My Proposal for Lifelong Driver Education
By: Chad Garhartt
Report 2 was titled My Driving Personality Makeover Project . The purpose of report 2 is to learn and witness negative aspects of the drivers three fold self. G20 students are supposed to develop an experiment in which they can witness driving behavior and measure this information against control data. Being able to see my negative driving habits on a chart or data table, really gave me a different perspective on my driving. I used a voice recorder and an observing passenger to collect my data. The results were more negative than I predicted. While I was listening to myself I thought it was a different person but these negative results gave me an idea of what I needed to work on. My main focus of the two experiments was speeding, tailgating and emotional intelligence. These were the three most occurring negative aspects of my driving. Without assignment two I would have never known my evil side when driving. Now I will try to keep a cooler head while driving. In the beginning of the semester I never even thought about any of the topics covered in report 1 or report 2. I thought since I have only received one speeding ticket, I was a good driver. All of these topics of emotional intelligence, aggression and negative habits, has taught me the real side of my driving. The objective of report three is to give an overview of chapter 9. The Life Long Driver Education chapter is important because it gives you a baseline idea for your own Lifelong proposal. The actual proposal brings all the material from the semester together. This project allows you to go through prior generations and different articles to create your own proposal. Creating your Lifelong Drivers Education Proposal allow you to learn more about your self as a driver because a lot of the information is from your own experiences and beliefs.
In the beginning of Chapter 9, “Lifelong Driver Education”, Dr James discusses how car crashes kill more young people fifteen to twenty than any other cause. One of the main problems is when sixteen year olds first get their license. Statistics show that sixteen year olds were involved in 10,337 crashes while the rate for seventeen year olds was considerably less. These problems show that there is a desperate need for driver education for teenagers. Driver’s Education doesn’t start as soon as an individual turns sixteen. Parents must teach children proper driving habits and decision- making skills. The American Automobile Association created the driver-ZED program. Drivers-ZED is an interactive CD-ROM which focuses on teaching appropriate risk management. Many individuals like Dr. Larson are making efforts to eliminate negative attitudes of drivers. The AAA conducts seminars which teach individuals to control negative personal traits which stem from cultural norms and social values in society.
The new driver education curriculum needs to be based on driving psychology, because research shows driving involves the three aspects of personality. The three aspects of personality are: affective; cognitive; and sensorimotor. Affective instruction can teach children about obedience and conscience. Cognitive instruction will teach teens about reasoning, decision making, and problem solving. Each aspect can be taught in three stages of an individuals life. Kindergarten and elementary school will focus on affective driving skills. Young children can learn affective skills like how we create stress for drivers by our behavior in and around cars. In middle school young adolescents will learn cognitive driving skills. One skill would be how to become more aware of habits of thinking while walking or riding and how to develop objective judgment about stranger’s behavior. In high school young adults will learn sensormotor skills. For example, teens will practice hands-on coordination skills with a driving simulator and supervised highway experience. After high school, driver’s education doesn’t stop. Dr. James says that adult drivers need continuing training through Quality Driving Circles. QDC’s are voluntary groups of two to ten drivers who meet regularly to encourage one another drive safely.
The last part of the chapter discusses the issue of elder drivers. There are many adjustments that elderly have to make due to physical and mental changes that may arise when aging. One example would be loss of night vision, inability to see their slowness and fatigue during extended driving hours. The biggest complaint about older drivers is that they travel at the speed limit in the passing lane and don’t move over into the slower lane. Older drivers have a slower reaction rate which puts themselves as well as other drivers. There are some groups that support older drivers and believe driving should be based on driving ability. One group is called The American Association of Retired Persons. There are also organizations that develop special training courses for older drivers. The AAA and AARP offer courses to help elders with their driving. Data shows elders are less likely to swear, tailgate, running red lights and change lanes without signaling.
