A DETERMINAUON 0F FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS T0 was scammed mm mm RELATIVE mmmmcg V “ ‘ Anmmwmmmmmm “fimmmMmmu mam 3m: W FRARK mm (mm w 1972 H (1W 1W WITHIN!!!“ W W 293 00675 7904 ABSTRACT A DETERMINATION OF FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS TO BE USED IN A PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM IN DRIVER EDUCATION AND THEIR RELATIVE IMPORTANCE AT THE SECONDARY-SCHOOL LEVEI BY Frank Joseph Gruber IV Driver education programs in the past have been oriented towards developing safe and efficient drivers. It was hoped that by carrying on such activities the high accident rate of young drivers might be reduced. The majority of these programs concerned themselves primarily with the student in the school situation and had little, if any, time spent on bringing in other parts of the child's environment. The reason this situation existed tended to stem from deficiencies in time and money. The most prominent part of most children's environment is their parents. The parent has the basic responsibility for the child's welfare, therefore, it is logical to assume that the parent should have some role to play in helping the child learn to drive. With his natural responsibility, as well as close contact with the child, the parent is well suited to participate in the driver education process. Frank Joseph Gruber IV This study was designed to select and develop concepts pertaining to parental involvement in driver education so parents might be able to assist their child in learning to Operate a motor vehicle safely and ef— ficiently. Description of the Method Used Concepts were develOped from literature relating to driver and traffic safety education. Experts in education also were interviewed to obtain concepts. The concepts were then categorized into topical and sub-topical areas. The concepts and topics were checked for clarity and content accuracy by three groups of jurors. The second part of the study consisted of submitting the listing of validated concepts to two panels of raters who were judged to be eXperts in the field of driver and traffic safety education. These experts were asked to rate the 163 concepts on a five point scale ranging from Extremely Unsuited to Extremely Suited. The concept ratings were then placed in a descending rank order for both rater panels, as well as for the combined rater group. The topical and sub-topical areas were also indirectly ranked using the total concept ratings. A Spearman rank order correlation was carried out on the rank orderings of the two rater panels to determine their similarity. Frank Joseph Gruber IV Findings A brief summary of the findings of this study indicated that the 163 concepts developed in the study were found to be accurate by the groups of jurors. The combined rater panel indicated that the tOp ranked concepts were: 1. The parent should see that his child receives an adequate amount of practice driving time. (1.0-34.)l The parent has the responsibility to encourage the child to obey traffic laws. (2.0-30.) Systematic driving instruction is more effective than a trial and error method. (3.0-35.) The parent has a responsibility to teach his child to respect the rights of others. (5.0-24.) The parent has the responsibility to keep his motor vehicle in safe working order. (5.0—29.) The parent can prepare his child for driver education by relating to him a positive example of proper driving behavior. (7.5-144.) The parent should demonstrate to the child that he believes the child has personal worth. (7.5-l4go) l The numbers indicate the rank the concept received from the combined rater panel as well as the number which it held in the original instrument. 10. 11. Frank Joseph Gruber IV The parent should cooperate with the driver education instructor to help prepare his child for his driving responsibilities. (10.5-31.) The young inexperienced driver who drinks before or while driving may face a double hazard. (10.5-71.) The driver should be able to identify potential hazards as he approaches them. (10.5—81.) The parent can assist in the driver education program, once the child is involved, by allowing time for practice driving and discussing with him proper driving tech- niques. (10.5-155.) The top four sub-topical areas under which the most suited concepts fell were: 1. The Parents' Responsibilities Become Even More Apparent When The Child Learns To Drive Means By Which The Parent Can Directly Assist His Child With The Task Of Learning To Drive What Parents Must Know About The Safe Operation Of A Motor Vehicle The Parents' Rights In Relation To Their Childs' Driving Privilege Until The Age Of Majority The least suited topical area, as determined by rater ranking, was The Highway Transportation System- Frank Joseph Gruber IV The Spearman rank order correlation which was used to test the correlation between the two rater groups indicated a correlation of 0.77. A DETERMINATION OF FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS TO BE USED IN A PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM IN DRIVER EDUCATION AND THEIR RELATIVE IMPORTANCE AT THE SECONDARY-SCHOOL LEVEL BY Frank Joseph Gruber IV A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Secondary Education and Curriculum 1972 © Copyri ght by Frank Joseph Gruber IV 19 72 Dedicated to my wife, Paulette, for her love and understanding, and to my parents, Dorothy and Frank, for their early sacrifices which made this advanced work possible. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENT S Sincere thanks is expressed to the following individuals for their assistance. The doctoral guidance committee: Dr. Robert E. Gustafson, Chairman, Dr. Joseph Dzenowagis, Dr. William Mann, and Dr. Robert O. Nolan. Professor Emeritus Leslie R. Silvernale for his inspiration and encouragement during the early stages. The individuals who served as jurors or as raters are deserving of my sincere thanks. Finally, to the members of the Highway Traffic Safety Center staff for their time, encouragement, and advice in carrying out this study. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION O O I O O O O I O O O O O O O ACKNOWLEDGMENT S O O O O O I C O O O O C 0 LIST OF TABLES O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 LIST OF APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter I. II. A III. THE PROBLEM O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . Purpose of the Study . . . . . . . . . Premise . . . . . . . . . . . . Procedures Used in the Study . . . . . . Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . Organization of the Study . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . The Relationship Between Parents and Teachers. The Need For Parental Assistance . . . . . Parental Involvement in Driver Education . . Concept Studies in Driver Education and Related Areas . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . ANALYSIS AND METHOD OF PROCEDURE . . . . . Development of the Instrument . . . . . . Survey of the Literature . . . . . . . Evaluation of the Concepts . . . . . Concept And Topical Heading Validation . . . Selection of the Jurors . . . . . . . . Validation Technique . . . . . . . . . Survey Technique . . . . . . . . . . Selection of Raters . . . . . . . . . The Rating Instrument . . . . . . . . iv Page ii iii vi vii GDCDQONGQUJH H |._a O 10 10 I6 21 27 31 32 32 32 35 35 36 38 40 41 43 Chapter Page Analysis of the Data . . . . . . . . . 44 Ranking of Concepts . . . . . 44 Ranking of Topical and Sub— —t0pica1 Headings . 45 Correlations of Rankings . . . . . . . 45 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 IV. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA . . . . . . . . . 47 Rank Ordering of Concepts . . . . . . . 47 Concept Ranking--Rater Panel One . . . . . 67 Concept Ranking—-Rater Panel Two . . . . . 68 Concept Ranking--Combined Rater Panel (Panel One and Two) . . . . . . . . 88 Composite Concept Rankings And Concept Rating Means . . . . . . 108 Rank Ordering of TOpics and Sub- -topics . . . 108 Rater Panel One . . . . . . . . . . 127 Rater Panel Two . . . . . . . . . . 129 Combined Rater Panel . . . . . . 131 Composite TOpic and Sub- -topic Rankings and Means . . . . . . . . . . 133 Significance of Correlations . . . . . . 133 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . 136 Summary . ' . . . . . . . 136 Statement of the Problem. . . . . . . 136 Methods, Techniques and Data Used. . . . . 136 Major Findings . . . . . . . . . . . 137 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . 144 Recommendations for Further Research. . . . 145 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 BIBLIOGRAPHY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 APPENDICIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 Table lCL 1J1. lu2. LIST OF TABLES Concepts ranked in order of importance by rater panel 1; ratings expressed in percentages . . . . . . . . . . . Concepts ranked in order of importance by rater panel 2; ratings expressed in percentages . . . . . . . . . . . Concepts ranked in order of importance by combined rater panels; ratings expressed in percentages . . . . . . . . . . Composite concept rankings and concept A A rating means . . . . . . . . . . . descending rank ordering by topical areas as determined by rater panel one . . . . . descending rank ordering by sub-topical areas as determined by rater panel one . . . . descending rank ordering by topical areas as determined by rater panel two . . . . . descending rank ordering by sub-topical areas as determined by rater panel two . . . . descending rank ordering by topical areas as determined by combined panels one and two . descending rank ordering by sub-topical areas as determined by combined panels one and two descending rank ordering by topical areas as determined by rater panels one and two and a combination of the two. . . . . . . . descending rank ordering by sub-topical areas as determined by rater panels one and two and a combination of the two. . . . . . vi Page 48 69 89 109 127 128 129 130 131 132 134 135 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix ' Page A. Juror Group Participant Listing . . . . . . 162 B. Juror Instructions . . . . . . . . . . 165 C. Juror Instrument Group 1 . . . . . . . . 167 D. Juror Deleted Concepts Group 1 . . . . . . 182 E. Information for Prospective Jurors Group 2 . . 185 F. Juror Instructions Group 2 . . . . . . . 187 G. Juror Instrument Group 2 . . . . . . . . 189 H. Juror Deleted Concepts Group 2 . . . . . . 