et al., 1995). They mainly educated professional
drivers and their quality was known to be poor. As a result, it was decided that authorized driving schools that provided professional driver
education should be established. In 1923 it was decided that the driver
education should be supervised by a certain car inspector, as some
found it unsuitable that it was the same person who taught, examined
and approved the new drivers. In 1927, new instructions made the task
of driving examiners more demanding. They were now supposed to
form an opinion not only of the student’s driving ability but also of his
or her presence of mind and general judgment.
In 1927 it was also suggested that students should not have to be as
familiar with the construction of the vehicle as before (SOU 1929:16).
Instead, more focus should be put on teaching students about the effects of vehicle handling. This was later changed so that the driver had
to be familiar only with the vehicle that he or she had a driving license
for (Franke et al., 1995)
In the late 20’s the oral test was also restricted in order to provide
room for more practical tests (SOU 1929:16). Further, the practical
test was now to be performed in a more varying environment, as it had
been criticized for being located on roads with low traffic intensity or
in environments well known to the student. It was also made an important issue to inform students about the negative effects of alcohol
and the risks connected with drinking and driving. Experts argued that
the driving examiner should be given the responsibility of making sure
that the student possessed necessary knowledge and fully understood
the importance of keeping alcohol and driving separated.
At about the same time, however, The Swedish Automobile Association claimed that the established educational system was insufficient
(SOU 1929:16). In a letter sent to the King of Sweden in October
1927, the association argued that the driver education system had
failed to keep up with the general development in society and therefore was out of date. According to the association, the general opinion
was that the number of traffic accidents was too high and that something had to be done to reduce it. A driver education given at nonprofit traffic schools was seen as the best alternative. These suggestions were soon criticized by experts who stated that a compulsory
education at a traffic school would be too expensive for most people.
8
Moreover, the experts stated that private educators would be more
able to adjust the education to suit the needs of each individual. It was
also assumed that students undergoing private education would get
more chances of practice than those educated at traffic schools. Therefore, the experts argued that the current system should be kept intact.
In 1935, it was suggested that The Royal Swedish Board of Roads and
Waterways should be the authority regulating the work of the driving
examiners (Franke et al., 1995). The main reason for this suggestion
was the fact that the examinations were performed differently by different examiners. Therefore, it was requested that the driving-license
test should be made more standardized. The suggestion was accepted
by the Swedish Government in 1937, and The Royal Swedish Board
of Roads and Waterways was made the central authority for the driving examiners of the country. During the following ten years no major
decisions were taken regarding the driver testing, except for a few that
mainly concerned professional drivers. In 1944, however, recommendations of a further expansion regarding the driving test were put forward and it was discussed how to guarantee that the student obtained
the necessary knowledge and driving experience.
In 1945, a traffic safety commission called attention to the fact that a
driver’s personal lifestyle also affected him or her as a driver (Franke
et al., 1995), and in 1948 guidelines were published that emphasized
the necessity of personal development and education in how to become a responsible driver. From now on more focus was put on the
individual, who should be taught to avoid accidents by being careful
and paying attention to other road users.
The National Vehicle Inspection, a division within the Royal Swedish
Board of Roads and Waterways, was in 1948 made responsible for the
driving-license test (Franke et al., 1995). For the first time, the test
was considered standardized.
The theoretical test was originally an oral examination, but in 1952
experiments were made with paper-and-pencil tests (Molander, 1997).
Since 1958, the theoretical examination has been performed using
such tests, though sometimes in combination with an oral examination
(SFS 1958:222).
9
In 1953, an investigation emphasized the importance of the student
understanding the problems regarding traffic safety, as this was believed to develop his or her judgment as a driver (Franke et al., 1995).
Therefore, the purpose of the theoretical test should be to make sure
that the student had obtained such knowledge. A proposition published in 1958 recommended that the central part of the theoretical
education should ensure that students adopted the right attitude towards other road users and the traffic environment. However, the
practical parts were still dominating the driver education. A problem
concerning the practical part of the test was the difficulty of finding
places where this could be performed, i.e. places where the traffic environment was varied enough (Molander, 1997). The aim was to expose the applicant to a large variety of situations in order to ensure
that he or she was fully capable of handling them, as a contrast to
driving only in already known environments.
The first practical curriculum
In 1959, the first curriculum regarding the practical aspects of driver
education was established (Vattenbyggnadsstyrelsen, 1959). It stated
that systematically learning was of great importance. Successive training, where instruction and practice were closely integrated, was therefore considered the best form of driver education. It was also considered important that the instructor was able to adjust instructions and
exercises so that they suited the individual capacity of the student. The
curriculum contained 28 different objectives regarding basic manoeuvres like starting, stopping and parking, different traffic situations like
driving in built-up areas, and special manoeuvres like overtaking. In
the curriculum, each exercise was described in detail and followed by
recommendations to the instructor regarding details to emphasize and
things to think of and look out for. The basic exercises were performed on roads with little or no traffic. The exercises were then
gradually moved into more general traffic environments. The student
was expected to perform these exercises to satisfactory before undergoing the driving test.
10
Driver education
In order to ensure that the student obtained the necessary skills and
knowledge, it was recommended that each area of training should contain three stages (Vattenbyggnadsstyrelsen, 1959):
1. A demonstration by the instructor
2. An instructed exercise
3. Independent practice by the student
It was also stated that each area of training should be repeated not until the student was barely able to perform the exercise, but until he or
she fully understood it and was able to perform it independently.
Spending more time practising fundamentals was considered a better
alternative than correcting faults later, as it was thought to save both
valuable time and money in the long run. The instructor should also
strive to teach the student not only what to do, but also why this
should be done.
The practical test
In 1959, the practical test was arranged through the driving school,
which offered a number of driving test occasions every week (Olweus,
1958). When the applicant had passed the theoretical test and the
superintendent at the driving school considered him or her ready, an
examiner was contacted. According to the traffic regulations of 1965,
the test-taker had to bring an ID, a photo and a medical certificate containing a health report and a doctor’s statement regarding his/her hearing and sight abilities (Fredriksson, 1965). The practical test was performed during 15 minutes, in an area close to the driving school and in
a car used by the applicant during the driver education. When the test
had been completed, the examiner gave the applicant a grade between
0 and 10, where a score of 5 or higher meant that the applicant had
passed the test. The examiner was to inform the applicant immediately
whether he or she had passed or not and also to point out any weaknesses (Olweus, 1958).
11
The first theoretical curriculum
In 1961, the first theoretical curriculum was established (Vattenbyggnadsstyrelsen, 1961). It contained guidelines and instructions
regarding what were required of the student in order for him or her to
pass the theoretical test, something that was necessary to be allowed to
undergo the practical test. To pass the theoretical test in 1961, the student had to possess the necessary knowledge regarding the vehicle
that the driving license concerned, understand the traffic regulations
and the effects of tiredness and alcohol on a person’s driving ability.
The student also had to possess knowledge concerning the risks of
overtaking, crossing railroad tracks, passing children staying on or
close to the road, driving after dark, driving on slippery surfaces and
other traffic situations fraught with danger, and how to avoid these
dangerous situations. In addition the student had to possess the knowledge about the extent and cause of traffic accidents to fully understand
the necessity of driving carefully.
Driver education
The curriculum also contained recommendations regarding teaching
methods (Vattenbyggnadsstyrelsen, 1961). For instance, it was recommended that the number of students attending a theory class should
not exceed 40 individuals, as it was considered important that the instructor worked close to the students. The curriculum stated that the
students should constitute the point of departure for the lessons and
that instructors should keep in mind that the students’ previous knowledge was limited.
Further, it was stated that the theoretical education should contain 14
hours of lessons of 45 minutes each, during which many different subjects were to be discussed. The history of traffic, the laws of nature,
the effects of alcohol and tiredness, traffic regulations and the nature
of traffic accidents were some of them. The driving schools were entrusted to make sure that students learned about these issues. They
should also prepare the students for what might happen in different
traffic situations and teach them how to protect themselves against the
dangers of traffic.
Before a student was allowed to undergo the driving-license test, he or
she had to perform an oral test in the presence of either the superin12
tendent of the driving school or an authorized instructor. This test
should be performed in a group of no more than eight students. It was
specified that the questions of this one-hour test should be formulated
so that the students were forced to leave exhaustive answers. The purpose of the test was to examine if the student remembered and fully
understood what he or she had been taught.
The theoretical test
At the time the theoretical test was performed both orally and with the
use of paper and pencil (SFS 1958:222). The applicant had to prove
that he or she had obtained the knowledge necessary to understand
and be able to adapt his/her driving to the hazardous situations to be
encountered in traffic. The applicant should also have obtained basic
knowledge regarding the forces of nature that might affect the driving.
The practical test
In order to obtain a driving license in 1965, one had to undergo a driving test in the presence of a driving examiner (Fredriksson, 1965).
When applying, the applicant had to present an approved ID to prove
his/her age, a photo and a medical certificate issued by a doctor containing a health report and a statement regarding the applicant’s hearing and sight abilities. The applicant was approved if the examiner
considered him or her to possess the necessary driving ability, awareness and general judgment. The applicant also had to possess knowledge regarding the kind of vehicle that the driving license concerned,
as well as necessary understanding regarding traffic regulations and
the special risks associated with the passing of railroad tracks or children on or at the side of the road and other hazardous traffic situations.
Further, the applicant was required to understand the necessity of
careful and considerate traffic behaviour.
The first integrated curriculum
In 1967, a commission was assigned to define and establish a number
of overarching goals that were later accepted by the Swedish Government (Franke et al., 1995). The result was a much more integrated
curriculum, where the theoretical and practical parts were brought
closer together. Further, more emphasis was put on teaching students
13
about different psychological effects of relevance to the traffic environment. The same year a proposition suggested that a special authority should be established. The result was the establishment of the National Swedish Road Safety Office in 1968, which from now on had
the overarching responsibility for road safety, driver education and
driver testing in Sweden. For the first time, there was a chance to get
an overall view of the situation.
14
In 1971, the first curriculum that integrated theoretical and practical
education was established. Until then the curricula had been kept
separated, even though attempts to bring them closer together had
been made since the end of the 1960s. The result was a curriculum
divided into six overlapping areas covering both the practical and the
theoretical aspects of the driver education, where the theory lessons
were supposed to make the student prepared for the practical exercises. The six areas were (National Swedish Road Safety Office,
1971):
1. Elementary theory
2. Elementary driving
3. Continued theory lessons (traffic regulations)
4. Introductory driving lessons in traffic
5. Concluding theory lessons
6. Concluding driving lessons in traffic
In the objectives of each exercise, the curriculum also described four
“degrees of knowledge and abilities.” These regulated the level of
knowledge that the student had to reach within each area. The four
degrees were:
1.
Orientation, which meant that the student should be able to
give a general account of current problems connected with the
area. Issues that the student was required to have only brief
knowledge about were for example the motoring development,
the structure and function of the vehicle and regulations regarding the inspection and registration of the vehicle.
2. Basic knowledge/ability, which meant that the student should
possess basic knowledge, though without any demands of being able to solve problems independently in an entirely correct
way. The student was required to possess only basic knowledge about things like the special regulations that applied to
military traffic, the interaction with other road users and the
regulations concerning the maximum speed limit. The student
should also be able to perform a simple safety control of the
15
vehicle in order to discover probable defects and worn out
parts.
3. Knowledge/ability, which meant that the student had to be able
to solve problems in a mainly correct way, though with plenty
of time at his or her disposal. Some of the things that the student was expected to possess knowledge about and have the
ability to perform was how to start and stop the car softly, how
to break the car at varying speed and how to reverse and park
the car in special training areas.
4. Good knowledge/ability, which meant that the student had to
be able to solve problems in a correct way under realistic time
conditions. For example, the student was supposed to have
good knowledge and abilities regarding the meaning of signs,
the content of the traffic regulations, driving on main roads
and the special risks of driving at night.
Driver education
The first section of the curriculum concerned the basics of driving
license theory, like the development of motor traffic and the individual’s role in traffic (National Swedish Road Safety Office, 1971). Basic knowledge regarding vehicles was also discussed, and the student
was introduced to the regulations regarding the traffic environment.
Then, the basics of driving were focused on. The student was taught
fundamental things like how to choose the correct driving position and
how to perform a simple control of the car from the aspect of traffic
safety. The student also practised some basic manoeuvres like starting
and stopping the vehicle as well as some elementary exercises in
steering. After these practical exercises a continued theoretical lesson
followed, where traffic regulations were discussed further. Regulations regarding road signs, meeting and overtaking, stopping and parking were some of the things that the student was supposed to learn
about. During the fourth part of the education, the student was introduced into traffic through driving lessons. The student performed
these driving lessons on roads with little traffic or in built-up areas.
Reversing, parking and turning manoeuvres were moments being
practised. This was followed by another theoretical part, where subjects like driving at night and on slippery surfaces were discussed. The
student was also informed about the special regulations that applied to
16
military traffic and correct procedures at traffic accidents. In the last
part the student performed a number of concluding driving lessons in
traffic. These exercises included driving at night, on slippery roads
and on highways. There were also some exercises within built-up areas.
The theoretical test
Two years after the new curriculum had been established a new theoretical test was constructed (Spolander, 1974). This differentiated
theoretical test was used for the first time in January 1973. It was
composed of a basic test and one or more supplementary tests. The
basic test was supposed to cover all necessary theoretical aspects of
driving a motorised vehicle. All test-takers performed the basic test,
regardless of what kind of driving license they had applied for. The
basic test contained 60 multiple-choice items with three options each.
One of the options was correct, and the test-taker received one point
for each item that had been answered correctly. In order to pass the
basic test the test-taker had to accomplish 51 correct answers (85 %).
Test-takers applying for a category B driving license (car/light truck)
also had to perform a complementary test in which 15 of the 20 items
(75 %) had to be answered correctly. Each test-taker had to pass both
parts in order to pass the entire test. The basic and the supplementary
tests were combined into six different test catalogues, each containing
a basic test and seven supplementary tests. At the test the students
were handed an entire test catalogue, but they only had to answer the
questions concerning the license they had applied for.
These new tests were made accessible to the driving schools and were
often used during the actual education of the driving students. The
decision to release the tests was taken in December 1972, just before
they were published. The National Swedish Road Safety Office was
convinced that the open attitude towards the driving schools would
prevent the tests from being spread illegally. As more than 200,000
students performed the test every year, it was considered impossible to
prevent that the tests would eventually become accessible to the students. The decision to release them was, however, soon followed by
undesirable effects as the number of students that passed the test
started to increase rapidly. It became hard to draw any conclusions
17
from the actual test results, due to the possibility that test-takers were
able to perform well only on tests already known to them.
In August 1973, the publication of the tests was terminated and revised versions were introduced. The number of items was increased
from 340 to 680. Although the tests were still not confidential in a
formal sense, the possibility of using them for practice disappeared.
As a result, the number of test-takers that passed the test decreased.
However, it was problematic to construct different test versions with a
similar degree of difficulty. Studies showed that students scored
higher means on some versions of the tests. The most difficult versions were passed by 71 per cent of the test-takers, while the easiest
was passed by 87 per cent.
The practical test
In 1973 it was decided that in order to go through a driving test, one
had to be in possession of a learners permit issued by the county administrative board (Björklund, 1973). The permission was granted if
the person in question was found suitable as a driver according to
medical demands and believed to respect traffic regulations, show
adequate respect to other road users and possess good judgment. The
applicant also had to prove that he or she had undergone driver education or been handling a car in different traffic environments during the
last 12 months. The driving test focused on the applicant’s knowledge
of traffic regulations, the construction of the vehicle etc., as well as
his/her ability to handle the vehicle on roads and within built-up areas.
The examiner also paid attention to the applicant’s awareness and
general judgment. If the examiner considered the demands of traffic
safety to be fulfilled, the applicant was approved as a driver.
Driver education in 1988
Curriculum
In 1986, The National Swedish Road Safety Organisation (TSV) felt
that it was time to update the theoretical elements of the driver education that had been used since 1973 (Franke et al., 1995). TSV also
proposed a new form of test. Four changes, which would affect the
curriculum as a whole, were suggested. TSV argued that the driver
18
education should be expanded, that more effort should be made in
order to influence the attitudes of young drivers, the theoretical education should be made more effective and that the driver education
should focus on the complex nature of the traffic environment.
The traffic committee, who were critical of the new curriculum,
thought that too much effort was put on developing knowledge regarding dangerous traffic situations (Franke et al., 1995). The committee
also pointed to the extensive use of picture interpretation and psychology and the fact that the test items regarding these subjects were so
many. As a consequence, they demanded that the new curriculum and
the new theoretical test should be tested before any permanent establishment took place. The traffic committee therefore recommended
TSV to perform an evaluation of the new curriculum and theoretical
test. However, their criticism was rejected and the new curriculum
was permanently established on 1 April 1989.
The curriculum consisted of nine different areas (TSVFS 1988:43).
The education was supposed to cover these areas and ensure that the
student possessed the attitudes, knowledge and skills needed to fulfil
society’s demands on correct traffic behaviour. These nine overlapping areas were divided into five theoretical and four practical parts,
where the theoretical elements were followed by practical exercises.
Unlike in the 1971 curriculum, the level of knowledge was no longer
made an issue. On the other hand, the new curriculum was more extensive, and each of its nine areas comprised a large number of different items and details regarding what both the student and the instructor should think about and look out for. The new theoretical areas 5
and 7 were also treated as separate subjects in the new curriculum, and
thereby attempts were made to lower the number of accidents by increasing the understanding and changing the attitudes among students.
Table 1. The content of the Swedish curriculum.
Theoretical
Practical
1. Vehicle-related knowledge
2. Vehicle-related knowledge
3. Traffic regulations
4. Manoeuvring the vehicle
5. Risky situations in traffic
6. Driving in traffic
19
7. Limitation of driver abilities
8. Driving under special conditions
9. Special applications and other
regulations
1. Vehicle-related knowledge: The student was taught about the construction of the vehicle. Attention was also paid to the environmental
and economical effects of traffic.
2. Vehicle-related knowledge: The student was trained to detect defects and worn out parts of the vehicle and also to solve minor problems in this respect.
3. Traffic regulations: The student was given the basic knowledge of
traffic regulations regarded as necessary in order for the driver to be
able to interact with other road users.
4. Manoeuvring the vehicle: The student was given the necessary
skills regarding options of choice, co-ordination, swiftness and accuracy
5. Risky situations in traffic: The student was trained with the aim of
increasing his/her awareness, illuminating the many risks of traffic
and pointing out hidden dangers and the small margins in many traffic
situations.
6. Driving in traffic: The student was supposed to obtain the necessary
skills, knowledge and attitudes to develop the will to show regard for
other road users. He or she was also to realize and make use of the
advantages of a defensive driving style and become able to choose the
right speed depending on the traffic situation.
7. Limitation of driver abilities: The student was taught about human
limitations in order to prevent an overestimation of his/her own abilities and to emphasize that a good driver is characterized by personal
maturity and great respect for other road users.
8. Driving under special conditions: The student was given the skills,
knowledge and attitudes necessary for safe traffic behaviour when
driving in reduced visibility, after dark and on slippery surfaces.
20
9. Special applications and other regulations: The student was informed about traffic regulations regarding driving in built-up areas, on
highways, after dark and on slippery surfaces, as well as important
regulations concerning loading, driving licenses and traffic offences.
Every area of the curriculum contains a number of different exercises
and information regarding sub-goals to be obtained.
The theoretical test
The previous paper-and-pencil test consisted of 80 items (Mattsson,
1990). Many of them were considered out of date, and many were also
well-known among students. When the new theoretical test was introduced on 1 January 1990, the test catalogues were classified as confidential. The purpose was to ensure that students were well-informed
rather then just trained in test performance. The test was also considered to be more difficult and harder to pass on routine by those who
did not fully understand what they had been taught. More items focused on actual traffic situations instead of individual regulations.
The test contained 40 multiple-choice items, half the number of the
previous test. One or more of the four options given were correct answers and the test-taker didn’t always know how many options that
were correct. For each item, the test-taker had to state all the correct
answers in order to get one point. The first 30 items regarded the general elements of the curriculum. The other 10 focused on certain traffic situations and knowledge about the kind of vehicle that the driving
license applied to. Many items were illustrated with photos or
sketches.
The test was printed in six different catalogues, which should be randomly handed to the test-takers. The contents of the catalogues were
the same, but the items were combined in different ways. The testtaker had 45 minutes to complete the test. In order to pass the test, the
test-taker needed to meet the minimum requirements showed in table
2 or score a total of at least 36 points (90 %).
21
Table 2. Number of items in different areas of the curriculum.
Area
B3
B5
B7
C1
C9
Total
Number of
items
14
8
8
3
7
40
11
(79 %)
5
(63 %)
5
(63 %)
1
(33 %)
4
(57 %)
30
(75 %)
Minimum
requirements
The practical test
In 1988, the practical test was divided into six overlapping areas:
safety check, manoeuvring, attentiveness, placement, speed adaptation
and traffic behaviour (TSVFS 1986:65). The examiner used a fivegraded scale for judging the performance in each area, except for the
first one, safety check, which was graded only as “approved” or “not
approved.” The scale contained guidelines regarding what should be
expected of the applicant in order for him or her to achieve a certain
grade. In order to pass the practical test the applicant had to reach a
certain grade level regulated by the National Swedish Road Safety
Office.