In the next section I choose five passages from our book Road Rage And Aggressive Driving, by Dr. Leon James and Dr. Diane Nahl. In the beginning of the chapter on page 190, Dr James states, “ According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, a sixteen-year-old driver is 42 percent more likely to be involved in a crash than a seventeen-year-old”. This quote came to my attention because I was once a sixteen-year-old teenager and my younger brother will be sixteen in two years. When I was sixteen I received my license as early as possible. It is a new form of freedom when you just get your license, but it is also a dangerous time as well. The quote above shows sixteen-year-olds are inexperienced and hazardous to others as well as themselves. Being older and taking driving psychology I have realized that sixteen-year-olds should wait another year to get their licenses. I don’t want to see my younger brother getting into an accident or hurting someone else due to inexperience.
The next quote comes from page 192 and has to do with the issue of parent’s roles in helping children become supportive drivers. “ We need to target children aged 11-15 for education, and follow up with kids later- they are learning aggressive driving behavior from day one, even from parents who get angry occasionally”. In today’s society there is so much aggression on television, on the radio and in movies. Parents need to set a good example of how to control their emotions when under stressful conditions. I remember an incident when my father was pulling into a store at a higher speed than he should have been going and almost hit another car. The lady got out of her car and began yelling at my father. My father got out of our car and was arguing back. I have learned aggressive behavior from my father and aggression has carried with me. Everyone makes mistakes and that is a good lesson for parents to teach their children when driving. If children see their parents being supportive drivers then they will have a better chance of developing supportive driving habits as well.
On page 194 Dr. James makes the statement, “ the new paradigm in driver education shifts the focus from just safety knowledge to a more integrated driver education that imparts affective or emotional skills. This quote seems to bring a feeling of a generation of new emotionally trained drivers. Along with safety knowledge new drives will also learn how to control their emotional skills, which will allow individuals to drive with a sense of community, self-esteem and interest in health. These feelings will motivate pro-social and self-protective behaviors. This new wave of drivers education is not only useful in the driving arena but can also be used in general values and characters in our culture. In chapter one, “ The Age of Rage”, Dr. James talks about how there are indications that the culture of disrespect is opening new venues for expressing anger. There are several different types of rage: parking lot rage; surf rage; cafeteria rage; and desk rage. Aggression is not just a problem with driving, it is an issue with every aspect of life. I have viewed surf rage many times while surfing in Waikiki. There are some surfers who are so aggressive and competitive that they would run over their own grandmother to catch a wave. If they are cut off by someone they will either physically or verbally attack the person. Imagine what these individuals are like when they are on the road. The new paradigm of divers education can be used to teach people to be supportive and have empathy in regards to everyday life. This philosophy has the potential to positively affect our aggressive society.
The new paradigm of driver’s education focuses on teaching supportive driving from an early age into late adulthood. The next quote states how even after high school drivers education doesn’t stop. Dr. James says, “ In addition to graduated licensing and the new K-12 driving psychology curriculum described, adult drivers need continuing training through Quality Driving Circles. QDC’s are voluntary groups of two to ten drivers who meet regularly to help and encourage one another to follow a driving self-improvement program. I believe QDC’s are one of the most important aspects of the new drivers education paradigm. Once and individual has left high school and completed the sensorimotor aspects of drivers education, he or she needs continual support and improvement to make sure bad habit don’t form or resurface. Dr. James states that most drivers need a social and instructional support group to maintain a lifelong motivation for self-improvement activities. One example would be keeping a journal of ones driving. I am twenty-one-years old and I need a lot of improvement to become a supportive driver. When I am driving I see a lot of adults who have more experience but seem to have less emotional intelligence than I do. Even though 16-23 year olds do make riskier decisions, older adults still need continual drivers education as well. There are QDC’s for families, virtual QDCs, telephone based, group and face to face QDCs, that can help adults continue their supportive driving skills into late adulthood.
Automotive sociologist J. Peter Rothe interviewed many elderly drivers and listened to them in focus groups. One quote stated was, “ The inability to see their slowness as other experience it, equating slowness with caution and patience” (pg. 207). This quote supports the fact that elderly drivers have to make adjustments that challenge personal philosophy and ideology. Most elderly people believe that driving ability should be looked at as more important than actual age when it comes to allowing an elderly person to drive. This seem like a fair statement but at what age do you start giving actual driving tests? There is also the problem of new older drivers. These individuals need training to remain alert to facilitate the activity of vehicles around them. This is a special concern for older drivers because reaction time tends to slow with age. I have seen many elderly drives that are driving the speed limit in the passing lane and won’t move over. This can be dangerous because most drivers are going to be going whatever the norm is for that particular area. This is where continued drivers education can have a positive influence. Even though elderly drivers have years of driving experience, due to physiological and cognitive change they need to teach skills that coincide with these changes.
