.... {'3 .‘Y . n F": - o -J t g "6'! :5 ‘1'“: 5:" 33» «0“- C} 331 "a .5”: u-vg £2.) n. £13 3.2:: {.ffi’ei’ :~dL£"2" m a ‘3: 51;, . g - m «g i; 3an mmn1unzsxmtao'2oz. ‘1:<‘-c-:'._-;r ‘vk «‘Ssx.‘l{ 3'35'45 n!“ {Wu} Bequ- A. ‘J P‘g: "' “"3"" \.'3 a... U. '5 ii; a: . - r1 ': 3' ' 'l "I C. 6 1." " «(F q. " v-L t u'I-“, ’V .‘ ' if”. “it If‘ "5.4%" ‘43; "‘ 'ééw y w: K2t€:75131;2c’L'-‘ ‘n' ‘-;.‘k.<;.:-"/.‘: .- . t . . .4‘ film’s...“ . ' ”‘l .IIIPH . . III! 10. 11. 12. 13. 16. 17. 18. 19. Beginning driver-student instructor combinations reported for the prac- tice driving car laboratory sessions . . . Persons supervising the laboratory phase of the introductory driver education course 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O 0 NUmbers and combinations of faculty and graduate assistants teaching the intro- ductory driver education course as reported by 20h institutions . . . . . . . Years of graduate study completed by faculty teaching the introductory driver education course . . . . . . . . . Special educational preparation in driver education reported for 225 college and university instructors of the introduc- tory driver education course . . . . . . . Professional experience related to driver education reported for 269 college and university instructors teaching the introductory driver education course . . . Percentage of employment time 206 college and university introductory driver education course instructors devote to teaching and non-teaching responsibilities Percentage of teaching time 180 college and university introductory driver education course instructors devote to teaching the introductory course, other driver and/or safety education courses, and courses outside the driver and/er safety education field . . . . . . . . . . Types of courses listed by colleges and universities as applicable for teacher preparation and/or certification in driver and/or safety education . . . . . . Highest degree held by faculty teaching driver education courses in selected institutions and in all institutions . . . 7111 1h2 lh8 156 159 160 163 166 168 198 207 20. 21. 22. 23. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. Percentage of instructors involved in research, administration, and other non-teaching responsibilities in selected institutions and in all institutions 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Distribution of enrollment by sex in the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education . . . . . . . . Distribution of enrollment by vocational intent in the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Distribution of enrollment by teaching service in the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . College and university typical enrollment figures for the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education during the entire regular school year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . College and university typical enrollment figures for the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education during the entire summer session . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . College and university typical enrollment figures for the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education offered on an extension basis . . . . . . Titles of text materials designated for student procurement and use in.the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education . . . . . . . . Total number of persons exclusive of supervisory personnel present in the practice driving car while laboratory sessions are in progress . . . . . . . . . Percentage of beginning drivers secured from a variety of sources for utilization in the laboratory phase of the introduc- tory driver education course . . . . . . . ix 209 293 29+ 295 ‘ 296 297 298 299 306 307 30- 31. 32. 33- 31+- Groups of beginning drivers assessed fees by colleges and universities Fees assessed beginning drivers’ participating in college and university introductory driver education courses . . . . . . . . Extent of supervision of student- instructors conducting practice driving instruction in the laboratory phase of the introductory driver education course . . . . . Titles of text materials designated for student procurement and use in the laboratory phase of the introductory driver education course 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Number and type of automobiles utilized in the laboratory phase of the introductory driver education course as reported by 18h colleges and universities . . . . . . . . . . . Procurement practices of colleges and universities securing autos for use in a driver education program . . 308 309 310 311 312 313 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Accredited colleges and universities in each state reported as offering an introductory teacher-preparation course in driver education on a credit basis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . llh LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Page A» State Departments of Education Questionnaire and Cover Letter . . . . . . 257 B. Bibliography of Teacher's Guide- books in Driver Education Published by State Education Departments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265 C. Colleges and Universities Basic Driver Education Course Question- naire and Cover Letter . . . . . . . . . . 270 D. Colleges and Universities Partici- pating in the Questionnaire Survey . . . . 281 E. Tables Relating to the Administrative and Instructional Aspects of the Introductory Driver Education cours. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 292 F. Bibliography of Publications Utilized as Text Sources in College and University Introductory Driver Education Courses . . . . . . . . . . . . 302 G. Tables Relating to the Laboratory Phase of the Introductory Driver Education Course . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305 H. Colleges and Universities Driver 'Education Teacher Preparation Progrem.Questionnaire and Cover Letter..................311;. x11 m1 INTRODUCTIOI W 2! i=2 _____.Pr°b1°-' High school driver education has been in existence over a quarter of a century. In 1933 at the high school in State College} Pennsylvania, Amos 3. leyhart taught the first course, during school hours , with both classroom and practice driving session“? Since its inception at that tine driver education has case to be offered as a part or the instructional program in thousands or secondary schools in the United States. The najer portion or this phencnenal growth has occurred during the post World war II period, growth being sporadic prior to l9h1 and virtually curtailed during the m years. In recent years hundreds of. thousands of pupils have enrolled in these courses annually. Subsequent to the initiation or high-school driver education, and somewhat paralleling its growth, teacher 111w known as University Park. evacu- D. we anizi tor Tr tic sang; in Your Omit; (SpringtieMtiEs—ht'fi— C. cna'i': my) a P0 e I rifle... n..