The curriculum of today
The present curriculum (see table 3) is divided into nine overlapping
areas, of which five are theoretical and four are practical (VVFS
1999:32). These areas are supposed to cover all the necessary aspects
of driving and ensure that the main purpose of the curriculum is
reached. The present curriculum is largely the same as the one established in 1988, but some minor changes have been made. For example, the environmental aspects of driving have become more emphasized.
22
Table 3. The content of the Swedish curriculum.
Main purpose
The main purpose of the curriculum is to create the attitudes, knowledge
and skills necessary to fulfil society’s demands on correct traffic behaviour.
Theoretical
Practical
1. Vehicle-related knowledge
2. Vehicle-related knowledge
3. Traffic regulations
4. Manoeuvring the vehicle
5. Risky situations in traffic
6. Driving in traffic
7. Limitation of driver abilities
8. Driving under special conditions
9. Special applications and other
regulations
Every area of the curriculum contains a number of different exercises
and information regarding sub-goals to be obtained.
The theoretical test
The theoretical test used at present contains 65 multiple-choice items
(VVFS 1998:53). In each item, only one option is correct. The test
also contains five try-out items not included in the total score. In order
to pass the test, the test-taker has to answer at least 52 of the 65 items
correctly (80%). The purpose of the test is to assess whether the testtaker has acquired sufficient knowledge according to the curriculum.
The test items are distributed over the five theoretical content areas of
the curriculum (see table 3). The number of items differs between the
areas. The area of traffic regulations is covered by the largest number
of items while the area of vehicle-related knowledge is covered by the
lowest number. The test also contains items regarding at least one of
the following subjects:
1. Mechanical aspects that is important to traffic safety
2. The safety equipment of the vehicle and safety equipment for
children
23
3. The environmental aspects of vehicle use.
The theoretical test is computerized, and both the order of the items
and the options are randomised. The test-taker is given 50 minutes to
complete the test.
The practical test
In order to be allowed to perform the practical test, the student has to
complete the exercises in driving on slippery surfaces and pass the
theoretical test (VVFS 1998:53). The driving test should contain a
safety check and driving within as well as outside a built-up area. The
student should drive the vehicle towards a certain destination or along
a certain route during at least 25 minutes. The test should, if possible,
be performed on roads and streets that vary in aspects like surface,
breadth and traffic intensity. The purpose of the test is to make sure
that the applicant has acquired the abilities, knowledge and behaviour
stated in the curriculum.
The driving test comprises four areas:
1. Vehicle-related knowledge: The test starts with a safety check
of the vehicle performed by the test-taker. He or she is to
check the condition of the breaks, tyres, mirrors etc.
2. Manoeuvring: The examiner sets focus on the test-taker’s ability to handle the vehicle. Particular focus should be put on
breaking, gear shifting and the ability to use different controls
without losing attention. This area should also contain two or
more of the following elements; turning on a road or in a
crossing, parking behind or in front of another vehicle or between two vehicles, parking on a parking lot, reversing or
starting in a downhill or uphill slope
3. Driving in traffic: Attention is paid to the applicant’s ability to
foresee risks and adapt to them, his/her watchfulness regarding
other road users and the information received through signs,
traffic lights and road marks. Other things tested are the ability
to adjust the speed and the distance to other vehicles depending on visibility, road conditions and other important aspects.
24
Moreover, the examiner should focus on the applicant’s routines when crossing a road, overtaking, turning, parking etc.
4. Driving under special conditions: The content of this area depends on the kind of special conditions under which driving is
being performed. If it takes place after dark, focus is put on the
applicant’s ability to handle the lights on the vehicle and place
it correctly when meeting oncoming vehicles. If driving is performed on slippery roads, focus is put on the applicant’s ability
to adjust the speed according to the state of the road.
The practical test is made in order to test the student’s abilities in the
four practical areas of the curriculum. The performance of the testtaker is judged with respect to five aspects of competence that relate to
the driver’s attentiveness of risks: speed, manoeuvring, placement,
traffic behaviour and attentiveness. During the practical test different
traffic situations are observed. The performance in these situations is
related to the five aspects of competence mentioned earlier. If the testtaker fails in an aspect, the examiner notes in what specific traffic
situation the error did occur. One error is enough to fail the test-taker.
The examiner uses a special form to record what has been tested and if
the test-taker has failed in any of these cases. When the test is completed, the driving examiner reports the result to the test-taker. If the
test-taker has failed the test, the examiner also explains the cause of
failure.
Suggestions for the improvement of driver education
Through the years many investigations have been carried out, resulting in just as many propositions. However, most of these have been
rejected, mainly for economic reasons.
The issue of how to ensure the efficiency of the driver education became more and more important during the 1960s (Franke et al., 1995).
From that time onwards, more focus was put on avoiding mechanical
learning and making sure that driving students fully understood what
they were taught.
Future forms of driver testing were also discussed, and a commission
came up with two alternatives: either that the driving schools should
25
handle the examination themselves, or that the responsibilities should
be given to the authorities (Franke et al., 1995). The reason that the
matter was brought up was the constantly increasing number of drivers waiting to get examined. The commission pleaded for the second
alternative, but this was later rejected by the Swedish Parliament,
which referred to the financial interests of the driving schools. There
were also discussions whether private education should be prohibited,
but it was later decided that no such changes should be made.
In 1972, another investigation regarding education at commercial
driving schools was carried out (Franke et al., 1995). The investigators
pointed to the fact that there was a conflict between the commercial
interests of the schools and the students’ interest in learning. They also
called attention to the differences between driver education and other
types of education regarding the examination of students, i.e. that a
driver examiner had to be able to observe and determine whether the
student possessed the necessary skills and knowledge within a very
limited period of time.
In order to generally improve the driver education, work began in order to develop and establish a better curriculum (Franke et al., 1995).
In 1975, it was demanded that driving on main roads, driving at night
and skidpan driving should be made compulsory. This meant more
expenses for the students, and therefore some argued that society
should pay for the driver education of its citizens and that private
driver education should be forbidden. The same people claimed that
more compulsory elements would result in a more homogeneous education of improved quality. These propositions were rejected, but are
still supported by many.
In 1981 the Swedish Government published a proposition, which suggested a new type of graduated driver education, divided into three
phases and completed with a driving-license test (Franke et al., 1995).
The first phase would contain eight driving lessons of 40 minutes each
and related theoretical education. During the first phase, private training would be forbidden. The second phase would be considered a
practice period for the student, and private training would be allowed
as a substitute for or complement to the education at driving school. A
special training card was to be used in order to document the content
of the driving lessons and the progress made by the student. The second phase would be completed with four driving lessons, of 40 min26
utes each, at the traffic school. The third phase would be considered
the examination phase, in which the instructor and an examiner were
to estimate the level of the student. The examiner would attend three
different occasions, and the phase would be completed with a drivinglicense test. This implied that a significant number of examiners
would have to be hired, which would of course increase students’ expenses greatly. Due to these increased expenses, the proposition was
rejected.
In 1984, a commission was assigned to examine the means and ends
of the driver education (Franke et al., 1995). Since statistics showed
that newly examined drivers were frequently involved in car accidents
the commission argued that more attention had to be paid to certain
aspects of the driver education, like increasing the knowledge about
different kinds of dangerous situations. The commission also argued
for a new, integrated system, which combined lessons taken at traffic
school with private education. The student was supposed to obtain
new knowledge and skills at traffic school and maintain and develop
these through private training. Eventually, this system was tried out.
Although both students and instructors were satisfied with it, it was
never made compulsory.
In 1987, another commission proposed that the driver education
should be divided into two different phases (Franke et al., 1995). In
the first phase, the student was to go through the existing education,
with some minor changes. A compulsory exercise of driving after dark
was recommended, and skidpan exercises should be focused in order
to develop the comprehension and respect regarding driving on slippery surfaces. The second phase, during which the driving license was
going to be regarded only as a preliminary document, the driver would
have to go through a number of additional lessons at a total of eight
hours. The driver would not have to perform a second examination.
However, this proposition was rejected.
In the same year, TSV published a proposition suggesting a similar
system (Franke et al., 1995). The existing education should be extended with a compulsory exercise in driving after nightfall, performed at driving school. Moreover, the education would focus on
developing the understanding of the limitations of the driving ability.
The student was to go through a compulsory theoretical education,
and the driving license would be regarded as a preliminary document
27
for two years during which four or five hours of additional lessons in
skidpan driving would take place. During these two years a sign was
to be placed upon the vehicle informing other road users that the
driver was a novice. In order to make the driving license permanent
the novice had to perform a final driving-license test after 18 months
at the earliest. TSV also proposed that a certain education certificate
should be required for those wanting to work as “private instructors.”
This certificate was to be provided when the applicant had passed a
theoretical and practical test. This proposition was also rejected.
In September 1999, a commission sent out a proposal for consideration to 40 different instances (Vägverket, 2000:77). In the final proposition sent to the Swedish Government it was stated that the driver
education should be seen as a part of a long-term road user education,
starting early and running through a person’s entire life. In order to
reach this goal, the driver education had to be altered regarding both
structure and content. The Swedish National Road Administration
suggested that the new graduate driver education should contain five
stages starting with a preparatory education, which the student had to
complete in order to be allowed to undergo the real education.
During the primary stage, starting in nursery school and continuing
during the entire comprehensive school, the student should acquire the
fundamental values and knowledge needed in order to participate in
road traffic before the driver education started. The primary stage was
to be followed by a training period divided into three stages. During
the first stage, the student was to be allowed to practice driving accompanied by a driving instructor in uncomplicated traffic environments and on roads with a maximum speed limit of 70 km/h. During
the second stage driving practice would be allowed on roads with a
maximum speed limit of 90 km/h, and during the third stage it would
be allowed in all kinds of traffic environments. Between every stage
the student would have to perform a proficiency test. The three-stage
training period was to be completed with a driving test in the presence
of an examiner. The training period was to be followed by a two-year
follow-up period. This new kind of driver education was thought to
have positive effects on traffic safety both during and after the education period, but it was never realized.
During the years it has also been suggested that the private education
should be improved. In 1987 TSV proposed that the private lay in28
structors should have a special education certificate in order to be allowed to practice as a private instructor. However, this proposal was
rejected (Franke et al., 1995). In 2002 the Swedish National Road
Administration proposed that the private education should start with a
compulsory education, which the lay instructor and the student should
complete together (Vägverket, 2002). Although, this proposal was
also rejected.
Finland
The Finnish curriculum
In Finland it has been more than ten years since the last curriculum
concerning class B vehicles was published, and many things have
changed during this period (AKE, 1998). The model, which builds on
a graduated driver education, has proved to be useful since a graduated driver education makes it possible to emphasize matters related to
different levels of knowledge. It is also adapted to its purpose to perform things in a certain order during each stage. For example, it is
stated in the curriculum that the driver education should start with
sufficient education in the handling of the vehicle, so that the student
will be fully able to focus on other aspects of the following education.
The driver education can be carried through at a traffic school and/or
with the help of a private instructor. It is however necessary that any
private driving training is performed with a car equipped with dual
controls.
The present Finnish curriculum is divided into three stages, two educational stages and one mid stage. During the first stage the student is
to obtain the necessary ability, knowledge and attitudes in order to be
able to drive independently during the mid-stage without endangering
him-/herself or other road users. The student should act realistically in
regard to his or her driving ability and be motivated to develop his/her
driving. Therefore, the student has to be able to handle and control the
vehicle, adopt of a safe way of driving in normal traffic situations and
show the ability to plan his/her driving and choice of route.
The student must also show the ability to interact socially with other
road users by being able to identify special qualities of other road us29
ers, foresee the behaviour of others, drive in a foreseeing way and be
able to void group pressure when transporting others. Further the student must be able to adapt speed and the way of driving to different
traffic environments and situations. Finally the student must be able to
judge his/her own condition and actions, be able to observe, identify
and avoid the most common hazards caused by the driver’s own acts,
the actions of others, the traffic environment, the driving conditions
and, especially light traffic. The student should also know how to
drive a car in an environmental as well as energy-saving way.
During the mid-stage, the experience and practice together with continuous judgments serve to develop the new driver’s independent, responsible and environmentally adapted driving. By means of stricter
control regarding new driver’s traffic offences, attempts are made to
ensure that they drive in a safe way and in accordance with applied
regulations.
During the second stage, the driver should be able to observe, identify
and avoid potential hazards, and also to act correctly if an emergency
situation occurs. The new driver should also acquire a realistic understanding of his/her driving ability and be motivated to develop his/her
driving.
The first stage
The first stage is divided into four minor parts: The driver in traffic,
Driving in traffic situations, Independent driving and Driving under
difficult conditions. Each part consists of both theoretical and practical
education.
The driver in traffic
In this part, the student is introduced to the driver education as well as
the traffic system and traffic environment. The student is also introduced to the vehicle. After this introduction, the student should know
the objectives of the driver education. By studying the student orients
him-/herself and acquires an overall picture of traffic as a system. The
student is taught more about traffic safety and also how to reduce the
contamination of the environment. The driver education starts with
30
basic education in vehicle handling. The objective is that the student
should be able to handle the vehicle and pass a formal handling test.
The first part contains four theory lessons, which cover the driver
education itself, the traffic system, traffic environment and control, the
vehicle and the handling of it. Before any practical education is given
the four theory lessons are to be completed. The practical exercises
should, if possible, be performed in an area secluded from traffic or
with little traffic. During these exercises the student is taught about
preparation for driving, starting, stopping and how to adjust speed and
the direction of the vehicle. The student’s handling ability is evaluated
at the end of the handling education.
Driving in traffic situations
After this part, the student should know how to participate in traffic in
a safe and environmental way. The student should also understand that
flexible traffic implies demands on social behaviour and the ability to
interact. Under the supervision of the instructor the student should be
able to control his/her driving and the vehicle in common situations
that may occur within built-up areas.
The second part contains six theory lessons which cover the basics of
safety in traffic situations, the interaction between road users, entrance
into traffic and driving within built-up areas, exit from traffic, passing
through crossings. The student practises how to enter and exit from
traffic as well as manoeuvres like passing a crossing and changing
lanes. At the end of the part, the instructor’s judgment is compared
with the student’s own apprehension. Before the student is allowed to
move on to the next part he or she has to pass a number of criteria.
The student has to be able to handle the car within a built-up area, pay
attention to light traffic, interact with other road users, be able to judge
traffic situations, etc.
Independent driving
During the third part the student is given larger responsibility, and the
practical exercises are continued on roads with higher speed limits.
After this part the student should know that a planned route and a
foreseeing way of driving reduce both the risk of accidents and the
fuel consumption. The student should know the differences between
31
driving within built-up areas and on main roads, and be aware of
common risks connected with driving in these different traffic environments. The student should also understand his/her responsibilities
as a driver and be familiar with different aspects of driving safely and
in a way that spares the environment. The student should also know
how to act in case a traffic accident occurs. Further, the student should
be able to control his/her driving and the vehicle on roads, within
built-up areas and without the supervision of the instructor. By now
the student should also be prepared to undergo the practical driving
test.
The third part contains eight theory lessons which cover the planning
of a driving route and the avoidance of risks, speed dependent on
situation, driving on roads, overtaking, the human being as a driver,
actions at the scene of a traffic accident, the condition of the vehicle
and the use of the vehicle in an environmental way. The student is also
given guidelines for the mid-stage. Before the practical exercises of
this part begin, the student’s ability to handle traffic situations is
evaluated. During this part the student has to practise driving on roads
on at least six occasions. At the end of the part the instructor’s judgment is compared with the student’s own apprehension. Before the
student is allowed to undergo the practical driving test he or she
should be able to act foreseeing when driving, plan a driving route,
interact with other road users, drive economically, etc.
Driving under difficult conditions
At the first stage of the driver education, the student is introduced to
driving on slippery surfaces as well as driving after dark. During this
part, focus is however put on demonstration rather than training,
mainly because of the time aspect. Nevertheless, the student is able to
study the fundamental principles of driving under difficult conditions.
After this part the student should know about common risks associated
with driving on slippery surfaces and driving after dark. The student
should know how to avoid these risks and how to handle such situations.
This theoretical education contains two parts: driving on slippery surfaces and driving after dark. The part concerning slippery surfaces
contains 60 minutes of education in class where the students are
taught how to foresee slipperiness and judge the grip of the vehicle,
32
how to make sharp turns and brake the vehicle on a slippery surface
and how to avoid hazardous situations when driving under such conditions. The part concerning driving after dark contains 30 minutes of
education in class covering how to see and be seen in the dark, different ways of avoiding hazardous situations when driving after dark and
the correct way of handling the lights of the vehicle.
During the practical exercises in driving on slippery surfaces, the student should understand the importance of the tyre grip and be able to
identify signs of slipperiness. The student should also be able to adapt
his/her speed and choose a safe distance to keep to other road users on
the basis of the condition of the road surface. He or she should also
possess fundamental knowledge of how to drive on a slippery surface
and realize that a hazardous situation is often the result of the driver
not being foreseeing enough. At the end of the practical education two
driving sessions containing both demonstration and training are performed on a driving course.
During the practical exercises in driving after dark, the student should
understand the dangers caused by poor visibility, perform correct
observations, adapt his/her speed in accordance with the current
visibility and handle the lights of the vehicle correctly when driving
and parking. Before taking the practical driving test the student
performs two driving sessions, if possible in a place secluded from
traffic or with minimum traffic. If the instructor considers the student
ready after this part, he or she is allowed to undergo the driving test.
The mid-stage
The mid-stage starts when the student has passed the practical driving
test. During this stage, the student is supposed to drive independently
and also to judge him-/herself as a driver. If an accident or a risky
situation occurs, the student is supposed to analyse the cause and consider what to do in order to avoid it from happening again. The student
is also supposed to analyse how economical his/her way of driving is.
During the mid-stage, attention is also being paid to any violations of
traffic regulations. If the education in driving after dark has been put
off as an effect of the education taking place during the summer
months, this should be given as soon as possible.
33
The second stage
At the second stage, the student’s independent driving practice in
different traffic environments should be the starting point (AKE,
1998). During this stage, the driving ability that the student has
achieved so far should be further developed. Special focus should be
put on a preventive and environmental way of driving. The student’s
ability to realistically judge his/her own behaviour, driving ability and
way of driving should be developed.
The theoretical part of the second stage is divided into four lessons
covering the causes of risky situations in traffic and how to drive
safely and economically. The student is also given the chance to judge
his/her own development as a driver on the basis of the experiences
gained during the mid-stage. In addition, the instructor gives the student some feedback.
During the practical part the student’s driving ability is evaluated during two driving sessions in traffic. The student also undergoes six
driving sessions on a driving course. Following a varied driving route,
the instructor judges how safe and economical the student’s way of
driving is.
When the new driver has gone through the second stage and has been
able to show that he or she has not violated any traffic regulations, the
permanent driving license is issued. The driver license is valid until
the driver is 70 years old, on the condition that he or she is not found
guilty of violating traffic regulations and nothing else causes the withdrawal or change of the driver license.
The theoretical test
The theoretical test is administered when the first stage is completed
(AKE, 2002). The test, which is computerised, contains a training section, a test section and a feedback section. The training section offers
the student a chance to practise the theoretical test. The test section
consists of ten written multiple-choice items, with three options each
of which one is correct. The test also comprises 50 picture interpretation items. Each item is to be answered within a certain time-limit,
which is 30 seconds for the multiple-choice items and ten seconds for
34
picture interpretations. However, an answer given within three seconds after the time-limit has expired will be regarded as valid. The
test-taker has 30 minutes to complete the test. In order to pass the test
he or she must give the correct answers to seven of the ten written
items (70 %) and 42 of the 50 picture interpretation items (84 %). The
test items are divided into ten content areas.
1. The basics of driver education
2. Fundamental conditions for safe driving
3. Traffic accidents and risks for the driver
4. Vehicles and risks, economical ways of driving, service
5. Special qualities of other road users, apprehending signals
6. Acting under difficult or exceptional conditions, traffic insurance, pollution
7. Dangers to the environment and other road users
8. Actions in case of an accident
9. Road signs
10. To plan a driving route
In the feedback section, the student is informed of the test result and
told which items were answered incorrectly. If the student passes the
test, the result will be valid for six months. If the student fails the test,
he or she will be able to re-test after three days.
The practical test
It is stated that the regulations concerning the practical test should
support and complement each other (AKE, 1999). In practice, however, it is almost impossible to fully comply with them. It has proved
impossible to examine everything that is included in the driver education. For instance, the student’s ability to handle the vehicle under
difficult conditions can be studied only during educational exercises,
never in practice. Efforts are made to teach the students a certain general attitude towards traffic but being able to fully measure these is
still considered a utopia.
35
By the use of a new examination system, the practical test has been
made easier to go through as a new way of recording the examination
results has been introduced. The new form of recording is based on a
summarised evaluation of the applicant’s performance during the test.
It was earlier stated that all faults occurring during the test should be
recorded.