The first book review I looked at was by Korey Molyneaux from generation seventeen. While reviewing her thoughts on chapter 9, I realized she briefly goes to over how learning to drive should be more than a short course. Korey talks about how drivers education should begin in kindergarten and extend into high school. One aspect she forgets to mention is how each level of schooling, a part of the drivers three fold self is incorporated to a specific period of time. For example, in kindergarten kids will learn about the affective self, in middle school kid will learn about the cognitive self and in high school teenagers will learn the senormotor self. Korey did mention how drivers education should be continued after high school with QDC’s. Molyneaux did forget to mention the section on elderly drivers and how they have advantages and disadvantages while driving. Katherine Gimeno, from generation 17, mentions how drivers education should be a continuous program and mentions the use of drivers-ZED and CD-ROM’s. Katherine forgot to mention the aspects of the drivers three-fold self and didn’t mention anything about elderly drivers. The next review I read was by Tyree woodruff. Tyree had the most in dept report on Life-long drivers education. He discusses the lack of funds that keeps us form successfully educating everyone. He also discusses how driving behavior involves three basic aspects of personality that are implemented throughout driver’s education. One aspect that Tyree did forget to mention was the aspect of elderly drivers. Leaving out the section on elderly drivers seemed to be a common mistake made by most of the students in generation seventeen.
I believe older drivers at risk is overlooked because older people seem to be overlooked or not given the respect they deserve in our society. Many times elders are looked at as being a damper and made fun of many times. I know that I have berated elderly people while driving, whether it was due to slow driven or walking slowly across a crosswalk. Elders at risk should not be overlooked because the increasing age of American Drivers is a serous national concern. People sixty-five and older represent 13 percent of the population and 1 percent of all motor vehicle deaths.
The first presentation I choose to discuss was by Jesse Chang on 4/19/4. Chang’s topic was on Chapter Eleven, “ Speed Limits: The Great Motorist Rebellion”. The first topic I agree with was on the driver’s education on teaching aggressive vs. assertive driving. It is tough to teach a child about speed limits. Many drivers including myself feel that sometimes it is safe to drive over the speed limit and sometimes it is not. For example, when it is raining a driver shouldn’t be driving over the speed limit. It does appear to be safe to go over the speed limit on a clear day to pass another driver. The only problem with speeding under certain situations is that speeding can become a senorimotor norm. Chang discusses how parenting influence plays an important role in teaching their children safe driving with no exceptions. This means that even though sometimes speeding can be assertive, one should not speed at all. In classes, drivers should learn the importance of reading environmental factors. Some factors could be weather, other drivers, and pedestrians. Chang says that drivers should have the mind frame that everyone doesn’t have to go the same speed, drivers just have to follow the speed limit. The next topic of citizen activism against government paternalism. In this section chang talks about how there is two ideological sides that consists of assertive and a side that promotes more government involvement. I agree that whatever driving initiatives make driving safer and prevents less accidents should be implemented. Some driving initiatives are: electronic traffic control devices; neighborhood traffic calming strategies, total speed enforcement, and national hotline to report bad drivers. Assertive drivers believe this type of driving laws is a violation of privacy.
The last topic I agree with in Jesse Chang’s presentation is his driver’s education for Traffic Calming. Traffic calming is the combination of mainly physical measures that reduce the negative effects of motor vehicle use. Chang suggests using human rights, meditation, and “ putting yourself in their shoes mentality”. I believe that human rights and having empathy would have a huge impact for traffic calming. Having an attitude of driving within a community will allow drivers to see other drivers as people. Everyday we have mini-relationships with our fellow drivers. Also, realizing that no matter the person’s age, race or religion we all are driving in an age of rage and we should not jump to conclusions and give people the benefit of the doubt. There are a few topics that I disagree in Jesse’s presentation. The first topic I disagree with is the teaching response to Government Paternalism. Chang believes drivers should be encouraged to oppose speed limits in a legal way like writing to the government, rather than by blatant noncompliance with speed limits. I disagree because I believe speed limits are posted for a reason and if the speed limits were to low and were unsafe the government would change them. Drivers have their rights, but asking for increased speed limits does not seem safe or worth the time. The next topic I disagreed with is with Electronic Traffic Surveillance. Jesse believes that students should be given the information to contact concerning speed limits and potential road conditions that warrant changes rather than camera usage. I don’t disagree with the fact that drivers should be given info. To protest camera usage. I believe that cameras at spots where people are constantly running red lights can only allow improve a driving community. You don’t see people complaining about cameras in stores or schools.