~ A.— ...s.\. 2 preparation programs in driver education have been developed in most of the states that cmprise this nation}1 These programs have sought to prepare prospec- tive and in-service teachers for teaching classroom and practice-driving sessions of high-school driver education. In the earlier years of teacher preparation in driver education a variety of approaches were employed. College-based programs were but one of several options available to those seeking preparation.2 During the early years there were noticeable differences existing both ‘ between the college -based programs and other approaches, and fru one college program to another. Despite differ- ences, however, a college-based progran could saseuhat typically be described as a “short course“, “mama", or 'seminar' characterised by one or morepf'the follotring conditions: (1) a session of short duration, often no more than one or two weeks in length, (2) a non-credit offering, (3) a program devoid of opportunity to instruct beginning drivers in a car, and (11.) a progran supervised 12.322. 2Descriptions of both college ~based programs and other teacher preparation approaches in use during the period preceding 1%.0 can be found in: American Associ- ation of School Administrators, Safet V Education, Eight- eenth Yearbook of the American Assoc atIon of School Admin- istrators, Washington: National Education Association, 191.0). PP. 237-273. 3 and taught by smeone other than a regularly employed college or university faculty member. In-service and non-credit approaches to teacher preparation in driver education in existence during the early years of the movement have all but passed from the scene in nest sections of the nation. The college-based programs have, however, grown in number and undergone a series of nodifications. The college and university teacher preparation prograns in driver education not: represent the means through which prospective and in~service teachers of high- sohool driver education attempt to equip themselves for their teaching role. It is these programs that are of vital importance to the future of driver education, and it is these programs that form the focal point of this investigation. The Problem General statement _o_f_ the problem This study has sought to determine the nature of teacher preparation programs in driver education as found in the colleges and universities of the United States, and to recommend improvements for such programs. Specific problems Solution of the problem was sought through inves- tigation in the following specific areas: 1. Examination of selected regulations and prac- tices existing on the state department of education level which relate to high-school driver education, with particular reference to certification requirements set by each state for teachers of high-school driver education. 2. Identification and analysis of selected admin- istrative and instructional practices associated with the introductory teacher preparation course in driver edu- cation as conducted in colleges and universities of the United States. 3. Determination of the nature and extent of the previous and current educational background and profes- sional experience of college and university driver edu- cation instructors, espocially insofar as such background and experience pertains to driver education and traffic safety. 11.. Examination of selected college and university 33135; programs of teacher preparation for driver educa- tion including such aspects as curriculum, program organi- zation and administration, staff, and allied services. Definitions For the purpose of this study, the following tense .r. defined: Safe education: Education for effective living in relation to the physical and health hazards of modern society.1 Safety education programs typically deal with areas such as has, school, recreational, occupational, and driver and traffic safety. 233.732 education: An instructional program provided by a school, college, or university for the purpose of helping students learn to use motor vehicles safely and efficiently.2 A. cgplete driver education program includes both classroom instruction and practice driving instruction. Classrom instruction: In driver education, the phase of teaching conducted in a typical classroal envi- ronment which relates to the developnent of knowledge, skills, and attitudes needed for safe driving. ICarter V. Good (ed.), Dictim _o_f_ Education (2nd ed.: low York: McGraw-Eill Boo Co., Inc., l§3§L r. We an: adaptation of the definition provided in: National Conference on High-School Driver Education, High-School Driver Education: Policies and Recasmen- dations, (gashington: National Education Association, e P- 6 Practice driving instruction: In driver education, the phase of teaching which embraces (a) the actual expe- rience of driving an automobile, and (b) observation, which includes all other time spent in the practice driving vehicle.1‘.Although the development of skills essential for safe driving is stressed in this phase of instruction, so too is the development of knowledge and attitudes needed for safe driving. Experience on driving simulators is also considered to be a part of practice driving instruction. Introductory driver education course: As applied to the college or university setting, a course offered by the institution as the first step in the process of specialized teacher preparation in the field of driver education and traffic safety. Sometimes known as a "basic" course. Beginning driver: A person.attempting to learn to operate a motor car in.compliance with the laws of the state, and to (eventually) become fully licensed as a motor car operator. IAn adaptation of the definition provided in: National Conference on Driver Education (Purdue Univer- sity, 1958), Policies and Practices for'Driver Education, (Washington; National Education Association, 1960), p. S. M assumptions The investigation of the problem was based upon the following asslnsptions: 1. Important information and concepts relative to college and university teacher preparation programs can be discovered through a questionnaire survey and the in- spection of curricular materials cut-titted by question- naire respondents. 2. Analysis and interpretation of existing policies and practices in college and university teacher preparation programs in driver education can result in the fornulation of recmmendaticns useful in initiating new programs and/ or expanding and improving existing programs . Delimitations The study was limited in the following ways: 1. Colleges and universities participating in the study were restricted to those institutions offering a minimum of four years of study leading toward a Bachelor's degree and fully accredited by one of the six regional ' accrediting agencies of the United States. 2. Information sought was that related to teacher preparation programs in m education. 