204 I. Information For Prospective Jurors Group 3 . . 206 J. Juror Instructions Group 3 . . . . . . . 208 K. Juror Instrument Group 3 . . . . . . . . 210 L. Juror Deleted Concepts Group 3 . . . . . . 231 M. Rater Group Participant Listing . . . . . . 233 N. Letter of Introduction Rater Groups 1 and 2 . . 236 O. Rater Instrument Package . . . . . . . . 238 P . Follow-up Letter Rater Groups 1 and 2 . . . . 255 vii CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Statement of the Problem Youthful drivers between the ages of fifteen and twenty-four years have long been involved in a disprOpor- tionally high accident rate on the highways, with automotive accidents causing approximately half of all deaths among youth within this age group. Youthful drivers are involved in fatal automotive accidents sixty per cent more often than their proportion of the driving population, or their use of the automobile would predict. The problem of a high accident rate for the fifteen to twenty-four year age group has been with us since the 1920's, but has really come to the forefront in the last seventeen years, and has been increasing since 1961.1 The problem of youthful drivers has been one which Edhacators have been attempting to deal with for several dexzades. In most cases the form these educational attempts if! rnj, until the child can handle the driving situation safely and efficiently. This type of program would not limit the nature of the traditional driver education program but would be able to develop a program which would be of a more comprehensive nature. A band of understanding and cooperation could be developed between the parent and instructor, as well as between the parent and child, as a result of such a program. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to develop concepts that could be used when involving parents of driver edu- cation students in a formal driver education program so they could assist their child in learning to drive safely and efficiently. As a result of this study a program could be developed that would have as one of its objec- tives, developing lines of communication between the parents and the driving instructors, and as another, promoting cooperative efforts between the home and the school through the use of parent supervisors. This cooperation would be used to extend the driving experiences of the student drivers. Improving the quality of parental supervision Wtulld.a1so occur because of extended parent-teacher com- munications. Using parents in such a program would allow tjha child the opportunity to develop the knowledge, skill, and attitudes necessary for him to handle an automobile 1n CDLxr modern traffic environment. Premise The premise upon which this thesis was based was that driver education, as it is known today, needs to be extended to a larger number of traffic situations and for a longer period of time. The extension suggested would be implemented by the development of concepts which could be used with parents of driver education students to supplement the present driver education programs. This premise is based on the Opinion of educational experts that education itself is beneficial. Presently, there is no way to validate the contention that this list of concepts, or any in driver education, is effective. For example, no one today can prove that behind- the-wheel instruction per dollar of cost is a better investment than the unit cost per hour of classroom instruction. Even more disturbing is the fact that no one, as yet, has produced clear proof that driver education, at least as presently constituted, has a significant favorable effect upon driver attitudes, motivation, performance, or other achievement. A common sense approach then, has to be applied, for it seems reasonable that an individual better adapted eund experienced with new surroundings will make fewer errors in carrying out a new task. As already discussed, this thesis is based on the theory that education, or the educational process, should haVe a positive influence on an individual's ability to ¥ 2Daniel P. Moynihan, et al., Report Of The Secretary's Agflzigipry Committee On Traffic Safety (Washington, D.C.: GOVernment Printing Office,1968) , p. 61. perform the desired task. The fact that education can change the attitudes and behaviors of individuals when implemented prOperly, is foremost. The idea that an individual is influenced by his circumstances and environ- ment plays heavily upon the ideas presented in this paper. The development of one's self, then, is as important in learning how to drive as it is in any of our other developmental functions.3 The idea of involving the parent in the educational process both to solve scheduling and financial limitations, as well as to play a role in developing "safe" attitudes and values, is one that should become a greater part of our formal educational system. In this case the driver edu- cation instructor cannot, in thirty hours of classroom work and six hours of on-the-road experience, or its equivilent, change attitudes, values, and beliefs which the student has obtained over a period of fifteen to sixteen years. If prOperly trained and used in the program, ‘parents may be able to play a role in influencing their Chigld's behavior. Again, changes