The next presentation I choose was by Mark N. Corpuz on February 1, 2004. This presentation was on Chapter two “ Aggressive Driving and Mental Health”. The first topic I agreed with was his cultural reasons for Aggressive driving. Corpuz says the reason why toad rage has gotten so bad is because it is culturally accepted, and we as a society enjoy it. Our cultural watches numerous shows on television that promote aggression and violence. I agree with this belief because from day one, we are learning aggression. Impressionable kids are watching television programs that depict aggression as acceptable. For example, the show Mighty Morphing Power Rangers and Transformers were both show I watched. They were both based on violence and aggression. Movies like Fast and the Furious also show driving recklessly as cool and kids try to copy these behaviors. The readiness to use violence and aggression is a cultural habit that is effecting our driving community in a negative way. The next topic I agree with is how players behaving badly with road rage video games can negatively affect an individual’s emotional intelligence. A lot of video games are popular because the game is based on how much blood and carnage it contains. One example would be Vice City. In this game the player is allowed to perform any illegal act he or she wishes. The player can kill, steal car and drive as recklessly as possible. If young kids are playing these games, what type of message are they receiving? I believe that violent video games will not only cause aggressive driving but will also cause individuals to aggressive in every day life.
The last topic I agree with in Mark N. Corpzes report is his cultural reasons for why driving arouses anger. Mark believes that driving is linked t a value of freedom. We can just jump into our cars and go wherever we want whenever we want. When these freedoms are restricted, we get upset because it prevents us from driving as we wish. Some examples of restrictions to our driving freedoms are population growth, traffic congestion and faulty highway engineering that impede traffic flow. When I am driving I like to be moving at a constant speed and don’t like the whole stop and go traffic. I become very irritated and this allows me to think irrationally and then I drive aggressively and bad habits arise. Sometimes I swear at other drivers and follow to closely. Limiting ones driving freedoms definitely arouses anger and the only way to overcome this type of anger is to develop positive emotional intelligence under stressful situations.
In the next section I will discuss two sections that I disagreed with. In the section of impaired driving, Mark says that anger management workshops would help. I don’t understand how anger management would help resolve impaired driving. The only way to educate people on driving while impaired is to not drive while impaired no matter what the substance is. (No if ands or butts). Even if a driver is not under the influence but is driving with little sleep, he or she should not be driving. There is only one way to teach this is driver’s education and that is to not drive impaired at all. The next topic that I don’t agree with is how some women are seen as aggressive because they have a high level of home responsibility and low level of emotional support for their hard work, which causes them to take frustrations out on the driving community. Culturally Mark says that women have to make more stops, carting kids, to school, sports, lessons, running errands and shopping. I do believe that women do have many responsibilities, but I don’t believe they are major reasons for more aggressive women drivers. When I am driving I don’t see more women driving then men. If anything there seems to be more men drivers than women. I also disagree with the statement that women who have a high level of home responsibility and low level of emotional support are more likely to have road rage. With my own experience, I know a lot of single mothers who have to carry a full load of home responsibilities but don’t express any signs of road rage.