3. Colleges and universities contacted for the purpose of the questionnaire survey were restricted to 8 those institutions previously reported as offering an introductory teacher preparation course in driver education A for credit ,1 and/or those institutions believed by state department of education personnel. to have initiated or reinstated such a course subsequent to the publication of the report. It. Infometion collected was limited to the data supplied by questionnaire response and additional printed or written materials furnished by respondents. 5. Information supplied by state department of education personnel was based upon regulations or prac- tices in effect during the period of October, 1960 to December, 1960. ' 6. College and university programs studied were those in effect during the school year beginningSeptember 1, 1960 and ending August 31, 1961. leed £2; 32. Study Living has always been an adventure, but it is more of an adventure today than ever before. Sane of the old dangers are gone but in their places have cane others more numerous and more serious. . . . These hazards are so great, the technics of meeting them are so complicated, 1ms. Department of Health, Education, and weirare and National Education Association, Courses in Sigma Safet and Eight: 1 Traffi A Dire t“_"Tc‘Ii UHversIt—E craggmfiin'gton: Hoaotionif Edouczéeicnsso- o e on. 9 . pp. 9-21“ 9 and the intellectual and emotional preparation needed for living satisfactorily among them is so extensive that the problem of safety has emerged as one of the major problems of our Civilization. e e e It 1' to the BOhOOJ. par. ticularly that we must look for the development of the knowledge, the attitudes, the habits, and the skills that are necessary if we are to live with reasonable safety in the modern world. Although written more than twenty years ago, the passage quoted above might well have been written in the current year for it is descriptive of presently existing circumstances in many areas of the safety field. The area of driver education. and traffic safety is perhaps particu- larly a case in point. Undeniably there has been progress in the United States in the fight against death, injury and economic loss arising out of traffic accidents. Illustrative of this point is a comparison of the death rate per one hundred millions miles of travel2 for 1935 and for 1960. The rate in 1935 was 15.9 while in 1960 a record low rate lAmorican Association of School Administrators, Safety Education, 92. gig" p. 9. 21ndicies typically utilised in computing national traffic death rates are: (1) deaths per 100,000,000 miles of travel, (2) deaths per 10,000 registered vehicles, and (3) deaths per 100,000 population. 4‘” 10 of 5.3 was set.1 Translated into human lives lost, if the 1935 rate had prevailed in 1960, over 100,000 lives would have been lost. Actually, the 1960 death count was 38,200.2 Similarly, a comparison of death rates as detcmined on another index reveals that in 1935 deaths per ten thousand motor-vehicles registered stood at 13.7, whereas the 1960 rate of 5.2 established a record low for this index.3 Progress, at least in relative terms, can also be claimed with regard to the actual count of fatal- ities each year. The all-time annual high of 39,969 traffic fatalities was reached sane twenty years ago in the year 191.1.h It should be remembered that this figure has not been reached since that time in spite of an enonsous upward trend in the masher of licensed drivers, registered vehicles, and miles traveled. Figures such as these seem encouraging. Hone the less the picture is far fras a bright one and the solution to the problem of traffic death, injury, and econcnic loss is clearly not at hand. According to National Safety Council reports, accidents are the fourth leading cause of 1National Safety Council, Accident Facts (1961 ed.: Chicago: The Council, 1961), p. 59. ZIbid. 3Ibid. “nie- 11 death for all age groups in the United States.1 For the age group fraa one to twenty-five years, accidents are the leading cause of death.2 ‘Ihile these computations include accidental death.from all causes (e.g., drowning, fire, falls, poisoning, etc.), motor-vehicle accidents constitute the most frequent and serious aspect of the total accidental death.picture. ‘Hhile some progress has been. made it is nevertheless true that each.year during the past decade a rather consistent average of approximately 38,000 lives have been.needlessly lost through traffic ndshaps. Nor does the death.rate tell the full story. In 1960 the number of persons injured and disabled beyond the day of the traffic accident was estimated at 1,hoo,coo.3 The Rational Safety Council's estimate of the dollar loss attributable to traffic accidents in the same year was placed at $6,500,000,000.h while impersonal statistics do little to conyey the feeling of loss and suffering inherent in traffic mishaps and affecting those both directly and indirectly involved, these figures do serve to indicate the 1Ibid., p. 8. 21pm. 3Ibid., p. to. I‘Ibid . 12 enormity of the problem. Further, the anticipated national situation in future years appears to make continued progress in the fight against traffic accidents more and more difficult, if for no other reason than that of a steadily increasing number of drivers operating a steadily increasing number of vehicles. Based on present trends it has been estimated that in 1966 -- only five years hence -- there will be 90 million drivers traveling 825 billion miles. Unless a further substantial reduction in.the. accident 3359- can be realised, the yearly fatality count in 1966 will rise to 511,000 and the disabling injury count will approach 2,000,000} Eccnmic losses can be expected to increase in similar fashion. Safety efforts that seek to reduce the number of deaths and injuries, and to lessen the economic losses arising out of traffic accidents and congestion are many and varied. At the risk of oversimplification it might be said that these diversified efforts fall into one or more of three basic categories. Dubbed the "three E's,"2 lladd, pp. g_i_t_., p. ht. awalter Ladd credits J‘ulien 3. Harvey with the origination of this term in the 1920's. Said to have been applied first to industrial safety, it was subsequently adapted to traffic safety and has been quoted and printed a countless number of times. For greater detail see Ladd, p. 58. {GIT .. '4 . -,«. 