When establishing the new recording system a new grading system
was also introduced. These grades that is being used during the final
evaluation consists of four levels. When the letter (F) or (K) is noted
the applicant has made at least one mistake within the current area. If
no note is made, the student is considered to have passed and nothing
further needs to be added. If a (G) is noted, the student’s performance
is considered excellent. Although the grade (G) is of no importance
for the final result, it is believed to mean a lot to the individual student. Thanks to this new way of recording student performance, good
performances have become easier to judge.
The new regulations increase the demands on the competence of the
driver examiner, who also has to be more active. The examiner must
decide where and how the different parts of the driving test should be
performed. He or she must try to find the optimal surroundings for
each and every element of the test.
The driving test starts with a conversation where the examiner establishes contact with the applicant. This should be made in a friendly
and correct way, without any stress. It is important that the applicant
feels comfortable. The examiner may inform the applicant of practical
details like where to drive, how the test is to be performed and how
much time it will take. The applicant is to show that he or she is capable of manoeuvring the driver’s seat and assuming a correct driving
position. The applicant should also be able to adjust the temperature,
the mirrors and the seat belt.
Before the driving test starts the applicant is asked to fill in an applicant column on the evaluation form. The applicant should make an
estimate of his or her driving ability and way of driving with reference
to the themes and situations stated on the form. The applicant is to use
a five-graded scale where 5 means good, 3 means OK and 1 means
poor. The applicant’s own estimate does not affect the decision made
36
by the examiner but plays an important part during the feedback session.
During the driving test the applicant is to show that he or she is able to
drive safely and smoothly in traffic. The applicant’s abilities and way
of driving should be evaluated on a test route, where the examiner
observes the applicant’s handling of the vehicle from many aspects
and in different situations. The driving test should have the character
of normal and independent driving to a certain location. If the applicant gets lost this should not be considered a fault, as he or she is not
obliged to know the locality. During the test the examiner records
each situation that the applicant undergoes in the left margin of the
form, using the same grading scale as the applicant.
Each driving test contains preparatory measures, handling of the vehicle and entrance into and exit from traffic. Within these aspects the
examiner is able to choose what elements to observe. The examiner is
also to choose one of the following areas for particularly close observation: driving in lanes, through crossings or on roads.
Handling of the vehicle
The applicant has to be able to manoeuvre the vehicle independently
in a number of different traffic situations. Within this part of the test
things like proper preparation before driving, adjustment of the
driver’s seat, starting, stopping, steering and speed adaptation are focused on. In order to achieve the grade of 3, the applicant has to be
able to manoeuvre the vehicle well in the most common traffic situations.
Control of the traffic situation
The applicant has to be able to independently handle many different
traffic situations within built-up areas as well as on roads. The applicant should observe traffic regulations but also be able to adjust his or
her behaviour in accordance to the traffic environment. A general fault
might be for instance that the applicant focuses on certain road users
at the expense of others. In order to achieve the grade of 3, the applicant has to be able to manage the most common traffic situations well.
37
Consideration of pedestrians, bicyclists, moped riders etc
The applicant must be able to observe and pay attention to pedestrians
and bicyclists in time. The applicant should also be careful when approaching footpath and observe any obstacles blocking the line of
sight. The student should be able to pass bicyclists in a safe way both
within built-up areas and on roads. When turning, the applicant should
pay attention to other road users on foot and bicycle paths in time. In
order to achieve the grade of 3, the applicant has to pay good attention
to pedestrians, bicyclists and moped riders in the most common situations.
Flexibility and methodical course of action
The applicant has to understand that flexibility in traffic demands both
social competence and interaction. When undergoing the practical test
the applicant is not normally given the chance of using all possible
means to improve flexibility and the systematic aspects of driving.
Due to traffic jams and rush hours, the route cannot be planed in advance. Therefore, it is most important that the examiner provides the
applicant with information that makes it possible for him or her to
perform the driving test as an independent task. In order to achieve the
grade of 3, the applicant has to show good ability to drive smoothly
and systematically in the most common traffic situations.
Ability to detect and avoid risks
The student has to be able to detect and avoid different kinds of risks
within built-up areas as well as on roads. In other words, he or she has
to be able to foresee different situations. It is important that the applicant maintains sufficient margins regarding unforeseen situations,
other road users and the condition and surface of the road. At crossings, foot and bicycle paths, etc., the applicant should observe any
obstacles blocking the line of sight and adapt his or her actions and
speed to the current situation. Other road users need varying kinds of
attention, for example heavy traffic, slow traffic and space-demanding
traffic. Children and old or disabled people may also behave in unexpected ways. In order to achieve the grade of 3, the applicant has to
show good ability to detect and avoid risks in the most common traffic
situations.
38
Economical ways of driving
During the practical test the applicant’s fundamental ability to drive
economically is examined. For instance, he or she should avoid idle
running, keep a safe distance to the vehicle ahead and refrain from
accelerating and braking unnecessarily. In order to achieve the grade
of 3, the applicant has to show good ability to drive economically in
the most common traffic situations. However, the grade of 1 does not
mean that the applicant has failed.
Agreement between estimates
After the driving test has been completed, the examiner and the applicant compare each other’s estimates. In order for the applicant to
achieve the grade of 3, the estimates should agree with each other.
This grade does not affect the final evaluation, but it will be of importance when feedback is given to the applicant.
After the driving test
After the driving test has been completed, each element is evaluated
on the basis of road safety. Notes can be made in four different ways:
The note “K” means that the performance is in conflict with the fundamental conditions for a safe way of driving. A “K” should be noted
when the applicant causes a situation in which he or she, the examiner
or another road user is able to avoid an accident only by braking or
turning sharply or by accelerating. A “K” should also be noted when
the examiner has to interfere or a collision takes place. Incidents like
these should always lead to the decision that the applicant failed the
test.
The note “F” means that the performance increases the risks in relation to the fundamental conditions for a safe way of driving. A (F)
should be noted when the applicant acts in a way that increases the
risk of an accident. However, this does not necessarily mean that the
applicant failed the driving test.
If no note is made the performance does not contain either negative or
positive features in relation to the fundamental conditions for a safe
way of driving.
39
The note “G” means that the performance does not contain any negative features and the examiner notes a good performance in relation to
the fundamental conditions for a safe way of driving. A “G” should be
noted if the applicant’s performance was better than average.
At the end of the driving test, the examiner discusses the test with the
applicant. The purpose of this discussion is to make sure that the applicant fully understands and accepts the decision made and the motives stated by the examiner. The examiner should also inform the
applicant of good as well as bad aspects of his/her way of driving.
40
Denmark
The Danish curriculum
In Denmark people applying for a driving license is only allowed to
attend the driving education at a traffic school since all private driving
education is forbidden (Rigspolitiet, 1995). The student must be at
least 17 years and nine months old before he or she is allowed to start
the driving education. The student is also obligated to keep a logbook
of what exercises he or she has fulfilled. The Danish driver education
is based on the curriculum, which consists of six main objectives:
1. To make students realize and understand the dangers that they
could encounter in traffic and give them knowledge of laws
and regulations concerning traffic
2. To give students such knowledge of the vehicle and its nature
that they are able to detect any malfunctions that could affect
general safety
3. To give students an understanding of the influence of fundamental human behaviour on driving ability so that they are
fully able to utilize their abilities in order to counteract basic
human limitations
4. To give students the ability to judge traffic situations and operate the vehicle without endangering him-/herself or others
5. To help to make students become concerned and responsible
drivers
6. To give students understanding concerning the most vulnerable road users and their special relation to motorised vehicles.
The curriculum is divided in nine major areas each containing minor
phases and area related exercises and guidelines.
41
The vehicle interior, equipment and documents
One objective of the education is to give the student such knowledge
regarding the construction and equipment of the vehicle and such
understanding of its functions that learning and vehicle handling are
simplified and the different manoeuvres can be performed in a safe
way.
Another objective of the education is to inform the student of the most
common and important regulations regarding vehicle equipment in
order for the student to be able to detect and assess faults that could
affect safety. The student should also be informed of laws and regulations and the most important documents concerning the vehicle.
Manoeuvres within a separate training area
The objective of this part is that the student should acquire the skills
necessary to operate the vehicle at low speed while performing basic
manoeuvres like starting, stopping, turning and parking. These basic
manoeuvres should be practised so that the student could concentrate
on and adapt to road conditions and established laws and regulations
during the following education.
Practice should be performed with only one student in each vehicle.
Every student should accomplish up to five lessons of practice and at
least four of these lessons should be performed with the student as a
driver. The student should be able to perform every exercise faultlessly twice. The exercises should be performed so that the degree of
difficulty increases in accordance with the curriculum. During these
exercises the student operates the vehicle on his/her own. The instructor mainly monitors the student.
The properties of the vehicle
The objective of this part is to give the student knowledge of the
properties of the vehicle such as acceleration, application of brakes
and steering. This part also considers the driver’s supervision of the
traffic environment, which aims to teach the applicant how to foresee
hazardous situations and thereby be able to judge the risks to which he
or she will expose him-/herself and other road users when operating a
vehicle.
42
Driving tour
The objective of this part is to give the student basic knowledge regarding the psychological aspects of driving in order to make him or
her familiar with his/her own awareness and reactivity and to develop
his/her attitude and behaviour regarding safety.
The education is also supposed to give the student understanding of
other road user’s behaviour in order to make him/her able to foresee
possible mistakes or thoughtlessness when driving. The driver should
also learn the importance of reacting towards them in a considerate
way. The student should also be familiar with laws and regulations
concerning driving behaviour, health conditions and the obligation to
show particular regard for certain road users. Where it is possible to
do so, the student’s knowledge regarding theoretical aspects should be
put into practice in exercises performed on roads.
Road conditions
The objective of this part is to make sure that the student acquires
knowledge of the risk conditions that depend on the weather, the condition of the road and other road users’ behaviour. Such knowledge
will help the student learn how to foresee hazardous situations, which
often occur at certain places or road sections, and to react adequate in
these situations. Where it is possible to do so, the student’s knowledge
regarding theoretical aspects should be put into practice in exercises
performed on roads.
Basic regulations regarding driving
The objective of this part is to give the student knowledge of some of
the general regulations concerning driving, immediately in order for
the student to be able to practise driving on a road. The student should
also be familiar with some of the terms used in traffic regulations to
specify demands on driving behaviour when different manoeuvres are
being performed.
Road manoeuvres
The objective of this part is that the student should acquire the ability
to adjust safely and considerately to changing driving conditions and
43
traffic regulations on different kinds of roads and at different hours
while being able to perform basic driving manoeuvres. The duration
of this part of the education is dependent on the needs of the individual. The ability to perform basic manoeuvres is considered sufficient
when the student is able to perform them in accordance with the objectives. The degree of difficulty of the exercises should increase
gradually. However, the degree of difficulty of a manoeuvre does not
depend solely on awareness and the control of the vehicle but also on
road conditions. In order to maintain a high standard during the planning and performance of the exercises, the driving instructor should
use the guidelines published regarding the instruction of students. It is
important that theoretical education precedes the practical exercises.
The practical exercises comprise for example starting and stopping,
change of lanes, turns and overtaking.
Driving on skidpan
The objective of this part is to give the student knowledge of
fundamental physical conditions relevant to driving, and an
understanding of the necessity to adapt speed, steering and braking to
the road conditions. The training is also used in order to teach the
student to control the vehicle in critical situations. He or she should be
able to halt the vehicle using the shortest possible distance, brake and
give way to others on road surfaces with both high and low friction.
Naturally these exercises are not supposed to make the student drive
faster or less careful but rather to make him or her realize the importance of speed in case an emergency manoeuvre should become necessary. The student should also be familiar with the properties of the
vehicle in order to avoid panic reactions in critical situations. As regards the order of the exercises, it is stated that identical exercises
should first be performed under normal road conditions and then on a
slippery surface in order to emphasize the differences between the two
and the importance of speed for controlling the vehicle.
Skidpan instructions and exercises should normally be performed during four to five lessons of 45 minutes each. At least four lessons
should be set aside for practical exercises. Before the practical exercises are being performed the student shall undertake theoretical education regarding driving on slippery surfaces. The exercises that the
44
student performs should be documented and files should be kept for
three years at the establishment in question.
Preparation for the driving test
The objective of this part is to give the student knowledge of the conditions for taking the driving test and being granted a driving license
and also to inform him or her of the most important laws and regulations concerning the driving license. The student should also be informed of the demands that apply when performing the test. Through
evaluating tests at the driving school the student is given the opportunity to learn about the conditions and procedures of the theoretical and
the practical test.
The theoretical test
The driving-license test consists of a theoretical and a practical part.
When the driving-license test is performed, an examiner should judge
whether the applicant has obtained the knowledge, abilities and attitudes that are prescribed as the objectives of the driver education and
serve as necessary qualifications in order to be granted a driving license.
A minimum number of theory lessons must be taken before the applicant may take the theoretical test. Those applying for a class B driving
license must have attended at least 26 lessons in order to be allowed to
take the theoretical test (CIECA, 2001).
The theoretical test takes place before the practical test (Rigspolitiet,
2002). During the test a series of slides containing pictures of traffic
situations are shown to the test-taker. For each slide a question is read
on a tape and the test-taker responds to the question by marking the
correct options on a response sheet. The theoretical test regarding
class B consists of 25 items of which 20 must be answered correctly.
For each item, more than one option can be correct.
The test-taker is given about 30 minutes to complete the test. The result is presented to the test-taker as soon as the test has been finished,
and he or she is also informed of any parts where he or she has failed.
If the applicant fails the test, there is no waiting period before retest45
ing. When taking the theoretical test the applicant must bring the test
application form, a proof of ID and a copy of the driving instructor’s
logbook.
The practical test
During the practical test the examiner is to evaluate if the applicant’s
performance is in accordance with the objectives of the curriculum
(Rigspolitiet, 2002). Therefore it is important that the curriculum
serves as a foundation for the practical test.
As regards the class B driving license, the practical test is conducted
within residential areas, within as well as outside built-up areas and on
motorways. The practical test takes 45 minutes of which at least 25
minutes is effective driving. The applicant must have taken a minimum of 20 driving lessons and passed the theoretical test before taking the practical test.
The practical test normally begins with a control of vehicle equipment. The applicant should demonstrate that he or she is able to judge
the technical status of the vehicle as stated in the curriculum. During
this control the examiner should monitor the applicant and pay attention to his/her practical ability. It is specified that the control of the
vehicle is not supposed to take the form of an oral exam.
When determining the test route, the examiner should make sure that
the applicant is given the possibility to show that he or she possesses
the knowledge and abilities stated in the curriculum. The examiner
should also make sure that the test route does not expose the applicant
to any particularly hazardous situations during the first minutes of the
test. Moreover, the examiner should consider the fact that driving on a
motorway or driving after dark should be included in the test.
The manoeuvring exercises that are carried out should not be performed separately but be integrated in the actual driving. Reversing
and reversing around corners may be performed as a sample test.
When taking the practical test the applicant must bring the test application form, any driving license that he or she has been granted earlier, a proof of ID and a copy of the driving instructor’s logbook.
46
The following items are included in the practical test:
1. Technical/safety check of the vehicle
2. Use and adjustment of the safety belt and the head restraint
3. Adjusting the rear-view mirrors
4. Starting and moving off
5. Driving on straight roads
6. Driving in curves
7. Approaching and crossing intersections and junctions
8. Left and right turns
9. Changing lanes
10. Approaching and leaving a motorway
11. Overtaking
12. Being overtaken
13. Roundabouts, railway crossings, bus stops and pedestrian
crossings
14. Driving up-/downhill
The following items are considered when assessing the applicant’s
skills:
1. Defensive and social driving behaviour
2. Controlling the vehicle
3. Observation
4. Rules of priority
5. Correct road position
6. Keeping distance
7. Speed
8. Signalling
9. Traffic lights and road signs etc.
10. Braking and stopping
11. Attention to the safety and comfort of passengers
12. Economical and environmental driving
47
Special manoeuvres are performed in traffic and only if required in a
certain traffic situation. The special manoeuvres comprise for example
different ways of parking and u-turn.
During the test-time should be set aside for controlling the identity of
the applicant, informing him or her of the test, controlling the equipment of the vehicle, etc. If necessary, the testing time may be extended. The test should be aborted if the applicant is unable to perform
the requested tasks or if he or she commits a serious error that could
have caused an accident.
Minor faults will not lead to the rejection of the applicant, as the performance should be regarded as a whole (Rigspolitiet, 1995). The result of the driving test should be presented to the applicant as soon as
the practical test is over. If the applicant has failed the test, he or she
should be informed of what elements caused the failure.
48
Norway
The Norwegian curriculum
In Norway the applicant of the driving license is given four opportunities to obtain the objectives of the non-compulsory education (Statens
vegvesen, 1994). Instruction at a driving school, private practice only,
both private practice and instruction at a driving school or through a
co-operation between a driving school, a lay instructor and the student. The extent of the driver education can vary in length depending
on the student’s previous knowledge; the basis is however always to
achieve the objective of the curriculum. Private driving education is
allowed once the student has turned 16 and is accompanied by an instructor who is at least 25 years old and has had a driving license for a
minimum of five years. During practice it is the lay instructor who is
responsible for the driving, but the person practising is also responsible to some extent. The practice should be performed in areas that suit
the student’s driving ability. Thus, driving on motorways may not be
practised at the beginning of the education.
The main objective of the driver education is that the applicant should
obtain the necessary skills, attitudes and knowledge to be able to
drive:
1. In the safest way possible
2. As foreseeingly as possible
3. With the greatest possible concern for the environment and the
safety and health of other road users
4. According to laws and regulations
These objectives specify what the applicants have to obtain in order to
be granted a driving license and given permission to continue the
learning process on their own.
The main objective of the curriculum serves as the starting point for
the evaluation process, during which it should be determined whether
the student has reached the objectives of the driver education. It is
stated that all evaluation should be based on the general impression of
49
the student’s performance and that the tests play an important part
next to the main objective. Two models of evaluation are being used:
evaluation during the education and evaluation after the education.
The evaluation should determine if the student has obtained the necessary knowledge and driving ability. A student that wishes to be evaluated during the education should have this done at a driving school.
This kind of evaluation provides the student with information of
his/her own ability and serves as a guideline for the education, which
can be continued either at a driving school or privately. A continuous
evaluation during the actual education also informs the student and the
driving school of the educational development in relation to the objectives. This information is used as a basis for adapting the education
underway and improving the student’s learning. If a student who is
evaluated during the education also wants a final evaluation to be
made, he or she can have this done at the driving school. The same
goes for students not educated or only partly educated at a driving
school.
Theoretical education
The theoretical education is divided into five different areas. Each
area contains minor phases and guidelines.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Introduction
Human beings in traffic
The vehicle, the road and the traffic environment
Traffic behaviour
Driver responsibilities
Introduction
The student is informed of the conditions for obtaining a driving license and the regulations that apply to driver education. It is stated
that it is important that the student regards the driver education as a
part of something larger than just the obtaining of a driving license.
Thus, it also includes aspects like health, safety and environment.
50
The student is also informed of the main objective of the driver education. The student should know the regulations that apply when he or
she drives a vehicle during the education as well as those that apply to
private driving practice. The student should also know that driving
practice may never be performed in a dangerous or in other ways inappropriate manner and that illegal driving practice could lead to a
pecuniary penalty.
The student should also know about the demands of the authorities on
a person that wishes to obtain a driving license. He or she should also
know what kinds of vehicles may be used once the class B driving
license has been obtained.
Human beings in traffic
During this phase, road users are in focus. The students should understand their possibilities to solve the problems they may face in traffic.
As regards driving, this relates to the knowledge of the driver’s abilities and limitations. It is stated that the operation of a vehicle mainly
consists of the execution of correct actions according to impressions
from the traffic environment. The student is also to get an overview of
the psychological aspects that affect an individual’s way of driving.
The student should understand that driving could be described as a
matter of social competence, affected by different values and attitudes
in society.
The student should know that factors like personality, social adaptation and acute illness affect driving behaviour and performance. Other
factors that affect the driving behaviour are emotional conditions,
tiredness, age and alcohol. The student should also know how the
driver could work against negative effects of the aspects mentioned
above and also understand when it is necessary to avoid driving.
The student should also be aware of any special features that characterize children, disabled and elderly people and know how to act considerately towards them. He or she should also know that pedestrians,
bicyclists, moped riders and motorcyclists are especially exposed in
traffic and how to show regard for them.
In addition the student should know that the driving process comprises
awareness, understanding, decision and action. He or she should be
51
familiar with the concept of awareness, the interpretation of impressions and the way in which distance and speed is comprehended. The
student should also be familiar with conditions that may lead to misinterpretations and the consequences this might have.
Finally the student should know how the system of traffic is adapted
to the distinctive human character. He or she should also know that
the situations faced in traffic might exceed the capacity of the driver
and be aware of the consequences this may have for a person’s driving
behaviour.
The vehicle, the road and the traffic environment
The technical condition of the vehicle is of great importance for traffic
safety, and safety demands on vehicles are rigorous. It is important
that the traffic safety of a vehicle is not reduced as an effect of usage.