The third presentation I choose was by Sarah E. Philips on March 1, 2004. Her topic was distracted driving from reference eight. Philips definition of Multi tasking and cultural reasons is very valid. She says multi tasking is the behavior a driver performs while driving that distracts from the focus of driving. For example, using cell phones, eating, applying make-up, reading, and playing with cd player or radio. I can defiantly relate to this definition because every time I drive I am multi-tasking. I will either be playing with the radio or talking on my cell phone. Both of these behaviors are dangerous and distract me from keeping my attention solely on the road. Sarah believes that in today’s society there is an increase demand for car technologies. There is a show on MTV that takes individuals old cars and rebuilds them into new cars with new features. I have watched every show and there has not been one episode where there was not a television, DVD player or other accessories. With today’s new technology, if you get a car that doesn’t have extra accessories, then it is not cool or accepted. The National Driving Habits Survey suggests that as much as 76 percent of driver is distracted and with all the new technology these numbers will not be going down. The next topic I found worthwhile was the driver’s education for distracted driving. Sarah suggests drivers become aware of the risks involved with being distracted. I believe while a person is taking a driving education class, there should be pictures of the accidents due to multi-taking. She also states it is important to know how to operate equipment that the driver will have to deal with when driving. This is a very good idea because it can be very dangerous to fiddle with your new equipment.
I agree with this idea because while reading the Musings of a driving psychologist I found that one could train them to perform certain tasks while driving. Dr. James has trained himself to use one hand while driving, which is definitely a reasonable feat. I always drive with one hand and can pretty much perform any task within reason and feel safe. If you know how to properly use your equipment, you can keep your eyes on the road while performing other tasks such as eating or changing a cd. I feel that all of these tasks are reasonable, but watching movies or playing video game are entirely unnecessary. The next topic I found interesting was the psychological topic of driving while drowsy. Sarah states that driving while sleepy is equivalent to driving while drunk. Reaction times are increased while awareness and judgment are hindered. Sleepiness can also increase impatience and cause a driver to develop negative thoughts. I know from first hand experience that driving while drowsy is very dangerous. A lot of times when a driver is intoxicated he or she will still have sensory vision on the road. When a driver falls asleep their sensory vision will be not functional and in a sense is more dangerous.
The first topic I disagree with is the definition of cell phone rage. Sarah E. Philips stated that cell phones are becoming a social threat. They remove a person from their surroundings causing them to be unaware of what is going on around them by answering calls at inappropriate times. I believe that the benefits of cell phones definitely outweigh the disadvantages. I know of many instances where I have been in trouble and have been able to use my cell phone to call parents and triple A. I have also been in classes where cell phones have been a distraction, but aren’t becoming a social threat. I believe until cell phones bring actual physical harm to users then they are becoming a social threat. In today’s fast pace world, cell phones are a good way to be able to communicate to the people we are in touch with and care about. I know I would not be able to talk to my family as much as I do if I did not have a cell phone. The next topic that was not clear to me was the topic of dashboard dining. In the definition Sarah talks about how it is bad that many cars are promoting meals in the car. Cars now have multiple cup holders and area for placing food to keep within reach while driving. In the drivers education section she states how drivers should train themselves to eat while driving by having food and beverages in usual handy spots to avoid spilling and losing food. These two ideas contradict each other. I feel that eating while driving is a distraction but is necessary in todays fast pace society. Sarah should have said that it is not a bad idea for cars to have these food functions in the car, because if cars did not have cup holder and other accessories then eating food could be even more of a distraction.
The next presentation I choose was by Jenny Arakaki on January 26, 2004. Jennies topic is on Chapter One: “ Driving in the Age of Rage”. The first topic I agree with is that culturally we learn road rage from childhood and the upbringing from our parents. I believe that you can see what type of parents a person had by the way they carry themselves and characteristics they have. We learn so much from our parents about everything from tying our shoes to how to behave that watching them drive at an early age effects how an individual will drive. I have acquired a lot of my father’s aggressive and impatient driving habits as well as being safe and cooperating characteristics from my mother. Jenny also talks about facing the culture of disrespect. She states that there is a decline in respect for all types of activities in life. A lot of children are growing up without respect for their parents and won’t respect anyone on the road when they receive there license. This type of behavior starts from an early age and is embedded into children’s thought processes. Arakai’s drivers education states that children should express kindness to others. Attitudes of being supportive will allow children to grow up with more empathy while driving and interacting with other people in every day life. Expanding the age of rage is a topic that caught my eye. Jenny talked about how road rage is not the only form of rage developed. There is parking lot, sidewalk, neighbor and shopping rage. I have been in lines at stores and have seen many arguments about who was in line ahead of another. As mentioned earlier I have seen surf rage that has led to acts of violence and verbal abuse. In today’s society there is so much competition in getting in to schools, getting jobs and playing sports, that many individuals are carrying this behavior into every day situations.