13 these areas are: (1) education, (2) enforcement, and (3) engineering. It is to these three areas that the public looks for leadership in minimizing the traffic accident toll. Individually and collectively these areas will need to continue to improve their techniques and approaches for an increasingly effective attack on traffic accidents. The foregoing review of past, present, and projected traffic- accident involvement indicates the need for such improvement. Each of the "three E's“ can be subdivided into a mnaber of areas. The major concern of this investigation centers upon one of these sub-areas within the framework of the education approach, namely the teacher preparation programs in driver education found in the colleges and universities of the United States. The success of driver education, like any other instruction, depends upon the personality, character, ability, and professional preparation of the teacher. Canpetencyecf teaching in this new field should go a primary requisite in set- ting up programs. Despite this stated recognition of the importance of quality professional preparation for high school driver 1National Conference on High-School Driver Edu- cation, Hifi-School Driver Education: Policies and Become one, 92. c ., p. . IIPIIIH‘N 1h education teachers, there is evidence to suggest that for many such.teachers, college and university teacher preparation programs are all too often unable to provide the same quality instructional program.generally available in other fields. For the most part neither the certification.requirements for teaching driver education, nor the instructional programs designed to prepare teache ers of the subject have reached higher than a bare1minhnal level. In reviewing the development of the profession Brody and Stack have described the situation in these terms: The history of high school driver education shows a dramatic, if not phenomenal growth, within the single decade prior to the mid-century mark. The need was great, and through the diligent efforts of many agencies, progress was remarkable. For this very reason, however, driver education has suffered internally by a lack of commensurate preparation and certifica- tion of its teachers. A complete high school driver education.course (meeting minimum teacher certification standards and minimum.clock hour requirements of thirty hours of class- room.experience and six hours of practice driving expe- rience) was offered in 9,786 (53%) of the nation's public high schools during the 1960-61 school year. A 1Leon Brody and Herbert J. Stack, Hi hw' Safet I F tics-- and Driver Education.(Englowood Cliffs, H. .: ren HEIlT, c.,‘I§3ET'—, p. 339. 15 Non-public high schools offering a complete course meeting minimum requirements during the same school year totaled 159. In addition, 1161 public and fourteen non-public high schools were reported as offering combination classroom and practice driving instructional programs in driver education that failed to satisfy minimum requirements.1 The combined public and non-public school pupil enrollment figures for those boys and girls participating in a complete program meeting minimum requirements (1960- 61 school year) was estimated to have reached 821,775 with 8111,11? of that number enrolled in the public school programs. Pupils enrolled in complete programs (1.6., classroom and practice driving phases) that failed to meet minimum requirements totaled an additional 60 ,7l|.0.2 Similarly, a recent survey indicated that ". . . in 328 of our colleges and universities, a total of 975 offerings are currently available for training personnel in the fields of highway safety and highway traffic."3 llnsurance Institute for Highway Safety, Four- teenth Annual National High School Driver Education Award P'r-ogram (Washington: Insurance Institute for Highway 8 e y: A Report to the Board of Judges for the School Year 1960-61), pp. 17, 14.11. (Processed.) 2Ibid., pp. 19, is. 3U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and National Education Association, Courses in Highway Safet and Hi hwal Traffic: A Direct—Tory 9_ callege Lug UHversi-Ei 0 cringe, 92. 93E” p. 7+. “H.131“, ’hsr. up... .- mflflln. a, 16 These reports indicate that both high school driver education courses and college and university professional preparation programs in the traffic safety field exist in more than isolated instances. Further, there are numerous factors that appear to favor the continuance, if not expansion, of these high school and college programs. Although not as directly and publicly active in recent years as in the earlier years of the driver education movement, a number of insurance companies , automobile clubs, automobile manufacturers and other agencies continue to provide financial and other types of support for driver education programs. Sometimes support is forthcoming in the form of scholarships for high school driver education teachers. For many years there has existed an encourage- ment of high school driver education through autmobile insurance discounts for students completing an approved driver education course. Assistance has been, and contin- ues to be, provided through automobile manufacturers ' discounts on cars sold to dealers, who in turn make such cars available on a free-loan basis to schools and colleges conducting driver education programs. These practical fouls of assistance and support have provided encouragement for the progrms. Assuming no reversal of this trend, support for driver education is likely to continue from these sources. 1? Legislation providing financial support for driver education has, during the last decade, provided a strong impetus for the growth and expansion of high school driver education in many states. In 1960 seventeen states had authorised some measure of financial reimbursement to local school districts conducting an approved driver edu- cation course.1 According to Bland, ”On the basis of previous Esic] proposed legislation, it may be expected that states will continue to introduce bills for financial support of driver education."2 while sane bills thus proposed may fail to gain passage, it appears in the light of past history that others may becaae law. Another spur to the growth and expansion of high school driver education through legislative act has been the enactment of laws which nah caspleticn of an approved course in driver education a prerequisite to obtaining a license under a certain age.3 or the seventeen states authorising financial support to local schools for driver llvan L. Eland, ”State Aid For Driver Education,“ afetz Education,n. (November, 1960), p. 15. 21bid. 3'.l‘y'picall.ly those under age eighteen. In most states with this legislation the act permits license issuance beginning at age sixteen for those completing an approved course, at age eighteen for those not completing an approved course. 