The user must understand the importance of making continuous
checks in order to detect any weaknesses and also be aware of the fact
that the vehicle needs to be examined closer at regular intervals. Further, the student should understand that the condition of the vehicle is
of significance to the utilization of resources as well as the environment. During this part of the education, the student should also obtain
the necessary knowledge regarding the physical road environment.
The student should be able to assess the technical condition of the
vehicle with reference to established regulations and determine if
there are any faults or deficiencies of such kind that the vehicle cannot
be used. This assessment includes brakes, steering, rims and tyres as
well as lights and safety equipment. The student should also know the
effects of the internal-combustion engine, different kinds of fuel and
ways of driving and their effects on the environment.
The student should know the differences regarding roads, roadways,
traffic lanes and crossings. The student should also understand different kinds of signs, road marks, traffic signals, the signals made by a
policeman, etc.
The student should understand that driving is a process of social cooperation that puts demands on the driver and the choices that he or
she makes, and that a driver is responsible for both his/her own and
52
other people’s safety. The student should also know that different
ways of driving put different kinds of pressure on the environment.
The student should know the present rate of traffic accidents and
understand that driving might endanger both the driver and others and
understand that traffic safety is dependent on the interaction between
the road user, the vehicle and the road.
The student should know the main provisions of the Road Traffic Act
and the conditions of the regulations that the law prescribes. He or she
should also know the fields of application of the Road Traffic Act and
traffic regulations.
Traffic behaviour
This part of the education contains theory that informs and motivates
driving behaviour in order for it to be correct, safe, effective and
adapted to the environment. It refers to the Road Traffic Act, regulations of traffic and signs as well as elements of both physics and psychology. The student should acquire an understanding of the risks of
driving in order to learn about, respect and avoid situations known to
cause accidents among young drivers. The student should understand
that the operation of a vehicle is a demanding and dangerous task that
involves special demands on the driver. This phase comprises 14 subareas:
1. Basic regulations of traffic behaviour
2. Observation technique
3. Signals and signs
4. Speed adaptation
5. Vehicle positioning on the road
6. Right of way
7. Reversing and turning
8. Stopping and parking
9. Risks
10. Driving after dark
11. Pedestrian crossings
12. Motorways
53
13. Entering and leaving a main road, driving in curves, longdistance driving at high speed
14. Overtaking
Driver responsibilities
This part of the education is intended to inform the student of the responsibilities connected with operating a vehicle. Both the owner of
the vehicle and the driver has a number of duties. The student should
be familiar with administrative matters as well as legal consequences.
This phase includes registration and ownership, usage of the vehicle,
economic responsibilities, public consequences and also traffic accidents and first aid.
Practical education
The practical part of the driver education is divided into seven parts
(Statens vegvesen, 1994):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Basic driving abilities
Traffic driving abilities
Driving within a built-up area
Driving on main roads
Driving in traffic
Driving on slippery surfaces
Driving after dark
(compulsory)
(compulsory)
(compulsory)
Every part has objectives for practical and theoretical education. The
objectives are placed in an order where relatively easy objectives are
followed by more difficult ones, in order to make the education
comprehensible. The objectives and content of the basic parts serves
as a starting point for the arrangement of the following education. The
curriculum acknowledges the fact that the operation of a vehicle is
often dangerous and demanding for the driver. It is stated that a
driver’s most important task is to acquire and process information.
Moreover, the driver is supposed to perform the correct actions precisely and smoothly as well as safe and environmentally. It is also
54
stated that it is important that the phases within the curriculum are
adapted in order to suit the individual needs of the student.
Basic driving abilities
During this phase, the student should obtain necessary skills and become able to maintain good control of the vehicle in order to be able
to concentrate on the content of the following education. This phase
regard preparations before driving, vehicle controls, starting and stopping, turning in crossings etc.
Traffic driving abilities
During this phase, the student is to integrate the basic driving skills
into an overlaying understanding and adaptation. The student should
use his/her senses effectively, interpret information correctly and perform the proper actions. The student is taught how to use and integrate
his or her basic driving abilities, driving on one-way streets, driving
through crossings with traffic lights, driving through a roundabout etc.
Driving within a built-up area
During this phase, the student is to drive in more demanding traffic
environments and also to drive independently in varying traffic situations. The student should be able to drive in accordance with local
traffic regulations and drive past a pedestrian crossing, turn and park
etc.
Driving on main roads
The student should summarize and develop his or her driving technique and regard it as a social ability. The student is taught the basics
of driving on main roads, entering, driving on and leaving a main
road, driving in curves etc.
Compulsory education
The compulsory education consists of phase five, six and seven. These
are to be gone through at traffic school following an approved curriculum under the supervision of qualified school personnel. It is assumed
55
that the student has obtained sufficient driving abilities to be able to
benefit from the compulsory phases.
The compulsory phase regarding driving in traffic is distributed over
five hours of education. Most of the education is to take place on main
roads. Focus should be put on giving the student experience that increases the understanding of the risks connected with driving at high
speed, and practising a correct way of driving on a main road.
The compulsory driving on slippery surfaces consists of three educational sessions of 45 minutes each and should take place on an approved skidpan. One session of theoretical education is being followed
by two sessions on the skidpan. An approved driving instructor should
supervise the education and the student should be accompanied by
either a lay instructor or a professional instructor. The purpose of the
education is to expose the student to situations that will create respect
for driving on slippery surfaces.
The compulsory driving after dark should take place within an approved training area. The education contains one hour of theoretical
education and demonstration followed by 30 minutes of driving. The
demonstration and the practical exercises should be carried through
under local conditions in order to maximize the results of the training.
During the education focus should be put on giving the student experience in order to increase the understanding of the risks associated
with driving after dark and to practise a correct way of driving considering the visibility.
Some changes of the present driver education have been suggested. In
2002 a proposal for a new driver education was published by the
Norwegian authorities (Statens vegvesen, 2002). The model suggested
is a graduated driver education and builds on the GDE-framework
which comprises four different levels. The first level comprises vehicle-manoeuvring abilities and the second level is the mastering of traffic situations. The third level represents the goals and context of driving and the fourth level refers to the goals for life and skills for living.
In the proposal it is stated that it is important that the third and fourth
level is represented in the education. In order to improve the traffic
safety it is also important to focus on the students’ capacity for selfevaluation regarding their knowledge and abilities.
56
The idea of the new driver education is that the model should be
common for all vehicle classes. All driver education should start with
a theory course that provides the student with the fundamental knowledge about the traffic system and traffic regulations. When the course
is completed the student continues with another course depending on
the driving license applied for.
The driver education for class B consists of four parts and the students
have to complete the first part in order to attend the second etc. When
the education is completed an evaluation needs to be done to control if
the goals of the education are fulfilled. The evaluation can be done by
a test or by compulsory education, the latter can be used when the
goals of the education are difficult to measure in a test.
If this model for driver education is introduced it would result in a
more controlled driver education where the competence of the students is judged after each part of the education. The amount of compulsory education would also increase. The content of this education
focus more on subjects important for traffic safety. If the driver education is changed in accordance with the proposal, the curricula and the
driving tests also need to be changed.
The theoretical test
The student is allowed to take the theoretical test provided that he or
she is approved by the test centre meaning that the compulsory parts
of the education have been accomplished and documentation of the
compulsory education is presented to the test centre (Ovelskorning for
forerekort klasse B).
The theoretical test is made up of multiple-choice items with three to
five options each (Henriksson, Sundström & Wiberg, 2002). Until
1995 Norway used a theoretical test with 50 items and three options
per item of which only one was correct. Today the theoretical test contains 45 items, both written items and image items. Each item has
three to five options and more than one option can be correct. The
items are divided into 15 areas. The number of items in each area depends on the level of importance according to the curriculum. The cutoff score is 80 per cent, which means that 35 of the 45 items must be
answered correctly in order for the test-taker to pass the test. The pre57
sent theoretical test is computerized and downloaded to the test-taker
from a central computer (Ovelskorning for forerekort klasse B). Eventually the data are sent back to the server and the test-taker receives
the result directly after having finished the test. The testing time is 90
minutes. If an applicant fails, he or she does not have to wait before
retesting. The theoretical test certificate is valid for five years.
The practical test
The purpose of the practical test is to evaluate the applicant’s performance in relation to the established aims of driving instruction
(Statens vegvesen, 2000). The test is intended to identify those who
have failed to reach such a satisfactory level as drivers that they can
be granted a driving license.
In order to cover all necessary aspects of the test 75 minutes should be
set aside for the driving test of which 55–60 minutes should be effective driving time. Every task should be related to the curriculum.
Preparation, safety check and feedback should always be included in
the test. Each applicant should be tested within urban areas, within
densely populated areas and on main roads/motorways. Further, the
driving test should be based on manoeuvres such as:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Right and left turns at crossroads
Driving straight ahead at a crossroads
Driving between crossroads
Change of lanes and choice of position
Speed adjustment and position when approaching crossroads
Driving in different traffic environments
In order to master this, the applicant should be able to:
1. Perform basic driving skills such as starting and moving off,
braking, changing gears, judging the width/length of the vehicle, etc.
2. Make observations systematically in order to obtain sufficient
information
3. Give correct information to other road users
58
4. Adjust speed according to location, the road and the traffic
conditions
5. Place the vehicle correctly in the lane
6. Adjust to traffic conditions
The driving test should be performed on a test route constructed by the
Test Centre. Each Norwegian Test Centre should have a minimum of
six updated test routes available. It is stated that each route should be
constructed as a normal driving route to the largest possible extent. At
the same time it should be clear what is to be evaluated. A correct
construction of the route is believed to give opportunities to test the
applicant’s understanding of the risks that may occur in traffic. Therefore, the route must be constructed in such a way that emphasis is put
on locations/situations that demand driving skills regarding signs and
position. Emphasis should also be put on the opportunities to drive at
and between crossroads in order to test the applicant’s foresight and
judgment in traffic situations. The applicant’s tasks around the driving
route should vary between being directed strictly by instructions and
being allowed to drive independently.
The routes should always include the following elements:
Safety check
The motive for the safety check is that future drivers must be able to
check the vehicle in view of traffic safety and also to use the controls
as well as undertake preparations for driving.
Driving skills (reversing, turning, parking)
The technical manoeuvres are intended as a test of whether the applicant can manoeuvre the vehicle satisfactorily without using a lot of
unnecessary space or hinder or inconvenience others. The manoeuvres
should be carried out neither at the very beginning or nor at the end of
the test but be a natural part of the whole test. The applicant should
perform the tasks under different traffic conditions and in locations
that demand a satisfactory observation technique.
59
Urban areas
The extent to which driving should take place in densely populated
areas, dense traffic or urban areas is dependent on local conditions.
The individual Test Centre must analyse what is appropriate.
Main roads and/or motorways
A decision must be made as to whether the route should include main
roads or motorways. At least one of these must be included in each
route.
Before an applicant is examined the test centre is to randomly choose
a test route with the help of a computer programme or by other means.
It must be ensured that all routes are used with the same frequency by
all examiners. As a rule neither the examiner nor the applicant should
be able to predict which route is going to be used.
Guidelines for the examiner
Properly performed preparation and a comforting start will give confidence and create a good basis for the test. The examiner should introduce him-/herself and shake hands with the applicant. Preparation is
crucial in order for the test to be valid. Therefore it is considered
greatly important that the examiner assures him-/herself that the applicant has understood the methods by which the test should be carried
out and the way in which instructions are used. The examiner is advised to introduce the applicant to the test at a place where they are
not disturbed. The preparation should be performed as a conversation
with the applicant. Although their order can be adjusted dependent on
the conversation, it is stated that the following pieces of information
must be included:
1. That when no instructions are given, the applicant should drive
straight ahead, except when signposts, road markings or other
items indicate otherwise. It is specified that the examiner must
not “set traps.”
2. That the examiner has an obligation to make notes during the
test and that these notes can refer to minor errors, substantial
errors or positive features.
60
3. That deviation from the route will normally not be judged as
errors if the applicant drives correctly in other respects.
4. That the examiner will of course be answering questions, but
not normally give the applicant any assistance in finding the
correct way to drive.
5. The examiner must also explain to the applicant to what extent
conversation will be carried on and ask whether the applicant
has any questions before the test begins.
The safety check should be included in every test. It should be regarded as a practical task, not as an extension of the theoretical test.
The applicant is to perform the safety check systematically and independently. The safety check is to be performed only once during the
test and should take place before the actual driving test.
Before preparation begins and without being told to do so, the applicant should have ensured good visibility and a correct position of the
driver’s seat, the head restraint, the mirrors and the safety belt. The
applicant is also supposed to test brake pressure without being asked.
If the performance of any of these tasks cannot be fully approved, the
examiner should make a note.
The applicant’s performance should be evaluated in relation to the
established objectives of driver instruction stated in the curriculum.
The performance of the safety check, the preparation and the handling
of the vehicle as well as performance in other respects should be included in the overall evaluation. A special form is used in order to
evaluate the applicant. The form comprises six test categories that
should serve as starting points for the evaluation of the test as a whole.
These categories are presented below.
Observation
The applicant must at an early stage obtain a good view of different
road environments and traffic situations including observations ahead
of, behind and to the sides of the vehicle.
61
Signalling
Emphasis is put on signalling at the right time and in the right place in
order to give information to other road users.
Position
Emphasis is put on the lane position of the vehicle, road markings,
distance to the vehicle ahead and other road users of importance while
driving as well as standing still.
Speed adjustment
The applicant’s adjustment of speed in different road environments
and traffic situations is assessed.
Traffic/environment adjustment
Emphasis is put on the applicant’s adjustment to other road users
including his/her ability to make use of gaps between vehicles, give
way to vehicles entering from the acceleration lane, etc. The applicant
must observe the right of way and drive in accordance with §3 of the
Norwegian Road Traffic Act.
Vehicle handling
It should be examined whether the applicant’s handling of the vehicle
provides a basis for or prevents safe and effective driving behaviour.
The assessment of the test-takers performance in relation to the categories stated above is judged with a four-graded scale. The scale comprises good performance, minor errors, major errors and critical errors.
The test-taker fails the test if he or she has one or more critical error,
more than three major errors. Regarding the minor errors, there are no
fixed number of errors that causes a failure.
After the test the examiner should ask whether the applicant wishes to
comment on his/her performance before being told the result. It is
stated that there should be no discussion or explanation until the applicant has been informed whether he or she has passed the driving
test. When the result has been declared the examiner explains the de62
cision to the applicant informing him or her of any strengths or weaknesses of the performance. It is stated that feedback is important and
should be given in order to give the applicant insight into the correlation between cause and effect regarding positive as well as negative
aspects of the driving performance. If the applicant has failed the test
a summary of the reasons for this decision will be given in the designated area on the evaluation form.
63
Iceland
The Icelandic curriculum
In Iceland private training is allowed from the age of 16 (Umferðarráð, 2000). However, in order to be allowed to perform private driving
training the student must be bound up with a traffic school at which he
or she is obligated to accomplish 10 hours of practical and 12 hours of
theoretical education. The student must also be in possession of a certificate issued by the driving instructor, the police and an insurance
company in order to be allowed to practice driving privately. The lay
instructor must be at least 24 years old and been in possession of a
driving license for a minimum of five years.
The curriculum is divided in a theoretical and practical part each containing a number of areas containing minor objectives and guidelines
for the driving instructor.
Introduction of the theoretical part
Here an overview of the theoretical education is given. The objectives
and regulations of the driver education are introduced. It is stated that
it is important that the student realizes that the education is more than
just something that he or she has to go through in order to obtain a
driving license.
Vehicle, roads and traffic
The condition of the vehicle is of great importance for its safety. Major requirements apply to the safety equipment for the driver and passengers. It is important that this equipment is examined on a regular
basis and that it is replaced if damaged or broken after use. The student should know methods of identifying damage and malfunctions
and realize the necessity of regular checks of the safety equipment.
Moreover, it is emphasized that an economical usage of the vehicle is
of great importance for the environment.
The student should also learn the most common regulations concerning the construction and design of streets and roads built in order to
64
facilitate the driving. He or she should also be familiar with road
markings and traffic signs, what they signify and how to react to them.
Participating in traffic is considered a process of interaction and cooperation between road users, which share the aim of making it a safe
environment for all who are staying, living or working close to roads.
This area regards vehicle equipment, traffic environment, traffic accidents and traffic regulations etc.
Traffic behaviour
This part of the theoretical education concerns the basic regulations
regarding driving that are intended to develop the driver’s responsibility and concern for others participating in traffic and those living or
working close to roads. Traffic regulations regarding signs and their
use are discussed as well as physical aspects and traffic psychology.
The student should understand the risks connected with new drivers’
participation in traffic and learn how to avoid traffic situations that are
dangerous and increase the risk of accidents. He or she must realize
that driving implies danger as well as major responsibilities and that it
requires the driver’s full attention. This area regards observations
technique, signs and markings, speed, driving after dark, reversing and
judgement of hazardous situations etc.
The human factor
This part of the education focuses on the road user. In the same way as
the student has to obtain knowledge of the vehicle that he or she intends to drive, he or she must also obtain knowledge regarding the
abilities and limitations of him-/herself and other categories of road
users, e.g. pedestrians, children, the elderly and the disabled. The student is to get an overview of the psychological processes that affect an
individual’s driving ability. He or she should also understand that the
many demands on people participating in traffic could sometimes be
hard to live up to. This area regards traffic psychology, the driving
process, different categories of road users and their characteristics and
demands on the driver etc.
Driver responsibilities
The objective here is to make sure that the student understands the
major responsibility that follows with the possession and usage of a
65
vehicle. Drivers as well as owners have many obligations and if these
are not fulfilled the consequences could be severe. This area regards
measures by the authorities, economic responsibilities and the procedure when arriving at the scene of a traffic accident.
Practical part
Basic training
The objective of this section is to make sure that the student is taught
the necessary basic elements regarding the safety check of the vehicle
before he or she is put in contact with other road users (Umferðarráð,
2000). During this section the student is taught the correct preparations before driving, moving off and stopping. The student is also being taught how to use the gears and brakes, how to perform right and
left turns at crossings and how to reverse the vehicle etc.
Driving in traffic
The objective of this section is to make sure that basic manoeuvres are
automatized when operating the vehicle and interacting with other
road users. The student should also use his or her senses in order to
interpret the traffic situation, make the correct decisions and react correctly. During this section the student is being taught how to use and
combine basic abilities, driving on one way streets, in roundabouts
and crossings with traffic lights etc.
Driving within built-up areas
The objective here is to make sure that the student is able to adapt to
the demands of traffic and drive independently in different kinds of
traffic. During this section the student is being taught how to use and
combine basic abilities, drive under special conditions, turn and park
and driving within residential areas.
Driving in rural areas
The objective of this section is to make sure that the student develops
his or her ability to regard driving in traffic as a process of social in-
66
teraction. This section regards speed adaptation when entering or leaving a main road, driving on main roads and overtaking.
Driving under difficult conditions
The objective here is to make sure that the student is able to detect and
recognize the dangers and risks connected with driving as well as the
limitations of the driver’s own abilities and is able to respond safely to
changes in weather, light and road conditions.
Driving on slippery surfaces and in snow: The student should be familiar with the effects of the forces of nature on the vehicle. It should
be made clear to the student how easily a driver could lose control of
the vehicle when the road grip is reduced. He or she should be informed of how drivers are likely to react and how to avoid an accident
when the braking distance is longer than the distance to an obstacle.
He or she should also perform a turn on a slippery surface in order to
understand the necessity of performing the correct actions if loosing
road grip. The student should also be given the opportunity to experience the difference between ABS and regular brakes, when braking
both with and without ABS. This should be performed within a separate area away from traffic. The student also practices driving after
dark during this moment.
Evaluation of the education
Evaluation, which is compulsory, pertains to all aspects of the education (Umferðarráð, 2000). Through the evaluation process the driving
school and the driving instructor are given valuable information about
the progress of the education. Moreover, the student is given information about what he or she has learned. The evaluation regarding the
student and the driving school should give an overall view of the quality of the education and also serve as a guideline for improvement to
be used by all those involved in the education. The evaluation process
is divided into two parts. One takes place during the education and the
other one afterwards.
When evaluation is performed during the education the driving instructors are given feedback on the student’s development and the
results of the education. The aim is to use the methods that have
67
proved to be the most useful. This kind of feedback is also important
to the student, since he or she is given the chance to see how progress
is made. The purpose of evaluation at the end of the education is to
determine to what extent the objectives have been fulfilled. The driving instructor should try to make this kind of evaluation before he or
she attests that the student is ready to take the driving test.
The evaluation should compare the education with the objectives
stated in the curriculum. The curriculum should contain the objectives
that the student is expected to achieve during the education. Those
involved in the education should then make sure that the student is
given optimal educational conditions according to the objectives.
The theoretical test
The applicant is allowed to take the theoretical test at the age of 16
years and 10 months at the earliest (Umferðarstofa, 2003). The theoretical test consists of 30 multiple-choice items with three options
each, of which one or more can be correct. The test is divided into two
sections, A and B, each containing 15 items. The applicant will fail
the test if two of the items in section A or more than a total of seven
items are answered incorrectly. This means that the student has to
score 43 out of 45 points in section A or obtain a total score of 83 out
of 90. The testing time is 45 minutes.