One aspect of expanding the age of rage I didn’t agree with was the cultural aspect of the media showing children and adults that you need to be tough in America. I feel it is more how his or her parents raised the child than movies that show being tough is the way to act. An individual who gets into a huge altercation because someone got in front of them has issues stemming from negative relationships in childhood more than watching a show like “ Rocky”. A more competitive and aggressive person would more likely to be involved with an alternative type of rage. This competition can stem from playing sports, biological characteristics, and parental guidance. Media influence does cause aggression but not as much as the factors listed. The next section I choose was developing emotional literacy. I didn’t disagree with the material, the topic of depression just wasn’t clear to me. Jenny states that depression is a symptom of our hurt self-esteem and social conflict is a symptom of the prejudice and lack of education. I think Jenny means there is a correlation between emotional literacy and depression. Depression doesn’t allow individual to develop coping mechanisms to help control their emotions. I was unaware there was so many people with depression. A person with depression must have a hard time focusing on being a supportive driver when they are dealing with such an emotional dilemma.
The last presentation I reviewed was by Eleanor Samuel on March 1, 2004. Her topic was on emotional intelligence for drivers from chapter five. The first topic I agree with is the use of inner power tools while driving under stressful situations. The definition is techniques used to help in restructuring and reevaluating a driver’s assessment of a situation on the road. A good example would be when another driver cuts you off and instead of showing any form of hostility, take slow deep breaths and try to relax. This would be an example of using emotional intelligence and would prevent negative emotions from arising. Inner power tools would also be a great president for younger children. Good practice and good examples make better outcomes for future drivers. The next topic that had significance for me was psychological factors for the three levels of emotional intelligence. Samuel says that it is automatic for drivers to jump to conclusions and assume wrong things about other drivers on the road. We tend to blame other drivers most of the time instead of finding the right excuse for being aggressive. The reason this topic jumped out at me was because I really was interested in the trigger theory topic in report 1. Trigger theory is a cause and effect assumption based on individuals own negative emotions that justify aggressing back. Most drivers assume it was the other driver that triggered reaction. People don’t look at themselves as being their own trigger. Driver A may break a rule that gets driver B angry. Driver B feels angry and wants to punish. This makes driver B feel better. Many drivers believe that retaliating is a basic right. A person that has low emotional intelligence will allow the trigger theory get the best of them. Drivers need to be responsible for their actions.
The topic of anatomy of an epic road rage tragedy goes along the same mind frame of getting into a fight. Samuel says that psychologically if a driver chooses to ignore a driving incident, bad blood will die down within the hormones and bloodstream. If a driver chooses to rebel, blood pressure goes up and all bad thoughts go up as well. This statement is true with any type of conflict with other people. I remember my parents always telling me to walk away from a fight and be the bigger man. This would also be a good attitude to take while driving under stressful situations. For example, say a driver has just cut you off, instead of going after him, you can use inner power tools and take an attitude of walking away and being the better person.
The first topic I didn’t understand clearly was the cultural aspect of Emotional Hijacking. Eleanor states that in passive cultures expressing anger is considered rude and disrespectful so drivers experience mental stress. In cultures such as the U.S. if drivers do not express anger verbally or physically they are experiencing it mentally. The first issue I have is that I believe our culture doesn’t look at being rude and disrespectful as the right way to act. In might be the cool thing to do in pop culture, but many adults and teenagers do realize being disrespectful is not the best choice. American culture does have its pitfalls like any other culture but still deserves a lot of credit. I also believe that even if the driver does express his or her anger through verbal or physical means, they will still experience anger mentally. In chapter three we talked about how venting is harmful to our health. Venting causes coronary diseases and allows an individual to become more upset after venting. So in all reality expressing anger verbally or physically cause more mental anger.