18 education, five states also have variations of this type of legislation.1 Other states have considered and con- tinue to consider similar legislation. Sometimes overlooked in attempts to identify the factors that have been a major influence in the growth of driver education is a very basic and potent force -- public opinion. Despite the efforts of both those prmoting high school driver education and those who oppose this instruction, it seems unlikely that driver education will either become a part of or remain a part of the regular school curriculum, unless and until the taxpaying public is convinced of the contributions this instructional program can males both to the individual and to society at large. The very existence of driver education courses in the secondary schools of thousands of cmnunities would appear to indicate that the citizens of these cmities are in support of these instructional programs . Without such support it is difficult to imagine why this course, or any course, would be allowed to remain a part of the curriculum. Further, if other segnents of this “public” are persuaded of the potential and value of offering driver education in the high school, this all-important factor of I'Details concerning all state programs are presented in Chapter IV. 19 public opinion will. continue in the future, perhaps even more than it has in the past, to provide a strong voice for the expansion and improvement of high school driver education. These several factors then, singly and in concert suggest that driver education may continue to be found as a part of the high school program in the foreseeable future. On this basis, college and university teacher preparation programs in driver education are likely to be in increasing demand as the nucleus for quality professional preparation. In many respects teacher preparation progrms in driver education have barely scratched the surface in terms of producing thorom prepared teachers in quantities sufficient to meet the need. Time and again experts in the field meeting at state, regional, and national conferences have span and written of the need for an upgrading and expansion of college and university teacher preparation programs in driver education.1 Tue such instances are known to have 1These reports are treated more extensively in Chapter II. 20 occurred since this investigation has been initiated.1 Action and improvement responsive to those stated needs has typically been slow. it this Juncture in the brief history of the driver education movement it would appear both desirable and necessary to gain a national picture of teacher preparation in driver education as it currently exists on the college and university level. This picture is needed so that the current status of these programs can be brought into sharper focus and extended beyond the confines of a single college, state, or section of the country. in appraisal of the present situation is pro.- requisite to planning for the future. is the present situation is brought into sharper focus, implications for future growth and development are revealed. Failure to consider these implications and guidelines for future growth and development would betray the demonstrated need for increased attention to the important function of education for traffic safety. lane such instance was that of a discussion from the floor during the Annual Meeting of the Camnittee on College Safety Education, National Safety Congress, Chicago, October 18, 1960. For another recent example see: Teacher Pre aration in Driver Education, Proceedings and Rooms a one 0 t5- Driver and TrETic Safety Education Seminar, (New York: Columbia University, Teachers College, 1960) pp. 7-11. (Processed.) 21 It is this dual need -- the discovery of the existing national picture and the development of guide- lines for future growth .. which this investigation seeks to satisfy. It is a need that has been previously unful- filled. Organization 95 the Study An introduction to the investigation has been provided in the present Chapter. In Chapter II literature related to the study is reviewed. The methodology and procedures utilised in the various phases of the investi- gation is outlined in Chapter III. Beginning with the fourth chapter and extending through the sixth, there is presented a review of the data collected in each of the three separate phases of the investigation: Chapter IV deals with state department of education regulations and practices related to driver education, Chapter V is an extensive report of the administrative and instructional practices associated with the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education in the nation's colleges and universities, and Chapter VI reveals charac- teristics of the 3.9.12.9; driver education program in selected colleges and universities. In Chapter VII the 22 significant findings of the investigation are reported, as are recanendations based upon an interpretation of the findings. CHAPTER II HEVIEH OF RELATE LITERATURE _Igtroduction In this chapter there is presented a review of the research and writing related to this investigation. An effort has been made to restrict the review to literature dealing with 913.119.! education as opposed to that of the more inclusive area of safety education. In instances where a report or study concerned with safety education included a significant emphasis on driver education, hcwaver, it too was reviewed. As a relatively new subject in both the high school and college curriculum, driver education is not backed by either the depth or breadth of. research avail- able in areas with longer histories.1 The specific area of teacher preparation in driver education, as it exists in colleges and universities, appears to have been particularly neglected from a research standpoint. For these reasons much of the literature related to this 1"Brody and Stack, 92. cit., p. 14.22. 23 an investigation was found to be other than research-based. Some theses, dissertations, survey studies, and additional research contributions were uncovered and reviewed. The major portion of the literature, however, was found in the following forms: (1) speeches or reports prepared by individuals engaged in the field of driver education and traffic safety, (2) reports and recommendations arising out of professional meetings, conferences, seminars, and similar gatherings of driver education and traffic safety personnel. The review of the literature has been arranged so as to center principally about three aspects of the investigation. These aspects are: (l) certification standards for high school driver education teachers, (2) the preparation and qualifications of college personnel. conducting teacher preparation courses in driver education, and ( 3) college and university teacher preparation programs in the field of driver education. A chronological review of the literature is presented within each of these three areas. ' Some duplication of content was discovered among the various reports and publications reviewed. Comacnly this duplication resulted when one regional or national conference took under discussion the deliberations or recommendations ofanother conference. Also, some confer- enee reports and other publications spanned more than one 25 of the three major aspects of the study listed above. Where duplication was discovered in the literature reviewed, references were appropriately noted, but repeti- tious review avoided. Throughout much of the literature is the theme of a need for upgrading teacher preparation programs. Less obvious is an indication of the specific nature of the existing programs and of the means through which the programs should be upgraded. The content of some of the literature then, is both pertinent to this study and, at the same time, indicative of further justification for the study. Literature Pertainigg 33 the Certification 9_f_‘ High School. Teachers in early study that included consideration of existing statutory and state board of education require- ments for safety (and driver) education teachers was that prepared by Nathaniel C. Schneider.1 Schneider's study revealed that at the time of the investigation only five states in the nation specified. anyrequirements pertaining to teacher preparation in safety education. This mall. l'Teacher Preparation for Safety Education," {ampublished ld.D. dissertation, New York University, 0 . 