The theoretical test concerns subjects like traffic regulations, the vehicle, the human factor and actions in case of an accident. The following
categories are included:
1. Traffic regulations regarding signs
2. The human factor, driver responsibilities such as the importance of respectful and considerate behaviour towards other
road users, the effects of alcohol, drugs and tiredness
3. Fundamental aspects regarding the appropriate distance between vehicles, braking distance and vehicle stability under
different road conditions
4. Risk factors associated with different road conditions with
special regard to changes in weather at different occasions.
68
5. The special risks associated with lack of experience regarding
vulnerable road users like children, pedestrians, cyclists, etc.
6. Common and special regulations regarding documents related
to the use of a vehicle, primary actions at the scene of a traffic
accident, issues of safety regarding load and passengers, car
inspection and vehicle insurance
7. Factors regarding the safety of the driver, passengers and other
road users, regulations regarding the use of a vehicle considering the environment, etc.
The practical test
The purpose of the driving tests is to determine if the applicant possesses the necessary knowledge and abilities needed to control the
designated vehicle with sufficient safety in order to be granted a driving license (Umferðarstofa, 2003). The practical test is divided into an
oral examination and a practical driving test. No test can be taken until
a certificate proving that the applicant has participated in sufficient
driving education has been issued. The practical test can not be taken
before the theoretical test has been passed and not earlier than one
week before the applicant’s 17th birthday. The applicant must pass the
practical test within six months after having passed the theoretical test.
If the applicant fails the practical test, he or she can retest after one
week.
The purpose of the oral exam is to determine if the applicant possesses
sufficient knowledge regarding the vehicle and its equipment and is
able to detect defects that could affect safety. In order to pass the oral
exam the test-taker has to score 60 points out of 100.
The purpose of the practical test is to determine if the applicant possesses sufficient knowledge, awareness and ability to operate the vehicle safely without the help of a driving instructor. The test centre decides where the theoretical test and practical tests should be performed. As regards driving, the applicant’s abilities should be tested
both within and outside built-up areas and under different circumstances so that different aspects of the applicant’s driving abilities
could be assessed. Preparation of the vehicle, vehicle handling, driving ability and observance of traffic regulations are the major items
69
being examined during the driving test. To pass the driving test the
applicant must score 80 points out of 100
Both the oral exam and the practical test are evaluated by an examiner. When making the evaluation the examiner uses a comparable
scale. This scale is used to determine what should be considered a
fault and, if so, how serious the fault is. The scale regulates the number of penalty points that the applicant receives if he or she makes
certain faults. Before the test the applicant is given 100 points. If the
applicant commits a fault according to the scale the current penalty
point is multiplied with two and the sum is subtracted from the hundred points given before the test. If these, at the end of the test, are
less than the cut-off score the applicant will have failed the test.
Turning
(-12) The applicant performs very wide or narrow turns that significantly increase the risk of getting hit by another vehicle
(-3) The applicant performs wide or narrow turns that might cause
danger
(-1) The applicant performs wide or narrow turns that are not obviously dangerous but results of lack of experience
Vehicle position
(-3) The applicant drives on the centre line, too close to other vehicles,
wobbles etc.
(-1) The applicant drives too close to the centre line or other vehicles
etc.
Choice and change of lanes
(-12) The applicant makes frequent turns between lanes causing danger to other road users, changes lanes in the way of other vehicles so
that the examiner has to intervene
(-3) The applicant chooses the wrong lane considering the direction of
travel, makes illegal changes of lanes, etc.
70
(-1) The applicant uses the wrong lane
Speed
(-12) The applicant drives unnaturally slow as an affect of uncertainty,
more than 15 km/h too fast on roads with a speed limit of 70–90 km/h
or more than 20 km/h too fast on roads with a speed limit of 30–60
km/h
(-3) The applicant drives 5–15 km/h too fast on roads with a speed
limit of 70–90 km/h, 5–20 km/h too fast on roads with a speed limit of
30–60 km/h or too slow/too fast in view of the conditions
(-1) The applicant exceeds the speed limit with up to 5 km/h or drives
unevenly or in a way that slows other road users
Awareness, safety when driving
(-3) The applicant keeps his or her eyes on the road but looks too
much to the sides, does not use the mirrors, passes a bus at a bus stop
without the proper signalling, drives incautiously in narrow streets,
etc.
(-1) The applicant is unaware of traffic behind/on the sides of the vehicle or other potential dangers, does not use the mirrors sufficiently
in order to monitor traffic or hesitates too long before driving through
a crossing
(+1) The applicant shows good awareness
Reversing
(-12) The applicant hits other objects when reversing, the examiner
has to intervene or the applicant totally lacks the ability to reverse the
vehicle
(-3) The applicant finds it difficult to reverse the vehicle and need
multiple attempts, incorrect position after reversing in spite of multiple attempts
71
Germany
The German curriculum
On 1 January 1999, a new law concerning driver education was established in Germany (BVF, 2002a). According to this, an individual
wanting to undergo driver education first needs to apply for a learner’s
permit approving him or her as an applicant. When applying the individual should provide a proof of ID, a photo, a medical statement concerning his/her hearing and sight abilities and also a certificate confirming that a first-aid course has been completed. During the first-aid
course the individual undergoes theoretical education and practical
exercises in order to learn how to attend to people that have been injured in traffic accidents. Those having medical education, e.g. nurses
and doctors, do not need to attend this course. Neither do lifeguards,
masseurs, etc.
The following guidelines apply to driver testing:
1. The applicant is to be examined by means of a practical test
and a theoretical test.
2. The examiner should be approved by the authorities.
3. The applicant has to be in possession of a certificate confirming that he or she has participated in practical and theoretical
education. The certificate must not be older than two years.
4. The application documents must be returned if the theoretical
test has not been passed within 12 months after the application
was handed in and if the practical test has not been passed
within 12 months after the theoretical test was passed.
If the applicant passes the theoretical and practical test he or she will
receive a probationary license that is valid for two years. If the driver
breaches the law during this period he or she may have to attend a
number of complementary educational seminars. During these seminars the problems and difficulties of newly examined drivers are discussed. The seminars are intended to make the participants attain considerate traffic behaviour. Efforts are made in order to change their
attitudes regarding traffic behaviour and thereby encourage risk
72
awareness and develop the ability to identify hazardous situations. The
seminars comprise four sessions during a period of two to four weeks,
and every session contains 135 minutes of education. Between the
first and the second session the participant performs a 30-minute driving test where his/her driving behaviour is being observed. Special
seminars are held for those who have been found driving under the
influence of alcohol or drugs. These special seminars comprise three
sessions during a period of two to four weeks, and every session contains 180 minutes of education. The aim of these seminars is the same
as described above, but more emphasis is put on informing the participants of the effects of alcohol. Both kinds of seminars are conducted
by specially trained psychologists. In Germany all private driving
training is forbidden.
The disposition of the driving education is, unlike most other countries, not regulated through a single curriculum (Die Fundgrube zum
Führerschein, 2003). Instead every traffic school arranges their own
driving education. The content of this education is however regulated
through a number of paragraphs. Those paragraphs are listed below.
The objective and content of the education
The objective of the curriculum is to teach the student to become a
safe, responsible and environmentally conscious road user. Another
objective of the education is to make the student prepared for the driving-license test.
The student has to obtain:
1. The abilities to control the vehicle also under difficult traffic
conditions
2. Knowledge and understanding of traffic regulations and their
applications
3. The abilities needed to perceive and control danger, including
avoidance and protection
4. Knowledge about the effects of driving errors and realistic
self-assessment
5. Readiness and ability to adopt considerate traffic behaviour
and understanding of the influence of emotions on driving
73
6. Responsibility for lives, health, environment and property
The design of the driver education
The education is divided into a theoretical part and a practical part.
These are to be linked to each other throughout the educational process.
General educational principles
The education shall be based on the curriculum and the content of the
education should be selected and prepared in such a way that the goals
of the curriculum are achieved. The content must be presented correctly, descriptive and understandably for the student. The theoretical
and practical education should be comprehensibly and systematically
developed in order to suit the student. The driver education should
encourage the student to continue to learn after the driving license has
been acquired. The driving instructor should respond to the student in
an open and patient way. The interaction with the student should focus
on discussions and questions. The general part of the education
amounts to at least 12 double lessons of 90 minutes each. If the student already has a driving license for a different class of vehicles, the
general part amounts to a minimum of six double lessons. The classspecific parts of the education vary in minimum length.
Theoretical education
The theoretical education follows a curriculum set up by the driving
school. It is stated that the instructions should be varied methodically.
Different media for instruction are to be selected and used, for example different kinds of electronic equipment. The plan outlined for
theoretical instruction is divided into a general part and a classspecific part.
The content of the general part of the theoretical education is distributed over 12 double lessons. This part is applicable to all the different
classes of driving licenses and divided into 12 areas:
1. The student is taught about personal conditions. This includes
the driver’s physical abilities, e.g. sight, but also his/her health
and general fitness. Further, the student is informed of restric74
tions due to physical conditions like diseases and other physical defects, alcohol, drugs, medicines, etc. The area also includes psychological and social conditions, attitudes, driving
in general, etc.
2. The student is informed of risk factors connected with human
behaviour. The influence of aggression, fear, stress etc. is discussed. The student is taught about possible causes of stress,
how to notice stress symptoms and also how to avoid and control the negative aspects of stress. The area also includes the
self-image of the driver, driving ideals and different driver
roles.
3. The student is taught about basic legal conditions and is also
informed of the different vehicle classes, regulations regarding
these vehicles, how to perform a safety check, issues of insurance and registration, etc.
4. The student is informed of different traffic systems, routes and
their use. The area also includes hazard perception when driving on different traffic routes.
5. The student is taught about the right of way, behaviour and
traffic regulations. Within this area special traffic locations
like crossings and drive way are discussed. The student is also
informed of the necessity of giving way and environmental
driving at crossings, drive ways etc.
6. The student is taught about different road signs and signals.
The student is also taught how to cross a railroad in a safe and
environmentally conscious way.
7. The student is taught about other participants in traffic. Questions regarding public means of transport, heavy vehicles, cyclists, children, elderly people etc. are discussed. The student
is also taught how to act at pedestrian crossings and how to reduce traffic noise.
8. The student is taught about the relationship between speed,
distance and stopping distance and also about how to spare the
environment when driving. Further, the dangers of driving at
75
high speed, speed-blindness and speed habits are discussed, as
well as safety margins, noise protection and foresight in traffic.
9. The student is taught about traffic behaviour (driving manoeuvres and traffic observation). He or she is taught how to start,
turn and reverse the vehicle as well as other driving manoeuvres. The student also practises how to perform traffic observation and decide how and when different manoeuvres should be
made.
10. The student is taught the proper procedure when stopping and
leaving the vehicle.
11. The student is taught about behaviour in certain traffic situations and the consequences of violating traffic regulations. He
or she is also informed of the central traffic register, driving license withdrawal, the correct behaviour in case of a traffic accident, etc.
12. The student is taught about the lifelong learning connected
with driving. The special risks associated with new drivers,
young drivers and elderly drivers are discussed. The student is
also informed of different forms of assistance and support by
means of advanced seminars, traffic psychology consultation
and experience exchange for new drivers. Road safety is subject to further training.
The class-specific education regarding the class B driving license consists of two double lessons of 90 minutes each. This part of the education is divided into two areas. The first one concerns the technical
condition of the vehicle, the transport of goods and passengers and the
environmental aspects of handling the vehicle. The second area includes subjects like speed, different road and weather conditions and
the handling of the brakes, but also legislation, traffic prohibitions,
etc.
Practical education
The practical education shall be based on a curriculum formulated by
the driving school. The education consists of basic training and special
training which is related to the theoretical education. During the prac76
tical education the driving instructor guides the student through the
driving tasks. Further, the student is given feedback and the training
conditions are discussed. The instructor should document the progress
of the training by records showing what areas have been covered. The
basic training should be as complete as possible before the special
training begins. The basic training covers 16 areas and regard actions
like course change, roadway use, driving in bends, reversing, turning,
observation of traffic environment and avoidance of hazardous situations etc.
The special training covers three different areas during a total of 12
lessons of 45 minutes each. During these 12 lessons five are being
spent exercising driving on federal roads or highways, four lessons are
used practicing driving on motorways and three lessons are used practicing driving after dark.
Evaluation of the education
The instructor may conclude the theoretical and practical education
only if the applicant has completed the instructions to the legally prescribed extent and the instructor is convinced that the main objective
has been fulfilled. After this evaluation, the person in charge should
hand over a certificate that confirms the accomplishment of the theoretical and practical education. If the education is not completed, the
student should be given a written confirmation of what parts of the
education he or she has gone through.
The theoretical test
In Germany applicants are allowed to undergo the theoretical test
when they have reached the age of 17 years and 9 months (BVF,
2002b). By taking the test the applicant is supposed to show that he or
she possesses the necessary knowledge to handle the vehicle correctly
according to the traffic regulations and in an environmental and energy-saving way. The test-taker should also prove that he or she possesses knowledge regarding the hazards of traffic and the attitudes and
behaviour necessary to avoid them.
The test is divided into a general section and a complementary section
concerning the particular kind of vehicle that the driving license ap77
plies to. If the test-taker has applied for more than one type of driving
license, he or she can take multiple complementary tests. The test contains 30 multiple-choice items with a total score of 110. The scoring is
dependent on item content and its significance for traffic safety, environmental protection and energy-saving driving. Each item has three
options, and at least one of them is correct. The test-taker marks the
answers using paper and pencil. He or she has to identify all correct
options of an item in order to be given points. Every item is valued on
the basis of its importance, and a fully correct answer gives the testtaker two to five points. In order to pass the test the test-taker has to
score at least 101 points (92 %).
Table 4. Content of the theoretical test in Germany.
General part
Number of items
Point
s
Dangers in traffic
Traffic behaviour
Rules of priority
Environmental protection
10 (4 picture interpretations)
6 (1 picture interpretation)
3 (2 picture interpretations)
1
39
21
15
3
3
9
Complementary part
7
23
Total
30
110
•
Road signs
•
Driving technique
•
The driver’s suitability
and ability
The practical test
At the practical test, the applicant is to show that he or she possesses
the necessary abilities and technical knowledge to drive in an environmental and energy-saving way (BVF, 2002c). The test should be
performed both within and outside a built-up area and if possible also
on Autobahn. Roads with light traffic are to be used only in order to
78
test speed adjustment. The driving instructor is always present during
the driving test.
The basic driving tasks should serve to prove that the applicant can
handle the vehicle independently at low speed. These tasks are to be
performed in locations with light traffic. During the test the applicant
also has to perform two compulsory driving tasks:
1. Park the vehicle by reversing it into an eight-meter gap, i.e. the
space between two other vehicles parked in line, and hold.
The task will be considered as failed if the applicant shows insufficient attention to traffic, drives into the curb or ends up in
an incorrect position, e.g. gets stuck between the other vehicles. The applicant will also have failed if he or she ends up
more than 30 cm from the curb or needs more than two attempts in order to get the vehicle into a correct position
2. Manoeuvre the vehicle, by reversing it or going forward, into a
parking space between two vehicles parallel to each other.
The task will be considered as failed if the applicant shows insufficient attention to traffic, does not operate the turn signal or
does not leave enough room for the driver or the passengers to
get out of the vehicle. The applicant will also have failed if he
or she does not place the vehicle within the markings of the
parking space or needs more than two attempts in order to get
the vehicle into a correct position
When the applicant has performed these two compulsory tasks, the
examiner chooses one of the tasks listed below for the applicant to
perform.
1. Reversal turning, where the applicant is asked to independently choose a suitable place and method. The task will be
considered as failed if the applicant: shows insufficient attention to traffic, does not operate the turn signal or inadmissibly
deviates from the correct procedure
2. Reversing to the right by using a crossing or an entry. The student is asked to reverse the car as far to the right as possible,
while observing the traffic environment and operating the right
79
turn signal, without driving into the curb or crossing the roadway markings. The vehicle should be parallel to the curb or the
roadway markings. The task will be considered as failed if the
applicant shows insufficient attention to traffic, does not operate the turn signal or drives into the curb or crosses the roadway markings. The applicant will also have failed if he or she
is not approximately parallel to the curb or the roadway markings or needs more than two attempts in order to get the vehicle into a correct position.
3. Starting in an uphill slope, where the applicant, under observation of rear traffic and punctual operation of the turn signal,
should be able to start and move the vehicle forward by the coordinated operation of gas, clutch and parking brake. The task
will be considered as failed if the applicant shows insufficient
attention to traffic, does not operate the turn signal, rolls backwards more than 50 cm or stalls the vehicle twice.
4. Emergency braking, where the applicant is asked to quickly
slow down the vehicle from 40 km/h to full stop. The instructor, who is present in the vehicle, is to make sure that road users behind are not endangered, and the applicant is therefore
not responsible for observing them. The instructor directs the
applicant and tells him or her when to perform the task. If chosen, this task should take place during the first part of the test,
and the examiner should inform the instructor in good time.
The task will be considered as failed if the applicant performs
the task at a lower speed than stated in the instruction, waits
too long before braking or needs a breaking distance that is too
long. The applicant will also have failed if he or she deviates
from the lane or stalls the vehicle.
Each task may be repeated once. If it is not performed satisfactorily at
the second attempt the applicant has failed the task. The applicant has
failed the task also if he or she did not pay enough attention to the
traffic environment when performing the task and a hazardous situation occurred as a result of this or another vehicle, person or object
was hit by the applicant’s vehicle.
During the practical test the examiner is required to make sure that the
applicant’s driver abilities are tested in a varied environment and un80
der varying conditions. In order to simplify this matter for the examiner certain guidelines have been published. Listed below are a number of situations to which the examiner is required to expose the applicant. The figures indicate the demanded frequency of each situation
within five driving tests.
1. Starting and moving off (7)
2. Driving on roads with heavy traffic (7)
3. Driving on a one-way street with the possibility of turning left
(5)
4. Driving and changing lanes (10)
5. Driving on roads with two lanes or more in each direction (5)
6. Driving past pedestrian crossings (7)
7. Driving past stops for public means of transport (5)
8. Drive past crossings concerning the right of way (10)
9. Drive onto roads with priority rules (7)
10. Driving past crossings with obligation to stop (5)
11. Driving past crossings with traffic lights (7)
12. Left turn on roadways with oncoming traffic (10)
13. Right or left turn under special consideration of cyclists in a
parallel lane (2)
14. Driving past crossings with bending right of way (5)
15. Driving outside of a built-up area on roads with bends (2)
16. Driving outside of a built-up area with possibility of overtaking (2)
17. Basic driving tasks outside of the traffic flow (5)
18. Driving on Autobahn (1)
The examiner records any mistake made by the applicant. If the applicant is considered to have failed the exam, he or she will be given a
protocol and an explanation by the examiner. The protocol regards
any general mistakes that have been made. The general mistakes are
listed below.
81
1. Disrespect for a red light at a crossing or the indications of a
police officer
2. Ignoring the priority regulation
3. Insufficient attention to traffic when changing lanes
4. Driving in the opposite lane when turning left or right
5. Incorrect placing of the vehicle
6. Endangering or damaging other road users or objects
7. Lacking attention to children, disabled or elderly people
8. Disrespect for road signs
9. Unsatisfactory attention to traffic when starting, driving onto
or off a road, turning or reversing the vehicle
10. Wrongly adjusted driving speed on motorways, roads or within
built-up areas
11. Incorrect distance to another road user
12. Lack of braking readiness
13. Disrespecting road markings
14. Incorrect placing when driving in bends
15. Considerable hesitation when passing crossings or drive ways
16. Incorrect behaviour at traffic jams
17. Incorrect or omitted use of the turn signal before changing
lanes or turning, overtaking or starting
18. Error made when overtaking or being overtaken
19. Error made when operating vehicle controls, e.g. turning on
the radio instead of the lights
20. Failing any of the five basic driving tasks mentioned earlier
21. Failing when moving off
22. Error made when a trailer is connected to or separated from the
vehicle
82
Great Britain
As an effect of the rising number of deaths and causalities in Great
Britain during the 1930s, it was decided that a driving-license test had
to be established (DSA, 2002a). The test was introduced in 1935, and
the effects of the new policy were felt almost immediately. Even
though the number of cars within the country was rising, the numbers
of causalities started to decline. The new drivers were required to
reach a minimum standard before being allowed to drive unaccompanied.
In 2001 nearly 1.3 million theoretical tests were conducted on the 158
test centres across Great Britain. 64 per cent of the test-takers applying
for the class B driving license passed their tests. Of the same amount
of people taking the practical test only 43 per cent passed.
In order to be allowed to drive a car in Great Britain the student must
first obtain a provisional license, which is equivalent to the learner
permit used in some countries. Minimum standards of medical fitness
must be met and proof of identity has to be provided. Those applying
for a provisional license to drive a car must have reached 17 years of
age, at which age he or she also is allowed to perform private driving
practice under the supervision of a lay instructor. The lay instructor
must be at least 21 years old and been in possession of a driving license for a minimum of three years.