in attitude and behavior .maQr be too great an expectation, but improved performance, at lleast in manipulative skills, should certainly be expected. The behavior and attitude improvement may not OCCWJJ: in this type of program, but chances are increased \ P. 3Earl C. Kelley,Perceiving, Behaving, Becoming (Washington, D.C.: National Education Association, 1962) , because a larger portion of the child's environment is involved in the training process. Procedures Used in the Study In the investigation a ranking of concepts that dealt with knowledge about driving and the role parents might play in assisting their child with the learning process was developed. The developmental process was carried on through a review of literature and personal contacts with experienced educators. A listing of concepts dealing with traffic safety was compiled. The listing was presented to three groups of jurors who were to judge the accuracy of the content material presented to determine validity. The validated concepts were then sent to two panels of raters. The raters were asked to rank the concepts on a five choice scale and return them. The returned ratings were then ranked by the two rater panels as well as an over-all ranking by all raters. The topical and sub-topical breakdowns of the concepts were also iranked. A Spearman rank order correlation was used on thee rank orderings of rater panel one and rater panel twm>, to gain an estimate of their similarities of ranking. Definition of Terms The terms that are used in the research are defined as follows: .__—.—— _. ._.—__..,__._.—_——__.-_ -v 5. . on‘ 5V: ‘7 ‘4‘ "v .4- iv ‘5 ‘A 'h Parental Involvement.—-The participation of one or both parents or guardians in the formal educational process with their child, before, during, and after the formal driver education program. Concept.--A meaningful idea, or related fact and opinion, that will help the young driver and his parents or guardians deal more effectively and efficiently with some aspect of the traffic environment. Jurors.--Individuals selected and placed in groups to judge the clarity and accuracy of the content material contained in the concept. Ragg£.--Individuals selected and randomly assigned to one of two panels to rate the concepts suitability for use in a parental involvement program. Rater Type.--Individuals used as raters fit one of four types; college instructors, high school teachers and coordinators, governmental officials, and private safety organization officials. Assumptions This study is based on the assumption that there aria basic concepts which parents should know or perform ‘Witflu their child before, during, and after the formal dIIiner education program. Furthermore, the study is based on tile assumption that concepts can be developed from drinvxar education literature, research reports and from experienced educators, and can be validated by the use of expert jurors judging the content material. Such validated materials can then be used in actual parental involvement programs. Organization of the Study The first chapter was limited to the need, purpose, and premise involved in the development of concepts which could be used with the parents of driver education students to up-grade the present driver education program. In Chapter II a list of pertinent related literature was developed dealing with the question of parent-teacher relationships, the need for parent assistance, and parent involvement in driver education. In Chapter III the process used in develoPing the instrument and analyzing the data was presented. In the fourth chapter the ratings made of the concepts by the rater group, topical headings, and sub- headings were examined. The final chapter contains a summary of the major findings, conclusions, recommendations, recommendations forrfurther research, and a discussion section. Summary The problem of the youthful driver and the limited scope of the educational attempts to remedy the high accuident situation were considered. The remedy developed in this study was in the form of a listing of concepts which might be used in a parental involvement program in driver education to better enable the parents to assist in developing a safe and efficient driver out of their child. The idea that this type of total approach to the educational process was needed, was also discussed. A brief description was also given of the development of the study. CHAPTER II A REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE Introduction In Chapter I the statement of the problem can be found, as well as the purpose of the study, premise, procedures used in the study, definition of terms, assumptions, and statements dealing with the organization of the study. This chapter is divided into five sections. The first two sections pertain to the relationship between parents and teachers, and the need for parental assistance in general education. The third section deals with parental involvement in driver education programs. Section four deals with concept studies in driver edu- cation and related areas, and the final section is a summary of the entire chapter. The Relationship Between Parents and Teachers The relationship between the parents of a child Eflld the teacher of a child are of recognized