26 number of states had established specific requirements for teacher preparation.while a total of thirty-one states had statutory and/or state board of education.requirements for the teaching of safety education in the public schools. .ALaost from the beginning it appears that little attention was given to assuring adequate preparation to teach.in this field. Apparently the concept that anyone can.teach in the field of driver education and traffic safety,1 regardless of preparation, is not new. In.l9h7 the American Automobile Association.issued a pamphlet indicating the status of safety (including driver) education.in.each.state.2 Actually a revision of earlier editions published in 1938 and 19h0, the pemphlet contained information secured fru state school officials in the respective states. Prhaarily a listing of existing practices, the following were reported as a part of this publication: (1) a summary of state laws and regulations pertaining to instruction in.any phase of safety education, (2) a brief description or outline of courses of study being utilized, and (3) various aspects associated'with 1Twelve of the thirty-one states in Schneider's study required that instruction be provided specifically in traffic safety or traffic law. 2American.Automobile Association, Stats Re clation of Safetz‘Education_ in.the'United States (Hishingtcn: The Association, 1§E7).— a .1 4‘1“ 27 teacher preparation in safety education existing within the state. In January, 1&9 the Center for Safety Education at law York University conducted a survey regarding certification practices in safety and driver education existing in eighteen selected states. An analysis of this brief survey and recommendations arising out of the study were presented in a ten page pamphlet written by the Director of the Center-u-Herbert J. Stack.1 Although focused upon the entire field of safety education there is revealed a special concern for driver education. In presenting recommendations Stack wrote: Since most teachers are expected to provide instruction in general safety through existing subjects, it is to be 8;? mationed whether certi- fication in ener education Is desIr- m— efficctive-g proce ure would be to Include as a required subject in teacher- preparing institutions a one, two, or three- semester-hour course in general safety educa- tion. In the case of high school driver educationfEEweverf'flg need-ms clearly _f_g_r_ ”11?? f "T a rag-51.3% ir’cegtlifi'ataimn. 2122... o s c ‘ Stack's early call for special certification to teach high school driver education has been answered in sue quarters, but as revealed in subsequent portions of 1The Pro aration and Certification of Teachers 3; Safety Education (Few YorE: New YorE Favors-ftp I955). 23111., p. 9e l 28 this study is as yet unheeded in a number of states. At the First National Conference on High-School Driver Education deliberations and recommendations included attention to teacher qualifications, preparation, and certification. Certification was handled in the conference report in a single sentence which was noticeably devoid of specifics. The sentence took the form of a mild recanmendation advising state education departments or state teacher certification agencies that they '. . . should explore the possibilities of providing for certifi- cation of driver education teachers. . . ."1 The recamendations of the Conference with regard to teacher qualifications and teacher preparation were more detailed and explicit as revealed in succeeding pages of this chapter. Considering that this meeting represented the initial attempt to develop policies and recommen- dations for driver education at the national level, and considering that driver education courses were only then beginning to be adopted by a sisable mber of secondary schools, it is perhaps not surprising that recmamendations pertaining to certification should have been mild and lacking in specifics. lustional Conference on High-School Driver Edu- cation, Higg-School Driver Education: Policies pad Recomme ons, 92. cit., p. 51. 29 The portion of the report of, the Second National Conference on Driver Education dealing with recommended standards for teacher certification specified completion of a general safety education course and a “basic" driver education course. It was further reccanncnded that official driver records of prospective teachers be investigated before certification to detemine whether they could qual- ify with regard to freedaa from chargeable accidents and repeated moving traffic violations. It was also suggested that certification be with-held free these who had cmpleted the required credit courses, but evidenced a low aptitude or potentiality for teaching driver education.1 As a forerunner to the organisation of the Amer- ican Driver and Safety Education Association in 1957, a conference was sponsored by the National Omission on Safety Education in September, 1956.2 Participating in the two-day meeting were fifty-two officers (or their designees) representing driver and/or safety education 1National Conference on Driver Education (Michigan State College, 1953), Policies and Practices for Driver Education (Washington: Fational'fl'ucation Asse'cTatIon, Igm ,, Pp. 28.290 2National Commission on Safety Education, 34%35n Re art of Conferencg of Driver Education and Safet u- cafiion Esociation Leaders (Washington:mom Educ-ation IssocIatIon, 19%).. (fiecessedd 30 associations in thirty-one states. Several of the work groups as well as some general sessions of the Conference were concerned with teacher preparation and certification. Basically the conference recamendations appear to have departed little from those developed at former conferences, particularly the Second National Conference on Driver Edu- cation. In the same year (1956) the National Conference on Teacher Education, Certification, and Program Standards for Driver Education was held at Pacific Intheran College at Parkland, Washington.1 Although little appears to have been gained through the conference in toms of new. knowledge and techniques pertinent to certification, the conference was unique and potentially valuable in that its co-spensorship brought together two professional groups which inevitably need to understand the policies, practices, and problems of the other group if any measure of co-operation and success is to be achieved. It was an appropriate time to meet because it was during the mid-fifties that a number ‘ A“ lNational Association of State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification and National Commission on Safety Education, National Conference 93 Teacher Education, Certification, annFProggam Standard? £93; Driver Education Washington: National Education Association, 1956.) (Processed.) 