In Great Britain people applying for a driving license are not required
to take mandatory professional training. Still 98 per cent of them have
some professional instruction prior to sitting a driving-license test.
After the student has passed the driving-license test follows a two-year
trial period when special rules are applied (DSA, 2002b). Those accumulating six or more penalty points during this period will have
their license revoked.
The British curriculum
The curriculum in Great Britain lists the skills in which the applicant
must achieve basic competence in order to pass the driving-license test
83
(DSA, Officially recommended syllabus). The applicant must also
have a thorough knowledge of the Highway Code and motoring laws
as well as a thorough understanding of the responsibilities as a driver.
This means that the student must have real concern for the safety of
him-/herself, pedestrians and other road users. The applicant is also
informed to make sure that the instructor fully covers the curriculum.
Listed below are the eight items that the student needs to attend to and
show that he or she is able to perform in order to pass the practical
test.
Car controls, equipment and components
The applicant must understand the function of the accelerator, clutch,
gears, footbrake, handbrake and steering. The applicant must also be
able to use these competently, understand the meaning of the gauges
and other displays on the instrumental panel and know the function of
other controls and switches in the car that have a bearing on road
safety and use them competently. Further the applicant must be able to
carry out routine safety checks concerning oil and coolant levels, tyre
pressure, steering and brakes.
Road user behaviour
The applicant must know the most common causes of accidents; know
which road users are most at risk and how to reduce that risk. The
applicant must also know the rules, risks and effects of drinking and
driving and know the effect of fatigue, illness and drugs on driving
performance
The applicant must also be aware of any age-related problems among
other road users, especially among children, teenagers and the elderly.
In addition he or she has to be alert and able to anticipate the likely
actions of other road users and be able to take appropriate precautions
and be aware that courtesy and consideration towards other road users
are essential for safe driving.
Vehicle characteristics
The applicant must know the important principles concerning braking
distance and road holding under various road and weather conditions.
84
The applicant must also know the handling characteristics of other
vehicles with regard to stability, speed, braking and manoeuvrability.
In addition the applicant must be able to assess the risks caused by the
characteristics of other vehicles and suggest precautions that can be
taken and know that some vehicles are less easily seen than others.
Road and weather conditions
The applicant must know the particular hazards in both daylight and
the dark and on different types of roads. It’s important that the applicant gains driving experience on urban and higher speed roads (not on
motorways) in both daylight and the dark and know which road surfaces provide the better or poorer grip when braking.
The applicant must also know the hazards caused by bad weather and
be able to assess the risks caused by road and traffic conditions, be
aware of how the conditions may cause others to drive unsafely, and
be able to take appropriate precautions.
Traffic signs, rules and regulations
The applicant must have sound knowledge of the meaning of traffic
signs and road markings, for example speed limits, parking restrictions and zebra and pelican crossings.
Car control and road procedure
The applicant must have the knowledge and skills to carry out the following tasks safely and competently practising the proper use of mirrors, observation and signals:
1. Take the necessary precautions before getting in or out of the
vehicle.
2. Before starting the engine, carry out safety checks on doors,
seat and head restraints, seat belts and mirrors.
3. Start the engine and move off.
4. Select the correct road position for normal driving.
5. Use proper observation in all traffic conditions.
85
6. Drive at speed suitable for road and traffic conditions.
7. Change gear promptly to all risks.
8. Change traffic lanes.
9. Pass stationary vehicles.
10. Meet, overtake and cross the path of other vehicles.
11. Turn right and left at junctions, including crossroads and
roundabouts.
12. Drive ahead at crossroads and roundabouts.
13. Keep a safe separation distance when following other traffic.
14. Act correctly at pedestrian crossings.
15. Show proper regard for the safety of other road users with particular care towards the most vulnerable.
16. Drive on both urban and rural roads, and where possible on
dual carriageways, keeping up with the flow of the traffic
where it is safe and proper to do so.
17. Comply with traffic regulations and traffic signals given by the
police, traffic wardens and other road users.
18. Stop the vehicle safely, normally and in an emergency, without
locking the wheels.
19. Turn the vehicle in the road to face the opposite way using the
forward and reverse gears.
20. Reverse the vehicle into a side road keeping reasonably close
to the kerb.
21. Parallel parking while driving in a reverse gear.
22. Park the vehicle in a multi-storey car park or other parking
bay, on the level, uphill and downhill, both in forward and reverse directions.
23. Cross all types of railway crossings.
86
Additional knowledge
The applicant must also know the importance of correct tyre pressures, the actions needed to avoid and correct skids and how to drive
through floods and flooded areas.
The applicant must also know what to do if involved in an accident or
breakdown, including the special arrangements for accidents or breakdown on a motorway etc.
Motorway driving
The applicant must gain a sound knowledge of the special rules,
regulations and driving techniques for motorway driving before taking
the driving test. After passing the test, lessons are recommended with
an approved driving instructor before driving unsupervised on motorways.
The theoretical test
The theoretical test is divided into two parts (DSA, 2003b). One is a
multiple-choice section, where the test items appear on a computer
screen and the student selects the answers by simply touching the
screen. The test-taker has the opportunity to practise using the system
before starting to work with this section. Moreover, it is possible to go
back and change a given answer as well as “tick” an item and go back
to answer it later. The system also prompts the test-taker to go back to
items not answered in full. The multiple-choice section contains 35
test items to be answered in 40 minutes. The test-taker must answer at
least 30 items (86%) correctly in order to pass this part of the test.
Since November 2002, the theoretical test has included a test of hazard perception skills, and after the multiple-choice section there is a
three- minute break before the hazard perception section starts. This
consists of 14 video clips, each lasting about one minute, which feature real road scenes and developing hazards of various types. There
are a total of 15 score able hazards in the test and the student is assessed on the amount of time needed to spot the hazards. The sooner
the student responds, the higher the score will be. The highest possible
score is five points. Thirteen of the clips contain one score able haz87
ard, and one clip contains two hazards. The student has only one
chance to respond to the hazard perception clips. Those applying for
the class B driving license must score at least 38 out of 75 points
(51%) in order to pass the hazard perception section.
The student will receive the test results and feedback information
within 30 minutes after having finished the test. Feedback is given on
any multiple-choice items answered incorrectly. In order to be approved the test-taker has to pass both parts of the test.
If approved the test-taker will receive a Theory Test Pass certificate
that is valid for two years. If the test-taker has not passed the practical
test within these two years, he or she will have to retake the theoretical
test.
The practical test
The main objective is to determine if the applicant is able to drive
safely and competently in various road and traffic conditions (DSA,
2002a). If the student fails he or she is encouraged to take more training. If the student passes he or she is provided with a provisional license and the two-year probationary period starts. In order to be allowed to undergo the practical test the applicant must pass the theoretical test.
The practical test lasts for approximately 40 minutes and starts with an
eyesight test. If the applicant is able to pass this test, i.e. able to read a
car number plate in good daylight at 67 feet, approximately 20 metres,
he or she is allowed to undergo the driving test. Then the applicant is
required to drive around one of a number of set driving test routes
which incorporate a range of different hazards and driving situations,
generally representative of normal driving conditions. During the test
the examiner directs the applicant around the route whilst assessing
and marking all aspects of the applicant’s performance.
Each examiner is required to use one of a number of sets and approved driving test routes. Each test centre normally uses around 20
test routes and examiners are required to use each of those in equal
proportion to the rest.
88
Driving instructors are encouraged to accompany their student on the
test or to listen to the examiner’s debriefing at the end of the session.
Apart from general driving, the applicant will be asked to carry out
two of the following manoeuvres during the test (DSA, 2002b).
1. Reversing around a corner
2. Turning in the road
3. Reverse parking
The applicant may also be asked to carry out an emergency stop exercise.
If the test-taker commits a number of different faults, he or she will
fail the test.
There are three categories of fault:
1. Dangerous fault – involving actual danger
2. Serious fault – potentially dangerous or serious errors
3. Driving fault – a significant error in driving technique or incorrect reaction to a situation not assessed as serious
If the applicant commits one dangerous fault, one serious fault or
more than 15 driving faults, this will result in failure.
If the test-taker passes the test he or she will be on probation for two
years (DSA, 2003a). If the driver gets six or more penalty points during this time, he or she will lose the license. Then he or she has to reapply for a provisional license and take all of the tests again.
89
The theoretical and practical test
- a comparative approach
In this section the theoretical and the practical test are compared. In
addition, the historical development of the theoretical and practical
test in Sweden is related to the present test in the different countries.
More over, the present theoretical tests of the different countries are
compared regarding number of items, item format and cut-off score.
The tests are also compared regarding the time-limit, the administration and the compulsory education taken prior to the test. The differences between the tests are also discussed from a psychometrical aspect. The practical tests are examined regarding the content, degree of
standardisation and the compulsory education taken before the test.
The tests are also compared regarding testing time and assessment.
Characteristics of the theoretical tests
The comparisons showed that there were both differences and similarities between the countries. Concerning the number of items in the
theoretical test, the Swedish and Finnish tests contain more items than
the tests of the other countries. In Sweden the theoretical test comprises 65 regular items and 5 try-out items that do not count towards
the score. In Finland the test consists of 10 multiple-choice items and
50 picture interpretations. In Norway, the test comprises 45 items, in
Great Britain 35 items, in Iceland and Germany 30 items and in Denmark 25 items. In most countries the items in the test cover different
areas of the curriculum. The idea of the tests is to measure if the applicant has the knowledge required in these areas. One crucial aspect
concerning the reliability of the measurement of these areas is that
there are enough items representing each area.
The comparison of the theoretical tests in the different countries also
took account of the testing time. The test-takers in Norway have the
most time to complete the test (90 minutes). In Great Britain, Iceland
and Sweden the testing time varies between 40 and 50 minutes and in
Denmark and Finland the testing time is 30 minutes. In addition to the
time-limit on the test, Finland also has a time-limit on the items. For
the multiple-choice items the time-limit is 30 seconds and for the picture interpretations the time-limit is 10 seconds. When a test has a
90
rigid time-limit it is being considered a speed test. The idea of such a
test is that some test-takers finish the test but others do not; a testtaker’s working rate will systematically influence his or her performance on the test. The theoretical test in Finland is one example of this
kind of test. On other kinds of tests, the rate of response may be irrelevant to the trait being measured. On these tests, the time-limits
should be long enough to allow all, or nearly all, test-takers to finish.
Otherwise, the reliability may be inflated because of consistencies in
performance caused by the test’s time-limit, when the examiner was
primarily interested in the degree of consistency in test performance
that might have been observed when all test-takers had finished the
test (Crocker & Algina, 1986).
When comparing the countries regarding the amount of time that is
given for each item, Sweden is the country that has least amount of
time for each item (43 s). Denmark and Iceland are other countries
where the time for each item is quite short. In contrast the test-takers
in Norway have two minutes to complete each item and in Germany
there is no official time-limit. When determining the time-limit for a
test one should consider the characteristics of the items. When comparing the countries Finland, Sweden and Denmark have the least
amount of time per item. In Finland the test is a speed test, where the
time should be the factor discriminating between test-takers. In Sweden and Denmark the test is more of a power test, where the items
should discriminate between the test-takers irrespective of the time. In
that case the time-limit might be to short time in order to allow all
test-takers to complete the test.
Regarding the item format all countries have multiple-choice items in
their theoretical tests. When comparing the items and the number of
options in the tests of the different countries the number of options
varies both between the countries and between the items in the same
test. In Sweden the number of options varies between two and six and
in Norway the number varies between three and five. In Finland, Iceland and Germany there are three options for each item.
In addition to the variation in the number of options, the number of
correct options is also something that varies between the tests. In
Sweden and Finland, only one option is correct. In the other countries
more than one option can be correct. This was also the case in the previous theoretical test in Sweden. In that test, one or more option could
91
be correct, and the test-taker did not always know how many options
that were correct. The test-taker had to mark all the correct options in
order to get one point for the item. This system was changed, since the
score at the test did not reflect the test-takers knowledge. Even if the
test-taker scored three out of the four correct options, he or she got
zero points. Two different ways to alter the test were proposed; one
way was to give the test-taker one point for each correct option, thus
considering the partial knowledge of the test-taker. The other way to
solve the problem was to construct items that only had one correct
option (Mattsson, 1993). When the test was revised in 1999 the latter
was chosen.
When the new theoretical test was introduced in Sweden in 1999, a
number of try-out items were included in the test. The use of try-out
items embedded in the test is unique for the Swedish test and offers a
possibility to assess the quality of the items before they are used as
regular items.
Moreover, the comparison showed that the cut-off score is set at different levels in different countries. In Sweden, Denmark and Norway
the cut-off score is 80 per cent. In Finland a test-taker has to pass 70
per cent of the 10 multiple-choice items and 84 per cent of the 50 picture interpretations. In Iceland a test-taker has to answer 14 of 15
items correct (93%) in the first part of the test. In the second part of
the test the cut-off score is 24 out of 30 (80%). In Germany the testtaker has to obtain 101 points (92% correct) in the theoretical test in
order to pass. In Great Britain the cut-off score is 30 out of 35 (86%)
in the multiple-choice test and 38 out of 75 (51%) for the hazard perception test.
When the theoretical tests in the different countries were compared
two strategies for administering the theoretical test emerged. In Denmark, Iceland and Germany the theoretical test is a paper-and-pencil
test. In Sweden, Finland, Norway and Great Britain the test is computerised.
Considering the test as a part of the whole driver education system,
the level of compulsory education is a factor that affects the role of the
test. In a number of countries there is some compulsory education that
should be completed before the theoretical test is undertaken. In Finland the theoretical test is undertaken when the first educational stage
92
stage is completed. In Denmark the test-taker has to attend 26 lessons
before taking the theoretical test. In Norway, Iceland and Germany
there are also some compulsory courses before the test. In Sweden and
Great Britain, the test-takers do not need to attend any education before taking the theoretical test. One way to guarantee that the testtakers have reached a certain level of competence is to use compulsory education that takes place before the test. If no compulsory education exists, the test becomes the only way to assess the knowledge
of the test-takers, and thus the demands of the test in terms of reliability and validity should be high.
Characteristics of the practical tests
When comparing the practical tests in the countries the content of the
tests seems to be quite similar. All tests include a safety check and
driving both inside and outside built-up areas. Although the content is
similar different countries emphasize certain areas more, e.g. manoeuvring. Denmark, Germany and Great Britain have listed a number of
manoeuvres that are carried out during the test. The practical test in
Sweden focuses on the attentiveness and the traffic behaviour of the
test-taker, but this has not always been the case. In previous tests the
focus of practical test was the student’s ability to manoeuvre the vehicle. The idea of focusing on attentiveness in the present test is that the
ability to manoeuvre the vehicle is considered to be a fundamental
prerequisite in order to be able to attend to traffic.
There are two different ways of regulating the content of the test. In
Norway and Great Britain the use of test routes is a guarantee that the
test contains certain elements. In Norway a test centre should have at
least 6 different routes and in Great Britain every test centre should
have at least 20 test routes. The other countries have other ways to
assess the content of the test. In Sweden, the driving examiners use a
certain protocol during the test. On the protocol different traffic situations are listed. When four driving tests have been completed all these
traffic situations should have occurred. Germany has a similar system
where different traffic situations or manoeuvres should occur a number of times with in five driving tests.
The comparison showed that the testing time varies between the tests
of the different countries. In Sweden and Denmark the effective driv93
ing time should be at least 25 minutes. In Finland and Germany the
effective driving time should be at least 30 minutes. In Great Britain
the effective driving time is 33 minutes and in Iceland 35 to 40 minutes. In contrast, the effective driving time in Norway is at least 55
minutes.
In most countries in the study, the assessment of the practical test is
based on a holistic impression of the test-takers performance. However, the criteria for judgment of the test differ between the countries.
In Sweden, Norway and Iceland the judgement is based on the speed
adjustment, the placement of the vehicle, the ability to manoeuvre the
vehicle, the observance of traffic regulations and the attention to the
traffic environment. In Iceland the examiner also uses a certain scale
when assessing the test-taker. As mentioned earlier, the applicant is
given 100 points before the test. If the applicant commits a fault, i.e.
by making an error when turning, when positioning the vehicle, when
adjusting the speed or by lacking attention, the penalty point connected with that fault is multiplied by two and the sum is then subtracted from the 100 points given before the test. If the applicant has
80 points or more when the test is completed, he or she has passed the
test. This kind of scoring can be termed “negative scoring” since the
examiner deducts points according to the errors made by the testtaker. In contrast to this, positive scoring would be a better alternative
since it is more encouraging for the test-taker when the test-taker is
awarded points for correct performance instead of being “punished”
for wrong performance.
In Great Britain, Finland and Norway the assessment is based on different levels of errors. In Great Britain the applicant’s faults are categorised as dangerous, serious or driving faults. The applicant fails the
test if he or she has one dangerous or serious fault or 15 driving faults.
As stated earlier, in Finland the test-takers performance is evaluated
on the basis of road safety. If the examiner marks the test sheet with
the letter K, the performance was in conflict with the fundamental
conditions for a safe way of driving. A K signifies that the test-taker
causes a situation in which he or she, the examiner or another road
user is able to avoid an accident only by braking, accelerating or turning sharply. If the examiner marks the test sheet with the letter F, the
performance increases the risk in relation to the fundamental conditions for a safe way of driving. The letter F signifies that the test-taker
acts in a way that increases the risk of an accident. However, this not
94
does necessarily mean that the test-taker failed the test. If no note is
made the performance does not contain either negative or positive
features and if the examiner marks the test paper with a G, the performance is good in relation to the fundamental conditions for a safe
way of driving. In Finland the test-takers are also asked to assess their
own ability before the test. When the test is completed the examiner
and the test-taker discuss and compare their individual assessments. In
Norway the assessment is based on different competences, but the
performance of these competences is also related to different levels of
errors.
Another important factor associated with the evaluation of the testtaker’s performance is the interrater reliability. In some countries
measures have been taken to check the consistency of the judgements
made by different raters. There are several possible ways to check the
reliability of a test, and it is of great importance for the quality of the
test that these evaluations are made. Finland, Sweden and Norway use
comparative statistics to check that the evaluations are equal enough.
In addition, the examiners in Sweden and Norway observe each
other’s tests and compare the evaluations with each other (Uusitalo &
Mynttinen, 2002). In order to facilitate the consistency of judgement it
is important that there are clearly defined guidelines for the assessment of the test-takers, so that the examiners assess the test-takers on
the same basis.
All countries, except for Great Britain, have some compulsory education that should be completed before the practical test. Although most
countries have some compulsory education, the level of education
differs to a great extent. In Sweden the compulsory education consist
of a four-hour training session on a slippery surface and in Denmark
the test-taker is obligated to take 20 driving lessons before taking the
test. In Germany the test-taker must participate in 14 double lessons
and 12 single lessons and in Iceland the test-taker must attend 24 theory lessons and 16-24 practical lessons. In Sweden and Great Britain,
where the compulsory education is minimal or non-existent, private
driver education is also allowed. The absence of compulsory education and the allowance of private education mean that the system
owner has a very limited control of the education or training that the
applicants go through. In these countries the practical test is of great
importance, since it is the only way to assess if the applicants have
reached the level of competence required.
95
Summary of the educational systems
The driver education systems, which comprise the objectives of the
education, the education itself and the driver testing, can be divided
into three categories depending on the possibilities that the system
owner has to determine whether the objectives of the education are
fulfilled. The first category contains systems with little or no compulsory education. In these systems private education is allowed. Sweden
and Great Britain are two examples of these systems. The second
category consists of systems with some compulsory education, as well
as private education. Examples of these systems are Finland, Iceland
and Norway. In the third category of systems the formal driver education is compulsory and private education is forbidden. Such driver
education systems are used in Denmark and Germany.
The driver education in both Sweden and Great Britain does not consist of any compulsory education, with the exception of the four-hour
education at a skidpan used in Sweden. In addition private education,
where the lay instructor does not have any education or guidelines for
teaching, is allowed. This means that the system owner in both Sweden and Britain has minimal control of the driver education and that
the theoretical and practical tests are the only way of making sure that
the objectives of the curriculum are being met.
In Sweden efforts are made to integrate the theoretical and practical
part as much as possible. Much of the education is also being focused
on the change and development of the students’ attitudes towards traffic safety. Ever since 1988, when the areas regarding the risky situations in traffic and the limitations in driver abilities were made separate subjects, it has been a deliberate strategy to attempt to lower the
number of accidents by increasing the understanding and changing the
attitudes among the students. However, since the curriculum does not
contain any compulsory areas, the effects of such a strategy are limited. This is of course also a major problem since much pressure is put
on the driving examiners and their ability to make a correct evaluation.
In other countries different ways and methods are being used in order
to ensure that the objectives of the driver education are being fulfilled.
Finland, Iceland and Norway are all countries where major parts of the
driver education are compulsory. Both Finland and Iceland are using a
96
driver education system with different stages, which is thought to be
effective since this kind of education makes it possible to emphasize
different knowledge and abilities at different stages. For example the
driver education in Finland starts with sufficient education in vehicle
handling so that the student later on is fully able to focus on other aspects of the education. The compulsory areas of the first stage ensures
that the student is given the necessary abilities, knowledge and attitudes in order to be able to drive independently during the mid-stage
of the education, without endangering the student or other road-users.