As I was reading the Life Long Driver Education chapter I took a lot of information into consideration because my brother will be driving in a few years. In the beginning of the chapter, Dr. James talks about how at the age of fifteen or sixteen, young drivers must be supervised by an adult, pass a driver education course, and remain citation free to pass to the next level. There are also other restrictions like more supervised driving and a curfew or prohibition against late-night driving. I believe this graduated license system is a very efficient and helpful program to make safer drivers of young inexperienced teenagers. I am glad my bother is going to take a similar program. Studies show a decreased fatality rate of young drivers in New Zealand while adopting a graduated license system. Living in New York I went through a graduated license system and it made be more careful driver. If a driver is not careful during the six month probation time he or she will lose their diving privileges.
Dr. Larson talks about how society is sensitized to the cultural inroads of general disrespect that are expressed daily in aggressive driving practices. The AAA foundation has created the Novice Driver Model Curriculum Outline. This programs objective is to reduce the amount of crashes by novice drivers. I took a defensive driving class that taught mechanical techniques on how to reduce crashes. The NDMCO teaches that knowledge o flow to control a car is not as critical to safety as individual motivation. Motivation and responsibility are essential components of affective education (194). This course will teach people how to deal with different personality factors allow us to make irrational decisions while driving. Traits such as being aggressive and competitive stem from cultural norms. It is important to teach how driving is apart of who we are not just a mechanical behavior. I have been in many accidents since I received my license five years ago. I have realized these accidents are not due to mechanical mishaps, but are due to a lack of emotional intelligence. Many times my motivation is getting to my destination in the quickest time. This type of motivation allows me to think aggressively. Three out of the four accidents I have been in were due to speeding and following to close. If I practice driving for safety instead of the quickness, I might have been able to avoid accidents.
The topic of continued Drivers Education after high school is a brilliant idea and one I am currently not involved in. QDC’s are a great way to continue your driver’s education into adulthood. I feel it is hard to devote a lot of time to self-witnessing procedure. If I had more time to keep a journal or voice recording, I would definitely make a strong effort to continue my driver’s education. Living in such a fast paced lifestyle, concentrating on driving is no easy feat. Statistics of all the injuries and deaths due to automobile accidents should make QDC’s very important. In all reality, I would guess that most adults don’t think about their driving habits.
My proposal for Lifelong Drivers Education is similar to Dr. James proposal. I agree a lifelong driver proposal must employ findings from psychology about human development. My proposal is a driving psychology curriculum of the entire human lifespan. The first part of my proposal is very similar to the books proposal but starts to differ after a driver graduates high school.
My proposal starts when a child is in kindergarten and deals with the affective skills when driving and more importantly in everyday situations. The attitudes and motivations that charge our behaviors are important to teach at a young age. Their brains are not fully developed to learn a lot of cognitive skills, so it is more efficient to start with affective skills. If a child is taught to have peacefulness, optimism and compassion while under stressful situations, he or she will be way ahead of the game. Under my proposal children in elementary school will learn positive attitudes toward environmental factors as well as within themselves. Also since driving is a social action, learning to avoid aggression by analyzing television scenes of drivers behaving badly and other forms of aggression is a big part of teaching kids form using hostile feelings. My proposal will teach children how hostile feelings can affect other people around them as well their own personal health. I was taught to vent from a young age by watching aggressive movies and video games. When an individual vents, it can have serious effects on their cardiovascular system. If kids are taught to natural feelings of compassion and empathy for other human beings, venting will not be acted out. They will grow up learning to deal with negative emotions.
In middle school, kids are more cognitively developed and will be taught more affective skills and cognitive skills with sensorimotor demonstrations. Some examples would be:
- What principles are safest for children as passengers, pedestrians, and cyclists.
- To develop objective judgment about strangers’ behavior.