31 of the states were considering and accepting new legislation and regulations affecting high school driver education. It is possible that more meetings between these two groups of people would aid.mutua1 understanding and lead to improvement of certification standards in the states. The American Driver and Safety‘Education.Asso- ciation; convened the first of its annual conferences in Philadelphia in 1957. Although little was reported with regard to teacher certification in driver education, an excellent concept of the role of the state department of education in the field of safety and driver education was outlined. The types of assistance state departments of education should provide to teacher preparation and teacher certification agencies were indicated.2 It is conceivable that the recommendations of this early conference with regard to the role of assisting teacher preparation and teacher certification agencies 1Name changed to ”American.Driver’Education Asso- ciation" in.June, 1960 when the Association was granted departmental status by the National Education.Association. 2AmericanDriver and Safety Education Association, First Annual Conference gf_the American.Driver and Safety Education Associatibn.(Washington: NatIOnaI Education Association, I957}, p. 18. (Processed.) 32 would, if followed, result in an upgrading of certifi- cation requirements in the field. . Another publication not directly concerned with certification, but dealing with a situation closely allied to teacher certification and preparation was the National Omission on Safety Education's 1958 report "Special State Financial. Support for Driver Education.“ A sumary of the types of support programs than existing in fourteen states was included in the report, as was a list of pertinent questions and answers designed to assist other states considering similar legislation. Financial support fras the state to the local school district in support of driver education typically demands that certain minimum standards (e.g., certifi- cation) be met. For this reason financial support programs in some states have been a strong influence in upgrading certification standards. The most recent national conference on driver education was held in 1958 at Purdue University.2 The section devoted to a discussion of certification was both I:8ationa1 Commission on Safety Education, "Special State Support for Driver Education," The Bu11e_____3___in, 11- (February. 1958). pp- 115-116- 2The printed report of this meeting, however, was not released until 1 33 longer and more specific than the corresponding sections which appeared in the We previous conference reports. Greater similarity of certification standards frm state to state, reciprocal agreements between states, and upgrading minimum standards were discussed. Specific requirements set forth for those seeking certification were: (1) a valid driver's license, (2) three years driving experience and a satisfactory driving record, (3) three semester-hours credit in an introductory safety education course, six semester-hours credit in courses in ‘ driver and traffic safety education, and a sufficient umber of related elective courses to enable completion of a minor in safety education.1 These same recommendations were outlined the following year by warren P. Quensel in a presentation before the Third Annual Conference of the American Driver and Safety Education Association.2 apparent between Quensel's report given in 1959 and the final copy of the Third Eational Conference on Driver Sale differences were J'Rational Conference on Driver Education (Purdue University, 1958), Policies and Practices for _lzr_i____ver Edu- g______ation, gp. c__i_.__t., pp. 23 ”—25. 2Third Ann____u_a_1_ Conference of the American D__r__i_.___ver and Safetz Education Association Washington: National Education Association, 1959). pp. 37-38. (Processed.) 31 Education which was not released until 1960; these differ- ences may have resulted from a difference of interpretation and/or editorial changes in the reports prior to publi- cation. In 1960 the National Omission. on Safety Education published a revised version of Norman Key's doctoral dissertation, "Status of Driver Educationin the United States ,‘1 which was originally prepared for American University. Included in this study was a listing of semester hours of special credit (i.e., driver education, safety education) required of driver education teachers in each of the forty-eight states. Data for this listing was supplied by state education departments during the 1957- 1958 school year.2 Although not related specifically to teacher certi- fication, Ivan L. Eland's article “State Aid for Driver Education"3 is a report-of a recent and comprehensive survey relating to state financial support for driver edu- cation. As mentioned earlier, such support is often accom- panied by a strengthening of certification standards. liashington: National Education Association, 1960. 2Similar data was secured as a part of the present investigation during the 1960-1961 school year fran fifty states and the District of Columbia. This data is presented in Chapter IV. 3318M, legs £1.23, PP. 15‘17. 1"! 35 Literaturg Pertaining _t_o_ the Preparation and Qualifications 2; College and University Personnel The Second National Conference on Driver Education recommended that college driver education instructors hold at least the Master's degree with a major (or its equiv- alent) in safety education. For those lacking this preparation attendance at periodic state or regional seminars was suggested.1 This marked one of the first official (group) pronouncements on a national basis to the effect that college instructors need competencies beyond those expected of high schoolteachers in the field of driver education. The previous national conference on driver education had indicated only that college instructors need a ”professional background in safety education.” The Third National Conference on Driver-Education reiterated the recounmendaticns of the previous national conference and suggested an additional aspect pertinent to the experience of the instructor. ”It is considered necessary that the background of the college instructor lflational Conference On Driver Education (Michigan State College, 1953), Policies §_n_d_ Practices for Driver Education, 22. cit., p. . w 36 ' include (a) the teaching of beginning drivers, and (b) several years in teaching and/or administration, preferably at the secondary level.