Through the compulsory section of the second stage the student is
given the chance to develop his/her driving abilities further. The compulsory education also gives the system owner a direct insight into as
well as a possibility to control the education. In Finland much effort is
also being made in order to develop the student’s capacity for selfevaluation. It is emphasised that actions shall be preceded and followed by reflections by the individual and that the student shall acquire a realistic understanding of his/her driving ability and be motivated to develop his/her driving. This objective requires a professional, compulsory driver education, since it is difficult to assess and
get a reliable measurement of the student’s capacity for selfevaluation through testing.
As mentioned earlier, all applicants in Iceland must start their driver
education at an authorised driving school. After completing these
compulsory parts the student is allowed to continue the education on
his/her own. He or she is however obliged to have an approval issued
by a driving instructor from the driving school proving that the compulsory parts have been attended. He or she is also obliged to be in
possession of an approval stated by the police and an insurance company. If the applicant has these documents he or she is allowed to
complete the education either through private training accompanied by
a lay instructor or at the traffic school. In this way the system owner is
assured that the student is given the fundamental knowledge, attitudes
and abilities in order to be entrusted to continue the education. This of
course increases the control that the system owner has over the education but it is also likely that the student in this way is given a better
chance to profit by the private education than if he or she is allowed to
start driving privately without an introductory education.
As stated earlier, an applicant in Norway is given four opportunities in
order to obtain the objectives of the non-compulsory driver education;
97
instruction at a driving school, private practice only, both private practice and instruction at a driving school or a co-operation between a
driving school, a lay instructor and the student. Regardless of which
way the student chooses to educate him- or her-self, the underlying
aim is always to achieve the objective of the curriculum even if the
driver education can vary in length depending on the student’s previous knowledge. The objectives of the curriculum determine what the
applicant has to obtain in order to be granted a driving license and be
given permission to continue with the education on their own. The
driver education is thereby regarded as an ongoing process that continues after the formal education has been accomplished. The compulsory education in Norway consists of three parts; driving in traffic,
driving on slippery surfaces and driving after dark. The parts comprise
nine and a half hours of training, which the student has to go through
at a driving school under the supervision of qualified school personnel. In this way the system owner is given increased control of the
education. It is however assumed that the student has previously been
able to obtain sufficient driving abilities to be able to benefit from the
compulsory parts.
Germany and Denmark are two countries where all driver education
must be conducted at a driving school since private education is forbidden. In Denmark the student is also obliged to keep a logbook of
what exercises he or she has completed in order for the driving instructor to keep track of progress made by the student. In Germany the
driver education is divided in different phases. The applicant for the
driving license must first attend the special first-aid course in order to
be allowed to start the driver’s education. During this course the student is given the fundamental knowledge needed in order to attend to
people that have been injured in traffic accidents. When this course
has been completed he or she is allowed to begin the driver education.
The education is divided in basic and special education. During the
basic practical education the student shall achieve the necessary
knowledge and abilities needed in order to profit by the special education. When the student is considered to be ready he or she will be
granted permission to attend the special education. In this way the
system owner is guaranteed that the student is given sufficient education before he or she is allowed to go through the more advanced aspects of driving. Unlike the other countries in this study there is no
national curriculum regulating the driver education. Instead there are a
number of centrally established paragraphs that regulate the contents
98
of the driver education. The driving schools establish their own curricula in accordance with these paragraphs.
When comparing these three categories one might expect that in countries without any compulsory education more focus should be put on
the theoretical and practical tests. Concerning the theoretical tests in
Sweden and Great Britain much effort has been made in order to develop the tests. In Sweden different theoretical tests has been used
throughout the years and several studies has been made in order to
improve the test and uphold a high standard. The development of the
test is also being considered a continuous process in which try-out
items are being used in order to guarantee the quality of the regular
items. The use of try-out items is something that is unique for the
theoretical test in Sweden. In Great Britain the theoretical test is relatively new since it was not introduced until 1996. However, a computerised test as well as a hazard perception test have been developed and
established in a relatively short time. In Germany and Denmark where
the entire education is compulsory, the theoretical test is still being
performed with the use of paper and pencil. In Finland, Norway and
Iceland both compulsory and private education is being used. The
theoretical test in Finland and Norway is computerised while Iceland
uses a written test. To sum up, the countries with no compulsory education seem to focus more on the development of the theoretical test
than the countries in which the entire education is compulsory. However, this fact does not seem to apply to the practical test. In the countries with compulsory education the practical test also contains more
compulsory parts and the content is more regulated through guidelines
and instructions given to the examiner. In the majority of these countries the effective driving time is also longer.
The relationship between driver education and test
performance
In order to study the relationship between the type of driver’s education and the performance on the theoretical and practical test, a number of studies have been conducted. Lehtimäki (1998) studied how the
type of training i.e. driving school and private training influenced the
drivers’ performance on the driving-license test in Finland. The results
showed that students from driving schools passed the theoretical test
at the first attempt more often than the students with private education.
99
At the first attempt 64 per cent of the school drivers and 60 per cent of
the students with private education passed the test. One explanation
for the results was that the theory lessons and learning aid in driving
schools may help a student to fare better at the theoretical test while
private students must often learn this on their own.
Concerning the practical test, Lehtimäki (1998) also found that drivers
with private education succeeded more often at their first attempt.
However, school drivers passed the practical test overall in fewer attempts than drivers with private education. The privately-taught drivers had either many errors or none at all on the practical test, while the
driving school students had few errors at the test. One explanation for
the results that some private students had no errors in the practical test
might be that the private training allows more driving in general but
also more driving in varied conditions than school driving, where only
the official minimal amount of practice required is done since driving
lessons are expensive.
In a British study, Forsyth (1992) also studied how different types of
driver’s education affected the results at the driving-license test. The
results showed that ninety per cent of the candidates in the study had
been taking more than ten hours of professional instruction, even
though the professional education is non-compulsory in Great Britain.
Sixty-five per cent of the participants in the study had also been practising driving with a friend or relative. Differences in performance on
the practical test were observed between candidates who had had different levels of professional instruction. Those who had had between
six and ten hours of professional instruction had the highest pass rate.
Candidates who had no professional instruction at all had a pass rate
of 59 per cent compared with 76 per cent for those who had six to ten
hours of professional instruction. In addition, private practice was also
found to improve the pass rate.
Two Swedish studies have also shown that there is a relationship between type of education and result at the driving-license test.
Wolming (2000) found that the students from driving school performed slightly better in the theoretical test and much better in the
practical test. A study by Sundström (2003) confirmed these differences. The results showed that 80 per cent of the driving school students and 57 per cent of the students with private education passed the
theoretical test. Regarding the practical test, the difference was even
100
bigger since 81 per cent of the driving school students and 47 per cent
of the students with private education passed the test. There was however a methodological problem in both these studies. The categorisation of the driving school students and the students with private education was based on their notification to the test. This means that if a
test-taker applied to the test through a driving school he or she is categorised as a driving school student regardless of the number of driving
lessons that he or she has taken.
To sum up, the results from these studies indicate that the Swedish
students with professional education perform better at the theoretical
as well as the practical test. In addition there is also a positive effect of
private training. One advantage with private training is that the student
is given the opportunity to practice more and get more experience,
since the private education is much cheaper than professional education. A combination of professional instruction and private training
gives the student the possibility to learn the different elements of driving in a correct way as well as providing an opportunity to practice
these elements through private education in order to get a lot of driving experience. It also seems like a combination of professional instruction and private training is common, even in countries like Sweden and Great Britain where the professional training is noncompulsory (Forsyth, 1992; Gregersen & Nyberg, 2002).
Improving goals for driver education
The objectives of the driver education regulate the content of both the
driver education and the driving-license test. In order to improve the
goals for driver education, and thus affecting both the education and
the tests, an attempt was made to formulate a conceptual model of
driver training and education (Hatakka, Keskinen, Gregersen, Glad &
Hernetkoski, 2002). The objective was to formulate guidelines and
goals for future development in the area of driver training and education. A four-level descriptive model, in which driver behaviour is conceptualised as a hierarchy, was presented. The first level in the model
comprises vehicle-manoeuvring abilities like controlling speed, direction and position. The second level is the mastering of traffic situations, which means that the driver should be able to adapt to the demands of the present situation. The third level represents the goals and
context of driving, which comprises the purpose of driving, the envi101
ronment and the social context. The fourth level refers to the goals for
life and skills for living, which relates to the importance of cars and
driving for personal development and the driver’s skills for selfcontrol. The idea is that a driver education should comprise all these
levels. The contents of driver education can be related to the hierarchical approach resulting in a framework for Goals for Driver Education. The GDE-framework can be used as a basis for evaluation of
specific driver education methods and also as basis for developing
new ideas. The second dimension of the framework is formed by three
goals for training: basic skills and knowledge, knowledge and skills
concerning risk increasing factors and skills for self-evaluation. A
conceptual analysis was conducted and it points towards a need to
emphasise the motivational aspects in driver education more than it is
done at present. It was also stated that in order to reach the goals,
pedagogical methods should be re-evaluated. For example, active
learning methods and use of self-reflection should be promoted in
driver education.
In Sweden three studies that focus on the relationship between the
content of the theoretical and practical tests and the objectives of the
curriculum have been conducted. The items in the theoretical test are
composed by defined educational objectives stated in the curriculum.
These objectives are very detailed. The purpose of the first study
(Henriksson, Wikström & Zolland, 1995) was to construct a model for
the theoretical test, used between 1990 and 1999, that was less detailed but general and comprehensive. The idea was that this model
could be the future basis of test construction. The model comprised
driver, vehicle and environment. The model also included two types of
states; a stationary and a non-stationary state. These five components
were combined to 15 categories in the model. The model made it possible to study what type of events the driving-license test was measuring. The first step was to fit the curriculum of the theoretical drivinglicense test to the model. The result showed that 95 percent of the objectives in the curriculum fitted the new model. An advantage with
this model, which is composed of more general objectives, is that it
would make item construction easier and thus facilitate the creation of
a large item bank. In addition, Zolland and Henriksson (1998) used
the theoretical model to analyse the theoretical test. The result indicated that the test versions had different content according to the theoretical model. In the theoretical test used at that time more than one
102
option could be correct, and due to this one item could relate to several parts of the curriculum.
The purpose of the third study conducted by Zolland (1999) was to
illustrate different ways of judging the structure of the curriculum of
the Swedish driving-license test and to clarify the division between the
theoretical and the practical test. The purpose was also to validate the
theoretical model that was developed to analyse the curriculum and
the tests. The analysis of the curriculum for the practical education
showed that the criterions were repeated and overlapped each other.
One conclusion was that the curriculum was highly specified and that
it needed more general criterions. Since the Swedish driver education
consists of two examinations, a practical and a theoretical test, one
needs to consider two curricula, two educations and two test situations. It is important that there is an agreement between the curriculum, education and the test in each of the two systems. The analysis
also showed that the theoretical test focused on both stationary and
non-stationary states and that the focus of the practical test was nonstationary states. One conclusion was that it might be reasonable that
the theoretical test measures stationary states and the non-stationary
states that are too dangerous to measure in the practical test, and that
the practical test measure only non-stationary states.
To summarize, the two approaches mentioned above focuses on
slightly different things. The purpose of the model presented by
Hatakka et al. (2002) is to improve both the objective and the content
of the driver education. Regarding the measurement of the higher levels of the hierarchy it is problematic to make a reliable and valid
measurement since these levels comprise attitudes and motives of the
driver. The model by Henriksson, Wikström and Zolland, (1995) aims
to facilitate the test construction by making the curriculum less detailed. The focus of the model is the measurement instead of the content of the driver education.
Improving driver testing
In addition to improving the goals of driver education a number of
studies have also been conducted in order to improve the theoretical
and the practical driving-license test. In Sweden a number of studies
have been focusing on improving the theoretical test in different ways.
103
When the theoretical test was computerised in January 1999, a study
was conducted with the purpose to check if there were any differences
between the results of those who wrote the same test before and after
it was computerised (Wiberg, 1999).
When the test was computerised a randomisation of both the items and
the options were made. The test was administered in six versions and
the results showed that there were differences in results in most of the
versions. The five content areas of each test version were examined
and there were differences in most of the parts. The statistical analysis
of the test showed that the proportion of examinees that passed the test
decreased after the computerisation of the test. An item analysis was
conducted and the results showed that some items worked better after
the computerisation. The most likely explanation to this is that the
possibility to remember patterns of the options was reduced with the
randomisation of the options. The main conclusion of the study
(Wiberg, 1999) was that the computerisation of the theoretical test
was positive. The possibility to learn answering patterns was reduced
with the randomisation of the items and their options. Most items
seemed to work better in the computerised test since they discriminate
better between the test-takers that have the knowledge and those who
do not.
The purpose of another study by Wiberg and Henriksson (2000) was
to consider standard setting in a theoretical perspective. The aim was
to describe the categories of methods, which are used to set a standard,
and to examine which category is the most suitable for a criterionreferenced licensure test like the Swedish theoretical test. The study
described how the standards were set in the old and new theoretical
tests. The criteria used to decide the most suitable method were technical adequacy and practicability, each defined in several ways and
some specific criteria concerning the fact that the theoretical test is a
licensure test. The theoretical examination showed that it is not possible to find one single method that is best is all possible situations. The
conclusion was that either the method Informed Judgement or Iterative Angoff was the most preferable method for setting a standard on
the Swedish driving-license test.
Another study (Wiberg 2002) focused on how an item bank for the
theoretical test should be constructed. The study also considered different problems related to the design of an item bank. Three kinds of
104
tests were discussed in the light of this field; paper-and-pencil tests,
computerized tests and computerised adaptive tests. In the report recommendations were made of how to design an item bank in general,
but also for the Swedish theoretical test. The main conclusion from the
study was that the construction of an item bank depends on the type of
test that is chosen.
When the new theoretical test was introduced in 1999, there was a
need to evaluate how the test worked. Wolming (2000) presented a
description of the test-takers results at the theoretical test and the practical test. He also studied the relationship between the theoretical test
and practical test. The purpose of the study was also to examine the
difference between professional and private learner drivers’ results at
the theoretical test and the practical test. Since the test-takers had to
pass the theoretical test before they were allowed to take the practical
test, only candidates who passed the theoretical test were included in
the sample.
The analysis of the relationship between the tests showed that testtakers with high performance on the theoretical test had a higher passrate on the practical test than test-takers with lower score on the theoretical test. All parts in the practical test were related to the scores in
the theoretical test to different degrees. The probability for a test-taker
to pass the practical test increased with higher score on the theoretical
test. There were major differences between the parts of the practical
test. “Traffic behaviour” and “attentiveness” were two parts that resulted in more failures than the other parts of the test. These parts also
had the strongest correlation to the theoretical test of all parts in the
practical test. The weakest correlation between the theoretical test and
the practical test was the part “manoeuvring”. The relationship between the two parts traffic behaviour and attentiveness in the practical
test and the result at the theoretical test indicated that the ability to
behave well in traffic and attend to traffic situations are dependent of
the knowledge obtained by the theoretical education. The relationship
between the theoretical and the practical test suggested that the tests
might complement each other, for example that a test-takers result at
the theoretical test would guide the content of the practical test.
Sundström (2003) conducted another study that confirmed the results
found by Wolming (2000). When compared to the earlier results, the
structure of the tests and the performance of the test-takers seemed
105
stable over time. In contrast to Wolming (2000), test-takers who failed
the test were also included in the analysis of the theoretical test. The
results showed that different versions of the theoretical test differed in
difficulty. As in the study by Wolming (2000) the results also showed
a moderate correlation between the score on the theoretical test and
the performance on the practical test. In order to get a more reliable
estimate of the relationship between the theoretical and the practical
test it was suggested that one should let all test-takers take the practical test irrespective of their result at the theoretical test.
In Norway, a study have been planned to examine if the difficulty of
the practical test depends on the traffic environment (Bjørnskau,
2002). The hypothesis is that it might be more difficult to take the
driving test in a city than on the country. Another question is if the
examiners adjust their judgement according to the difficulty of the
traffic environment. If this is the case, the examiners may be stricter in
their judgements when candidates are taking the test in the country
compared to when they are taking it in a city. The idea is to conduct a
study where candidates from different traffic environments are tested
under similar conditions. The plan is also to examine if the judgement
of the examiners differ when comparing examiners that usually make
assessments in different traffic environments. Practically, this could be
arranged by letting three examiners assess the same candidate at the
same test occasion.
The summarized conclusion is that the studies conducted in Sweden
have been useful in improving the theoretical test and confirmed that
changes in the theoretical test, e.g. the computerisation were positive.
Moreover, the results of these studies can be used to improve the test
further, considering different methods of standard setting and the use
of an item bank for the theoretical test.
106
Summarised conclusions
Previous studies that have compared different driver education systems have made some suggestions for improvement of driver education. For instance it was suggested that training techniques should be
improved and that more emphasis should be put on cognitive skills
and hazard perception. Other important areas that should be emphasised include each driver’s ability to assess their own skills and the
development of responsible attitudes towards driving. It was also
stated that research is required to improve the value of private practice
and that the education of instructors will probably need to be extended
to enable them to deliver the content of the driver education effectively. It was also suggested that the process of the practical and theoretical test should be improved (Lynam & Twisk, 1995). In addition,
the focus of some of these studies (Lynam & Twisk, 1995; Siegrist,
1999) has been the accidents of novice drivers. Attempts have been
made to investigate the relationship between test performance and
accidents. There is however a problem with this approach since drivers who fail an established driving test, and are therefore expected to
have a poor accident record, are excluded from the population of drivers who drive unsupervised and can play no further part in a study of
the test to predict accident liability. Due to this fact, our opinion is that
the test performance can only be evaluated within the driver education
system. Therefore, the focus of this study was the curricula, driver
education and driver testing in different European countries.
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 driving-license test i.e. the theoretical and practical tests in those countries, as well as to compare the
driving-license tests in the different countries 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.
107
The results of this study showed that there are three ways of evaluating whether the objectives of the curriculum have been met: tests,
education or a combination of both. If the system owner uses education as a way to guarantee that the student has obtained a certain level
of competence, it is however essential that the education is compulsory. 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 Sweden and Great Britain where the level of compulsory education
is minimal or non-existent, the driving-license test is the only way to
verify that the test-takers have obtained the knowledge and abilities
stated in the curriculum. The student is given the option of both professional and private education and decides to what extent these are to
be attended. With the use of private education the student is given an
opportunity to practice frequently, at a lower cost, and thereby become
more experienced. However, there are some disadvantages with this
kind of education. Over the years a number of studies have shown that
the students with professional education perform better than students
with private education on both the theoretical and the practical test
(Lehtimäki, 1998; Wolming, 2000; Sundström, 2003). Nevertheless,
there is still a need to further investigate the effects of a combination
of private and professional education. Such a combination might provide the student with the opportunity to learn the different elements of
driving in a correct way at the driving school, as well as an opportunity to practice these elements through private education in order to
gain a lot of driving experience. Some initiatives have also been taken
in order to support the lay instructor and the student in the private
education. Both in Norway and Sweden it has been suggested that a
class should be held in order to prepare both the student and the lay
instructor for the private education.
As a result of a restricted use of compulsory education in Sweden and
Great Britain, 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. The comparison of the theoretical and
practical tests and the analysis regarding psychometric criteria resulted
108
in some suggestions for improving the tests. In order to obtain a valid
measure of the test-takers knowledge and abilities there has to be an
agreement between the objectives of the curriculum, the driver education and the driving-license test. For this reason, it is important that
the test covers the content of the curriculum. The analysis also showed
that the number of items is an important aspect. In order to get a reliable measurement it is important that there are enough items in the test
representing each area of the curriculum. Another important issue is
the time aspect. In order to get a reliable measurement it is important
that the test-taker has enough time to complete the test if the time is
not the factor that should discriminate between the test-takers. There
should be a relationship between the number of items and the timelimit for the test, and the time-limit should allow all or nearly all testtakers to complete the test. The amount of time should also depend on
the characteristics of the items.
The item format was also something that was addressed when comparing the theoretical tests in the different countries. All countries have
multiple-choice items in their tests, but the number of correct options
varies. The use of items having only one correct option gives an advantage, since these questions only measure one aspect and thus make
the question more straightforward to the test-taker. When constructing
multiple-choice items it is important that the stem, i.e. the question,
provides a complete idea of the problem to be solved by selecting the
right answer. It is also important to have in mind that the distractors
i.e. the incorrect options should be equally attractive to the test-takers
that do not know the right answer. To those who possess the knowledge required by the item, the distractors should clearly be wrong
choices. Multiple-choice items always offer a possibility of guessing,
but the probability of a correct guess can be regulated through the
number of options available for an item. When determining the number of options the most important thing to consider is that each distractor is doing its job (Haladyna, 1994). When there is a variation in the
number of distractors or in the number of correct options, it is important that the quotient of the number of correct options divided by the
number of possible options is the same for all test versions.