value, lending tflbenselves as topics of articles by Reeves, Brown, Elder, Li<:ht, and Downes. The arguments presented by these 10 11 writers, both logical and sincere in nature, are found in the following pages. Through references to these articles the writer will demonstrate the relative importance of a positive parent-teacher relationship. Traditionally, parents and teachers have been drawn together, as pointed out by Charles Reeves in Parents And The School, when the child has become involved in difficulty. Unfortunately, this presents the teacher as an authoritarian figure causing the parents to be on the defensive.1 Thus, little positive communication occurs. Familiar with this situation, Muriel Brown dis- covered a solution to the problem. Brown felt that by making parents and teachers aware of their roles, authoritarian situations could be eliminated. This she felt could be done by following two rules: 1. Rules should be thoroughly defined and agree- ments about responsibilities reached by those who wish to c00perate. 2. Possible misunderstandings about roles should be cleared as they develop. Brown felt that for home-school relationships to grow they must be nurtured. The home must get to know ‘ lCharles Reeves, Parents And The School (Washington, D..C.: Public Affairs Press, 1963), p. 114. 2Muriel Brown, "Partners In Education," Bulletin 233. 85 Of The Childhood Education Journal, of the Assoc1ation Ftur Childhood Education InternationaI (1950), 5. 12 more about the school, and the school must learn more about the home.3 A cooperative effort by the school and the home to learn more about each other seemed to be a common need felt by both groups. Franklin Elder, commenting on a program of parental involvement in an arithmetic program developed in Texas, supported the contention that parents must be positively involved in school matters. In the Texas program parent meetings were held to explain the purpose of a new arithmetic program. A questionnaire was distributed to determine parental attitudes concerning the program; and the returns indicated a highly positive parental attitude. Similar examples can be obtained from a study dealing with parental involvement in driver education. The Extended Driver Education Laboratory Enrichment Project, conducted in Janesville, Wisconsin, pointed out that parents wanted to be involved in the educational process of their children. The project conclusions stated that parents should become more involved in the driver education process, tflirough more individual parent-teacher conferences, ‘ 31bid. 4Franklin Elder, Explorations In Parent—School Ikalationshi 5 (Austin, Texas: University of TexasIPress, 19.545, p. 3-32. 13 discussion group sessions, and more emphasis on parent— supervised student practice driving time. It must be noted, however, that even though parents were willing to assist in their child's education, their trust and support had to be solicited by the school. In an article about new math by Marjorie Eicher, parents' suspicions concerning the schools intentions in introducing a new program, as well as their intention in involving parents had to be relieved before positive communication could take place. Introductory parent meetings in the form of descriptive lectures given by the child's class- room teacher, eliminated such suspicions. The teachers and administrators attitudes con- cerning parental support and active assistance must also be considered. In the field of driver education positive teacher-administrator-board support was demonstrated in Kenneth Licht's article, "What Do School People Think About Driver Education?" Licht referred to a questionnaire adndnistered at the 1970 convention of the American .Association of School Administrators, and the National —__ 5Automotive Safety Foundation, "Extended Driver Ethication Laboratory Enrichment Project" (Applied Research Prt>'ect Report), Report to the Wisconsin Department of Pum>Iic Instruction (Madison: Automotive Safety Foundation, 1969), pp. 10-11. 6Marjorie Eicher, "The New Math," Detroit Free Bresss Sunday Magazine (February 23, 1964), p. 4. 14 Education Association, concerning the concepts of having parents formally involved in the driver education program in their schools. The following statement is a summary of one of the items on the survey. The idea of having the parents provide post driver education supervised driving experience for new drivers, and restricted licenses for beginning drivers drew virtually unanimous support from all groups. Teachers were most emphatic, supporting the concept 83% and 84%. School Board members were least enthusiastic of all groups, but still in strong support, 63% and 66%.7 If the responsibility for post driver education practice experience is shifted back to parents, then it is the schools' role to assist the parents with this task. To properly assist parents, communications must be established. Mildred Downes felt parents must have contact with the school when they do attempt to assist their child with any school related learning, or they will simply confuse the issue, and the child.8 The need for concept study materials is further substantiated in a survey conducted by James Counts. The findings indicated that parents working with their child after the completion of driver education did not carry-on przictices stressed in the program, but, in fact, altered ¥ 7Kenneth F. Licht, "What Do School People Think Abcrut Driver Education?" Traffic Safety_(July, 1971), pp. 14-16. 