- To practice group discussions on the importance of civility in public behavior
- To practice self-witnessing activities as pedestrians and other road users. (Road Rage and Aggressive Driving, pg.198)
As shown, many of the ideas during these middle school years are related to how one operates the thinking and reasoning behind the wheel. Kids will be taught
To use positive attitudes that will allow them to make rational decisions. For example, kids will be taught ideas like “ This person looks like he’s in a hurry to
get in. I better let him in”. This type of attitude shows an individual with positive thinking and motivations would act under a stressful situation. My proposal
would also teach kids about the emotional spin cycle of drivers. As soon as an individual gets into the car to drive, the emotional spin cycle begins. The spin
cycle may fluxgate between positive emotions and negative emotions. A driver may be feeling good and the day may be perfect. Then all of the sudden he or
she is driving on H1 and there is back up traffic for twelve miles. It is hot and the driver doesn’t have air conditioner. His emotions can immediately turn to
negative.
As the driver begins to switch lanes someone squeezes in front of him. The very happy driver may then develop negative emotions. He tenses up and
begins to develop feeling of automotive vigilantism. I believe that the spin cycle can occur at any time from negative to positive or vice versa. It also has to do
with the attitude of the driver that particular day or time. Kids in middle school will be taught to realize that sometimes they will be in a bad mood. It is their job
To understand this and deal with negative emotions in a rational way. No one is a perfect driver and everyone makes mistakes.
In high school, the focus will be on sensorimotor driving skills. This stage will use affective and cognitive skills when making sensorimotor decisions. For example:
-To practice hands-on coordination skills with a driving simulator and supervised highway experience.
-To say alert by acquiring attention checking routines.
-To act with appreciation and cooperation toward traffic law enforcement and education. (pg. 199).
Learning sensorimotor skills are very important but not as important of the two previous stages. I believe a person can always improve sensorimotor skills. Developing the affective and cognitive self and by high school many people are set in their ways. This is why it is important to always continue to improve cognitive and affective self throughout all stage of driver’s education.
The next stage is post licensing. As with Dr. James’s proposal, I believe implementing QDC’s is a very helpful way to continue driver’s education. In my proposal I would have college students take two mandatory classes on drivers education. For those young adults not going to college, they will have to take mandatory drivers education classes through the DMV. If a person chooses not to take these classes, then their licenses would be suspended. These classes would be about twenty hours each and would continue to teach further information of the drivers three fold self and becoming a supportive driver. After the age of twenty-five, classes would not be mandatory for drivers but would still be available. I believe with all of this mandatory education, people will want to continue education for their own personal reasons. Having programs like Drivers-Zed, and online support groups are beneficial for continued drivers education. Between the ages of twenty-five to sixty, it will be up to the individual to take classes and join groups that promote supportive driving. At the age of sixty, my proposal would make it mandatory for drivers to go through a post license examination. This would be a program to make sure elder drivers are fit to drive. Physical qualities such as hearing, vision, and hand eye coordination will all be checked. These drivers will also have to take another class similar to the class they took in college or at the DMV. This would allow older drivers to freshen up on their supportive driving skills. Elder drivers will also be taught to about the new technology coming out at the time. My grandmother bought a new car and had no idea how to use it. It is important to make sure drivers know their equipment to reduce multi-tasking.
This assignment helped identify social and cultural attitudes in our society because it allowed me to further research topics like learning aggression when younger. I have realized that learned aggression starts from day one and it is important to teach children how be supportive with others around them in all situations. Our society views aggression as acceptable. Even though I can’t go back into the past and change my experiences, reading the lifelong drivers education proposal has allowed me to make changes in my driving now. In the beginning of the semester I didn’t event think I was an aggressive driver. In the beginning of the semester I never even thought about any of the topics covered in report one, two or three. I thought since I have only received one speeding ticket, I was a good driver. All of these topics of emotional intelligence, aggression and negative habits, has taught me the real side of my driving I a believe my driving will improve ten-fold because I will be aware of being a supportive driver. After college I definitely intend to join support groups to continue supportive driving. I believe our society will improve as well. As long as driving psychology continues to grow and people are aware of driving psychology, our society will become a more supportive driving society.
To future students, go into making your proposal with a positive attitude and you will see the benefits. As you read our reports, remember we are college students just as you are. G20 students probably have the same problems driving as you do. It is hard to realize negative aspects of yourself. Many individual believe they are great drivers, but in reality they need much improvement. It is critical to go into driving psychology with the mind frame of improving. There are no perfect drivers and never will be. Take this class to not only improve your driving but also improve your overall personality as a person.
Links: Home page Chads home page