In addition, the comparison showed that the cut-off scores in the theoretical tests differed between the countries. When assessing a testtaker there are two types of wrong decisions that can be made. The
first is if a test-taker that does not have the knowledge passes the test.
109
The other is if a test-taker that has the knowledge fails the test. The
idea of standard setting is to find a method that minimizes the number
of wrong decisions about the test-taker. There are various methods
that one can use in standard setting and depending on the format of the
test, different methods are applicable. (Berk, 1986; Wiberg & Henriksson, 2000).
Finally, the analysis of the theoretical tests showed that there are two
strategies of administering the test; by paper and pencil or by computers. One advantage with computerised tests is that the security of
the test is increased when there are no paper copies of the test. Another advantage is that the try-out procedure is made easier. Due to the
try-out the system owner is given an opportunity of obtaining valuable
information about new items before they are inserted in an ordinary
test. The try-out items, can simply be integrated in the ordinary test,
making it easier to anticipate their quality. Computerised testing also
offers other advantages: the items and their options can be randomised
and the administration of the test takes less time since the scoring can
be done during the test. One disadvantage with computerised tests is
that some test-takers are not used to working with computers and this
inexperience might be reflected in their test results (Wainer et al,
1990: Wiberg, 2002).
Regarding the try-out of items, the comparison of the theoretical tests
showed that try-out items are something that is unique for the Swedish
theoretical test. The try-out can be done in different ways. The items
can be pre-tested separate from the regular test, or in combination with
items in the regular test, as it is done in the Swedish test. If the try-out
items are a part of the regular test the test-taker can either be informed
that they are working with try-out items or not. The advantage of including the try-out items in the regular test is that the try-out is done in
the proper group of test-takers and that they probably are fully motivated (Crocker & Algina, 1986).
When considering the reliability and validity of a practical test, there
are other methods that can be used in order to maintain the standard of
the test. One method that helps ensure the equality of different assessments is the use of standardised test routes. However, if standardised routes are being used, the test routes need to be continuously updated in order to assure that the test-takers do not know the route in
advance. If they do, the validity of the test is, of course, negatively
110
affected. The advantage of tests where the examiner decides the route
is that the content can be more varied. In addition, the validity of such
an assessment is probably higher than an assessment with standardised
test routes, since the test-takers are observed in the actual traffic environment. One problem with this kind of assessment is to obtain equality between different assessments, so that one student is judged in the
same way by all examiners. In this case it is important that the examiners are trained to assess in the same way. One problem with this
kind of assessment is that more demands are put on the examiner in
terms of choosing a route that covers the content of the curriculum. In
these cases, it is also important that the time for the driving test is long
enough to ensure that the content stated in the curriculum is covered.
In most countries in the study, the assessment of the practical test is
based on a holistic impression of the test-takers performance. However, the criteria for judgement differ between the countries. Sweden,
Norway and Iceland have defined certain competences that the testtaker should have in order to be granted a license. These competences
are being examined during the test when the test-taker drives in different traffic environments. In Norway and Great Britain the errors made
by the test-taker are divided into different categories. Depending of
the category the test-taker is allowed to make a number of errors before he or she fails the test. In Iceland the examiner uses a certain
scale to mark the errors made by the test-taker and in Finland the testtakers performance is related to behaviour that promotes road safety.
In order to get a reliable and valid measurement, it is important that
there are certain guidelines for the assessment. These guidelines
should describe what to measure, i.e. the performance of the test-taker.
The guidelines should also state when the performance is erroneous.
Moreover, the length of the testing time is also of great importance for
the reliability and validity of the evaluation, since the examiner needs
sufficient time to get a good basis for the decision. Another important
aspect related to the quality of the test is that the test-taker’s result is
independent of the driving examiner that assesses the test-taker. There
are several possible ways to check the reliability of a test, and it is of
great importance for the quality of the test that these evaluations are
made. In order to facilitate the agreement between examiners it is important that there are clearly defined guidelines for the assessment of
the test-takers, so that the examiners assess the test-takers on the same
basis.
111
When comparing the different driver education systems one might
expect that in countries without any compulsory education more focus
would be put on the theoretical and practical tests. The comparison
showed that the countries with no compulsory education seem to focus
more on the development of the theoretical test than do the countries
in which the entire education is compulsory. However, this does not
seem to be the case for the practical test. In the countries with compulsory education the practical test also contains more compulsory parts
and the content is more regulated through guidelines and instructions
given to the examiner. In the majority of these countries the effective
driving time is also longer than in countries with little or no compulsory education.
The purpose of the driving-license test is to measure whether the student has acquired the knowledge and abilities specified in the curriculum. Today, when the curricula in many countries emphasise the students’ attitudes towards driving, the driver education systems with no
compulsory education encounters a major problem, since it is difficult
to get a reliable measurement of the students’ attitudes through driver
testing. Therefore, the system owner needs to consider other ways of
evaluating the attitudes of the test-taker. One way of evaluating the
attitudes is through compulsory education, where qualified teachers
indirectly assess the student. One example of this problem is the suggestion of a new curriculum for driver education in Sweden. This curriculum emphasises drivers’ attitudes and motives, which are difficult
to measure in a test. In order to measure performance in these areas a
compulsory education with qualified the teachers is required. In the
case of Sweden this is a problem, since the driver education is voluntary and the competence of the teachers varies due to the fact that
there are both professional and private teachers. Thus, the effects of
this kind of deliberate strategies in these kinds of driver education
systems are limited, since a compulsory education of high quality is
necessary to affect and develop the students’ attitudes.
The driver education systems in Norway, Iceland and Finland are included in the second category of driver education systems. In those
systems both compulsory and private education is used, which might
provide a fruitful combination depending on how the education is arranged. For instance, a compulsory part in the beginning of the education might provide the student with the fundamental knowledge and
abilities in order to be entrusted to continue the education. In this way
112
the student is given a better chance to profit by the private education
than if he or she is allowed to start driving privately without an introductory education.
Denmark and Germany are included in the third category of driver
education systems, in which the entire education is compulsory. Thus,
the system owner is given two ways of verifying that the student is
competent enough to drive independently: through compulsory education and testing. The idea behind the education is to provide the student with sufficient education in order to guarantee that he or she possesses the necessary attitudes, knowledge and abilities in order 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. In these systems the driving-license test would still be a valuable method of evaluating the
competence of the students. However, the tests will not play such an
important part as it does in systems with no compulsory education.
The fact that there are two ways of verifying the competence of the
student reduces the pressure on the examiners and their ability to
make a correct evaluation within a limited amount of testing time.
To summarize, one conclusion of the study is that the student’s
performance should be evaluated within the driver education system,
which means that the performance of the test-taker should be assessed
against the objectives of the driver education. Another conclusion is
that compulsory driver education combined with a theoretical and
practical test of high quality constitutes the optimal way for the system owner in terms of verifying that the student has reached the level
of competence stated in the curriculum. In order to improve the driver
education systems it is suggested that the education should consist of
some compulsory parts. In order to determine which parts of the education should be compulsory and when the students are to attend these
parts, further investigation needs to be done. When considering these
questions, the individual driver education systems need to be in focus.
In addition, work needs to be done in order to develop the theoretical
and practical test in order to get a more reliable and valid measurement.
113
References
AKE (1998). Undervisningsplanen, B-klass förarundervisning. [Curriculum regarding class B vehicles] Helsingfors: Fordonsförvaltningscentralen.
AKE (1999). Körprov för förarexamen. Bedömning av körskicklighet
och körsätt i trafiken. [Practical driving-license test. Evaluation
of driving ability] Helsingfors: Fordonsförvaltningscentralen.
AKE (2002). Teoriprovet för förarexamen. [Theoretical drivinglicense test] Helsingfors: Fordonsförvaltningscentralen.
Assailly, J-P. (1999). A public health view of the situation concerning
novice drivers. In S. Siegrist (Ed.). Driver training, testing and
licensing - towards theory-based management of young drivers'
injury risk in road traffic. Results of EU-project GADGET,
Work Package 3. Berne: Accident Prevention bfu.
Berk, R.A. (Ed.). (1986). Performance Assessment Methods and Applications. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.
Björklund, G., & Borgström, K. (1973). Vår vägtrafiklagstiftning
1973. [Traffic regulations 1973] Karlshamn: Nya lagerblads
tryckeri AB.
Bjørnskau, T. (2002). Prøvested og kjøreprøvens vanskelighetsgrad forslag till arbeidsopplegg. [Test location and the degree of difficulty – a suggestion for a scientific study] Oslo: Transportøkonomisk institutt.
BVF (2002a). Fahrerlaubnisverordnung (FeV) [Driving regulations].
e.V. München: Bundesvereinigung der Fahrlehrervebände.
BVF (2002b). Anlagen zur FeV. [Suplement to driving regulations]
e.V. München: Bundesvereinigung der Fahrlehrervebände.
BVF (2002c). Prüfungsrichtlinie.[Test guidelines] mbH. München:
Bundesvereinigung der Fahrlehrervebände.
114
CIECA (2001). Guide on driver licensing. Rijswijk, Netherlands.
Crocker, L. & Algina, J. (1968). Introduction to classical and modern
test theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Die Fundgrube zum Führerschein (2003). Die FahrschülerAusbildungsordnung. [The driving schools educational ordinances] Retrieved 2003-05-22, from
http://www.fahrtipps.de/recht/fahrschausbo.php
Driving Standard Agency (DSA) (2002a). Driver Assessment in GB.
Great Britain: Driving Standard Agency
Driving Standard Agency (DSA) (2002b). Driving Instructor Training
and Testing in GB. Great Britain: Driving Standard Agency
Driving Standard Agency (DSA) (2003a). Safe driving for life leaflet.
Retrieved 2003-05-22, from
http://www.dsa.gov.uk/infocentre/csu/safedr.htm
Driving Standard Agency (DSA) (2003b). Theory FAQ. Retrieved
2003-05-22, from http://www.dsa.gov.uk/theory/tt_faqs.htm
Driving Standard Agency (DSA). Officially recommended syllabus.
Great Britain: Driving Standard Agency
Forsyth, E. (1992). Cohort study of learner and novice drivers. Part 1:
Learning to driver and performance in the driving test. (No.
338). Crowthorne, Berkshire: Transport Research Laboratory.
Franke, A., Larsson, L., & Mårdsjö, A-C. (1995). Förarutbildningssystemet i Sverige. Delrapport 1. En historisk beskrivning av förarutbildningssystemet i Sverige. [The Swedish driver education
system in a historical perspective] (Rapport Nr 1995:16). Göteborg: Göteborgs universitet, Institutionen för pedagogik.
Fredriksson, G. (1965). Vägtrafikförordningen. [Traffic regulations]
Stockholm: Kungl. Boktryckeriet P.A. Norstedt & Söner.
Goldenbeld, C., Baughan, C.J., & Hatakka, M. (1999). Driver testing.
In S. Siegrist (Ed.), Driver training, testing and licensing - towards theory-based management of young drivers' injury risk in
115
road traffic. Results of EU-project GADGET, Work Package 3.
Berne: Accident Prevention bfu.
Gregersen, N. P. (1999). Overall licensing systems. In S. Siegrist
(Ed.), Driver training, testing and licensing - towards theorybased management of young drivers' injury risk in road traffic.
Results of EU-project GADGET, Work Package 3. Berne: Accident Prevention bfu.
Gregersen, N. P., & Nyberg, A. (2002). Privat övningskörning. En undersökning om hur den utnyttjas och om dess för- och nackdelar för trafiksäkerheten [Private driver education. A survey regarding its advantages and disadvantages for traffic safety] (VTI rapport Nr. 481).
Linköping: Väg- och transportforskningsinstitutet.
Haladyna, T. M. (1994). Developing and Validating Multiple-Choice
Test Items. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Hatakka, M., Keskinen, E., Gregersen, N.P., & Glad, A. (1999). Theories and aims of educational and training measures. In S. Siegrist
(Ed.), Driver training, testing and licensing - towards theorybased management of young drivers' injury risk in road traffic.
Results of EU-project GADGET, Work Package 3. Berne: Accident Prevention bfu.
Hatakka, M., Keskinen, E., Gregersen, N.P., Glad, A. & Hernetkoski,
K. (2002). From control of the vehicle to personal self-control;
broadening the perspectives to driver education. Transportation
research part F(5), 201-215.
Henriksson, W., Sundström, A. & Wiberg, M., (2002). Körkortsprovet
i ett nordiskt perspektiv. Teoriprovet – nuläge och framtid. [The
theoretical test in the Nordic countries] (Pedagogiska Mätningar
Nr 174). Umeå: Umeå universitet, Enheten för pedagogiska
mätningar.
Henriksson, W., Wikström, P & Zolland, A. (1995). Modell för körkortsprovets teoriprov. Modellprövning och reflektioner [Model
for the theoretical driving-license test](Pedagogiska Mätningar,
Nr. 103). Umeå: Enheten för pedagogiska mätningar, Umeå
Universitet.
116
Lehtimäki, R. L. (1998). Driver training type and performance in the
driving exam. Helsinki: University of Helsinki.
Lynam, D., & Twisk, D. (1995). Car driver training and licensing systems in Europe (TRL report No. 147). Crowthorne, Berkshire:
Transport research laboratory.
Mattsson, H. (1990). Nytt teoriprov 1990. Statistisk beskrivning av
körkortsprovet våren 1990. [A statistical description of the driving-license test in 1990] (Pedagogiska mätningar Nr 38). Umeå:
Umeå Universitet, Enheten för pedagogiska mätningar.
Mattsson, H. (1993). Körkortsutbildningens teoriprov. Provet i ett
forskningsperspektiv och olika utvecklingsmöjligheter.[The theoretical driving-license test – research and development] (Pedagogiska mätningar Nr 71). Umeå: Umeå Universitet, Enheten
för pedagogiska mätningar
Molander, M. (1997). Automobilbesiktningsmannen. En kort historik
om fordonskontroll och förarprövning. [The car examiner. A
short history regarding vehicle control and driver examination]
(Publikation 1997:65). Borlänge: Vägverket.
National Swedish Road Safety Office. (1971). Curriculum for driver
education – private car/light lorry. Stockholm: National Swedish Road Safety Office. Driver’s license department.
Olweus, D. (1958). Bilinspektörers bedömning av praktiska körkortsprov. [The examiner’s evaluation of the practical driving-license
test] Stockholm: Psykologtekniska institutet.
Ovelskorning for forerekort klasse B. [Private driving training regarding class B vehicles] Norway.
Rigspolitiet (1995). Undervisningsplan for køreuddanelsen til kategori
B, Version 6.02. [Curriculum regarding the driving education
for class B vehicles, Version 6.02.] Köpenhamn: Færdselsstyrelsen.
Rigspolitiet (2002). Retningslinier for prøvesagkyndige, Version 7.02.
[Guidelines for driving license examiners, version 7.02] Köpenhamn: Rigspolitiet.
117
SFS 1958:222. Svensk författningssamling. Ändring i körkortslagen.
[Changes in the Swedish driving license regulation] Stockholm:
Sveriges riksdag.
Siegrist, S. (Ed.). (1999). Driver training, testing and licensing - towards a theory-based management of young drivers' injury risk
in road traffic. Results of EU-project GADGET, Work Package
3. Berne: Accident Prevention bfu.
SOU 1929:16. Betänkande med förslag till förordning om motorfordon m.m. jämte därmed sammanhängande författningar samt till
stadga om trafiken å vägar och gator. Angivet av 1927 års motorfordonssakkunninga. [Report containing suggestions for prepositions regarding the regulations concerning motorised vehicles] Stockholm: Kommunikationsdepartementet.
Spolander, K. (1974). Skriftliga differentierade förarprov. Uppföljning
och analys av förarprovens egenskaper år 1973. [Written driving-license test. A follow-up and analysis of the driving-license
tests in 1973] (Rapport Nr 46). Stockholm: Statens väg- och trafik institut.
Statens vegvesen (1994). Normalplan for f. [Curriculum regarding
driver education] Oslo: Vegdirektoratet.
Statens vegvesen (2000). Retningslinger for gjennomføring av praktisk førerprøve klasse B. [Guidelines regarding the practical driving-license test class B] Oslo: Vegdirektoratet.
Statens vegvesen (2002). Forslag till ny føreropplæring. Oppfølging
av Nasjonal transportplan 2002-2011. [Proposal of a new driver
education model] Oslo: Vegdirektoratet.
Sundström, A. (2003). Den svenska förarprövningen. Sambandet mellan kunskapsprovet och körprovet, provens struktur samt kökortsutbildningens betydelse. [A study of the relationship between the theoretical and practical test, the structure of the test
and the effect of driver education on test performance] (PM Nr.
183) Umeå: Umeå Universitet, Enheten för pedagogiska mätningar.
118
TSVFS 1986:65. Trafiksäkerhetsverkets föreskrifter om förarprov,
bedömningsnormer. [The national Swedish road safety office’s
regulations regarding evaluation of the practical driving-license
test] Borlänge: Vägverket.
TSVFS 1988:43. Trafiksäkerhetsverkets föreskrifter om kursplaner,
behörighet B. [The national Swedish road safety office’s regulations regarding qualifications for class B vehicles] Borlänge:
Vägverket.
Umferðarráð (2000). Námskrá fyrir almenn ökuréttindi, flokkur B.
[Curriculum regarding class B vehicles] Retrived 2003-05-26,
from http://www.umferd.is
Umferðarstofa (2003). Umferðarstofa – Fólksbifreið. [Traffic authority, department of class B vehicles] Retrived 2003-05-26, from
http://www.us.is/elements/printArticle.asp?catID=340&artID
Uusitalo, E., & Mynttinen, S. (2002). Benchmarking the Quality of the
Driver Examinations - A Review of Results of Preliminary Questions. Helsinki: AKE.
Vägverket. (2002). Vägverket föreslår handledarutbildning vid privat
övningskörning. Pressmeddelande nr 45. Borlänge: Vägverket.
Vägverket 2000:77. Stegvis förarutbildning. En väg till ökad trafiksäkerhet för nya bilförare. Sammanfattning av utredningsförslag
lämnat till regeringen i december 1999. [Graduated driving education a way of increased traffic safety] Borlänge: Vägverket.
Vattenbyggnadsstyrelsen, K. V.-o. (1959). Kursplan för praktisk utbildning. [Curriculum regarding practical driving license education]. Stockholm: Kungliga Väg- och vattenbyggnadsstyrelsen.
Vattenbyggnadsstyrelsen, K. V.-o. (1961). Kursplan för teoriutbildning. [Curriculum regarding the theoretical driving education]
Stockholm: Kungliga Väg- och vattenbyggnadsstyrelsen.
VVFS 1998:53. Vägverkets föreskrifter om förarprov, behörighet B.
[Regulations concerning driving-license test class B]. Borlänge:
Vägverket.
119
VVFS 1999:32. Vägverkets föreskrifter om kursplaner, behörighet B.
[Regulations concerning curriculums, class B] Borlänge: Vägverket.
Wainer, H., Dorans, N.J., Flaugher, R., Green, B.F., Mieslevy, R.J.,
Steinberg, L. & Thissen, D. (1990). Computerized Adaptive
Testing: A Primer. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Publishers.
Wiberg, M. & Henriksson, W. (2000). Metoder för kravgränssättning.
En teoretisk granskning samt diskussion av lämplig metod för ett
målrelaterat certifieringsprov av typ körkortsprovets teoriprov
(Pedagogiska Mätningar, Nr 165). [Methods for standard setting] Umeå: Umeå Universitet, Enheten för pedagogiska mätningar.
Wiberg, M. (1999). Datoriseringen av teoriprovet. En beskrivning av
effekter utifrån ett antal statistiska indikatorer. [Computerisation of the theoretical test] (Pedagogiska Mätningar, Nr 158).
Umeå: Umeå Universitet, Enheten för pedagogiska mätningar.
Wiberg, M. (2002). Uppgiftsbank för körkortsprovets teoretiska prov.
Relationen mellan utformningen, exponeringen och provtypen.
[Item bank for the theoretical driving-license test] (Pedagogiska
Mätningar, Nr 173). Umeå: Umeå Universitet, Enheten för pedagogiska mätningar.
Wolming, S. (2000). Förarprövningens struktur och resultat. En studie av relationen mellan kunskapsprov och körprov samt utbildningsbakgrundens betydelse. [The structure and result of driving
license examination] (Pedagogiska Mätningar, Nr 166) Umeå:
Umeå Universitet, Enheten för pedagogiska mätningar.
Zolland, A. (1999). Analys av körkortsprovets kursplansstrukturr.
[Analysis of the structure of the curriculum for the drivinglicense test]
(Pedagogiska Mätningar Nr. 157). Umeå: Umeå Universitet,
Enheten för pedagogiska mätningar.
Zolland, A. & Henriksson, W. (1998). Analys av det teoretiska
körkortsprovet utifrån modeller och statistiska data. [Analysis
of the theoretical driving-license test – models and statistical
120
the theoretical driving-license test – models and statistical data]
(Pedagogiska Mätningar Nr. 134). Umeå: Umeå Universitet,
Enheten för pedagogiska mätningar.
121