8Mildred Gignoux Downes, "Homework—~To Help Or Not 'To Help?" The Clearing House (January, 1960), pp. 283- 285. 15 their child's behavior to conform to what they felt was correct.9 The question of what the parent-school relation- ship has to do with the child's performance must be examined. It was pointed out by Emmett Betts and Edwin Mingoia, that the level of parental involvement, as well as the cultural and educational level of the parents, played a major role in the student's achievement. Betts pointed out, that the cultural level of the home influences the child's reading achievement level, and that parents with high educational levels are usually more active in school affairs.lo Mingoia pointed out in his study, that there was a high positive correlation between high elementary reading levels and informed, well-educated, and school-involved parents. It was further found that parents who were "taskmasters" and uninformed, or mis- informed concerning school objectives caused their children more often to under-achieve than to achieve.11 9James William Counts, "A Study To Determine The Driving Experience Of Youth From Ingham County High Schools During A Thirty-Day Period Between Receiving A Driver Ikhacation Certificate And Being Able To Apply For A bthshigan Driver License" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, bthzhigan State University, 1972), p. 159. 10Emmett Betts, "Impact Of Adult Reading On Pupil Ach¢ievement," Education, LXXXII, l (1961), 29. llEdwin Mingoia, "Possible Causes Of Underachievement In IReading," Elementary English (March, 1962), p. 220. 16 While conducting experiments at the University of Eastern Illinois, Frank Lanning discovered that if students with reading difficulties were allowed to work with indi— viduals of their own choosing, likes, and enjoyments, they progressed at a better rate than those students working independently.12 If this concept is true in peer relationships, it may also be true in parent-child relationships, where the child is truly motivated to learn to drive and the parent has information which he can share with his child from his own driving experience. The Need For Parental Assistance Attending school is a small portion of an overall socialization process the child progresses through as he matures. Through the ages the school has attempted to assist the home in the development of knowledge believed to be needed in the society. It must be stressed, however, that even with its specialized qualifications enabling it to succeed, the school cannot be expected to produce a conmdetely finished product in the form of an educated child. Learning experiences should be spread between titree institutions, the home, the school, and the community, tx> obtain a total socialization and education process. John Mitchell pointed out in an article dealing witfln the family's role as a teacher, that parental —— 12Frank Lanning, "Dyadic Reading," Elementary m (March, 1962), p. 244. 17 attitudes can be expected to exert great impact on a child's life. This seems to be logical since the child spends at least five years at home with a parent, before being sent to school. In Mitchell's View the "home is a school that is always in session, and you (the parent) are the teacher . children are learning something from every action 13 EUId every social experience." The family, as seen by Mitchell, is a basic ritirture group for its members. In this case nurture Inezans more than just providing physical nourishment, it Ineaans to provide social, psychological, and moral sub- ”‘14 st anance . In further discussions Mitchell noted the need for man to be educated concerning his environment. Szpeecifically, man must know how to use his mental capaci- thees for his own survival. The idea that man has a high iIiftellect, as well as the fact that physically he is de fenseless for a long period following birth, makes tllea formation of a nurture group, or family, essential. The rationale for the educational process can 'bEB found in these very basic parent-child relationships. 'Fhe child's desire for new experiences can be fulfilled ‘_ 13John B. Mitchell, "The Family Teaches, Too," Childhood Education Journal, Of The Association For Childhood Education International, XXXVII, 7 (1961), 310. l4Ibid. 18 with less pain through parental guidance. This logic, of course, is behind the total educational experience of‘ building knowledge on the experience of others. Not only does the family shelter the child from possible harm, but by allowing him success in new experiences, they help leman stated "that variations in family background aiczcount for far more variations in school achievement than do variations in school characteristics."l7 To (:éatrry this statement one step further, Coleman added: Schools bring little influence to bear on a child's achievement that is independent of his background and general social context; and this very lack of independent effect means that the inequalities imposed on children by their home, neighborhood, and peer environment, are carried along to become the inequalities with which they confront adult life at the end of school. 15Mitchell, op. cit., p. 312. 16James S. Coleman, Equality of Educational ngmmtunities (The Coleman Report), Report of National Center For Educational StatistIEs, submitted to the President in Congress (Washington, D.C.: Education Office of Health, Education, and welfare, 1966), p. 311. 17 Ibid., p. 325. lBIbid. 19 Statements such as those made by Coleman reinforce the need for parental c00peration with the school, and more specifically, the need for parental cooperation in driver education. Formal parental aid to schools was not allowed 111 schools of the past, thus the parent did not become irivolved in the formal education process. In fact, as Exointed out by Sidonie Gruenburg, teachers did not want Ipairental assistance a generation ago, because they felt Epairental aid tended to confuse the child.19 The teacher VJELS also placed in an awkward situation, not knowing how txo» evaluate what was taught by the parent.20 This sciiruation has changed today, but it is still not totally caleaar what particular roles the parents and the teachers harvea. The following role responsibility list, developed 'bfi’ bdaria Piers, deals with concepts both the parent and the: teacher can develOp: -teaching the child to distinguish right from wrong -recognizing his abilities and talents —helping him establish habits of health, cleanliness, and safety -helping him develop good study habits —teaching him the responsibilities of citizenship in a democracy 19Sidonie M. Gruenburg, "Your Child Learns At Hknne," Childhood Education Journal, of the Association Bklr Childhood Education International, XXVI (1959), 4, 20Ibid., p. 161. 20 —helping him get along with others -providing him with basic economic understanding —he1ping him prepare for marriage and family life -helping him choose and prepare for a vocation It should be noted that safety awareness and safety education are areas where the parent and the teacher share a dual responsibility; thus specific parent—teacher .responsibilities fit nicely into a program of parent jxnvolvement in driver education. With the idea established that parental assistance .111 education is both needed and beneficial, it is wise to tngrn to ways that the parent might assist. Inherent in tide ideas stated earlier by John Mitchell is that one way .a. parent can aid his child is simply by giving recognition ‘tc> the child's accomplishments. This recognition builds tides child's self-confidence and encourages him to try even more difficult activities.22 Glenn Blough pointed out how parents might play a rCfiLe in assisting their child in the science content area. Bltyugh stated that the parent might find his child's work mcDreinteresting than he though it could be. The parent can Verk with the child gathering information and recording data 111 the home. In this way the parent may use the home's rESources to assist his child. \ 21Maria Piers, How to Work With Parents (Chicago: SCience Research Associates), (n.d.), pp. 13-14. 22Mitchell, op. cit., p. 161. 21 Such cooperation demonstrates to the child that the parent is interested in his schoolwork, thus they help promote a feeling of intelligence and dignity in the child.24 These are examples of how the parent can assist 'the child. The preceeding authors pointed out that Eparents have: (1) an obligation to assist in the edu- cnational process of their child, and (2) a great deal 'tlD offer their child at home that will have definite E>c>sitive effects on the child's motivation and achievement :ir1 school. Parental Involvement in Driver Education The need for involving parents in the formal edu- <>a1:ional process has been discussed in the preceeding materials. This section deals with materials that SEMa<2ifically relate to developing parental involvement ir1 (driver education. Parental involvement is defined as the participa- ticui of one or both parents, or guardians in the educational 23Glenn 0. Blough, You And Your Child And Science UNashington, D.C.: Department of Elementary Principals, ational Education Association, 1963), p. 19. 24Thomas A. Mayes, "A Study Of The Effects Of A :arent Education Program On Third Grade Arithmetic Sfllievement Levels" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Mchzhigan State University, 1965). 22 process with their children, before, during, and after the formal driver education program. The actual need for involving parents in the driver education of their children is based on the needs of the young student driver ‘when he enters the driving environment. Drivers under the aage of twenty account for approximately 10.2 per cent of tide driving population, yet in 1970 they accounted for .165.6 per cent of the traffic accidents.25 This would 'teend to indicate that young drivers are in need of aasssistance. A statement made by Leslie Silvernale and bdaalcolm Whale suggested the training period for young (ixiivers be extended beyond what is now known as driver education. The extended time for practice, they sug- gested, is under the control of both the parent and the clrjsver education teacher.26 The major thrust of Silvernale EUHCi Whale's program prOposal was to develop the student