“- Except for sarcasions of individual members of the profession since the Purdue Conference in 1958, the most recent recmnendations for the preparation of col- lege instructors of driver education available today are those developed at this conference. At the National Safety Congress meetings late in 1958 one of drivereducation's pioneers spoloe directly to the subject of the qualifications and preparation of col- lege personnel teaching driver education courses. These comments from a man in a position to know a great deal about his subject reveal a critical problem associated with the effectiveness of teacher preparation programs in driver education. In his address ”Next Steps and Priorities for the» Section and Driver Education"2 Amos E. Ueyhart said: At the present time, we have college profes- sors offering teacher preparation courses in driver education who, themselves, have never taught a single driver how to drive. And fur- ther, they do not require their teachers to 1National Conference on Driver Education (Purdue University, 1958), Policies and Practice; for Driver Edu- C‘tion, 22. 0115., pe e . 2National Safet Co as Transactions: School and College Sa'etg (Chicago: a o Saety Council, I953), I’l- e 37 instruct at least one student from 'scratch' how to drive under their imnediate super- vision, and what is worse, they have no spe- cial preparation, not even a hO-hour college professors' seminar. They feel that they are traffic experts.1 In opening the Third Annual Conference of the American Driver and Safety Education Association with the loeynete address ”The Challenge We Pace,“2 Walter A. Cutter also related weaknesses existingain college pro- grams because of inadequately prepared instructors. The Purdue Conference recmunendations pertaining to the quali- fications and preparation of college instructors (Third National Conference in Driver Education, 1958) were reiterated to those in attendance at the Third Annual Conference of the American Driver and Safety Education Association by Warren P. Quensel.3 A conference was sponsored by the University of Wisconsin in 1959 for college instructors of driver and safety education in the state of Wisconsin. With financial assistance provided by insurance companies, the conference 1Ibid., pp. 168-169. 2American Driver and Safety Education Association, Third Annual Conference 9_f_ the American Driver and Safety Eucaticn E's-sedation, _o_p. Bit" p. 27. 3R1de, p. 38. 38 proceedings were subsequently published.1 One of the presentations made at the conference was that given by H. E. Engclhardt who spoke on ''Safety Education Cmpeten- cies for the College Instructor."2 In addition to pre- senting a comprehensive review of the recmnnendations pertaining to the specialised educational preparation of ‘ college instructors which had been developed at previous conferences, Engelhardt also stressed the need for attention to additional competencies. Canpetencies for research, administration, and comunity service-public relations were discussed. Since a number of states are known to periodically hold seminars or conferences for college safety and driver education teachers the Wisconsin Conference cannot be said to be unique. The publication of proceedings, however, is somewhat unique for a conference of this type. Norman Key's doctoral study which has been previously cited included smae attention to the special preparation required by the states of college personnel preparing driver education teachers. Key found that many 1Charles Peter Yost (ed. ) Teacher Preparation in afet Education (Madison, Wisconsin: Uiivers y 0 scene n, . (Processed. ) 2 LIL-idea PP. 25'300 39 states had no such requirement. or those that had sane type of requirement a non-credit course or seminar was a more typical requirement than that of a credit course or courses.1 One of the reeamendatiens of Key's study was that teacher education institutions and state teacher- certificaticn agencies collaborate in establishing standards for college personnel preparing driver education teachers. It was suggested that standards should be comparable to those for preparation of teachers in any other rieid.2 literature Pertaining to Teacher Preparation '— Pro me In 1939 11h; fly; 233.19.. m devoted an entire issue to safety education. Herbert J. Stack's article ”Training for Leadership on the Safety Front“3 and J. Andrew Holley's article ”Teacher Training in Safety Edu- cation'l" appeared in this issue. Both men discussed existing programs and practices relative to teacher preparation in safety education. Stack's article was .__ IKey, pp. pit... pp. 7-8. zlhido. p. 65. 3_T_h_e_ Phi 222:; m, January, 1939, pp. 19li-l96. "193. gig" pp. 20h-207. he confined primarily to a description of the program at New York University and other "centers" preparing traffic safety specialists. Holley dealt with‘sane specifics relative to curriculum and teaching methods. Stress was placed on development of individual responsibility for safe behavior as a prime objective of teacher preparation programs. Holley presented evidence of the incasplete and inadequate nature of many teacher preparation programs in safety (including driver and traffic) education. An extensive and authoritative report published during the early years of the driver education movement which included a section on the preparation of safety and driver education teachers was §_a_f_e_tl Education, the Eighteenth Yearbook of the American Association of School Administrators. An entire chapter was devoted to the preparation of teaching personnel and a sizable portion of the chapter emphasised the driver education and traffic safety phase of the. safety program. In-service and pre- service education programs were suggested. An extensive description of the early college professors' institutes and seminars was included, as was a reproduction of the outline of one complete unit from these courses. Teacher preparation programs existing in four selected institutions of higher education were revealed. The chapter was con- cluded with an explanation of the need for research to hi improve both the teacher preparation programs and safety and driver education itself.1 Schneider's doctoral study2 had as its purpose the assembling of information that could serve as a guide to colleges and universities engaged in teacher preparation, thereby enabling better preparation of teachers in the various fields of safety. The present study then is closely allied with Schneider's investigation. Sane principal differences between the two studies are (1) the present study is delimited specifically to driver education while Schneider's study covered the entire safety education field, (2) Schneider's study focused considerable attention on classroom methodsutilised in teacher preparation pro- grams while the present study is related principally to practices other than those associated with classroom teaching methods, and (3) the present study deals with the status of those teaching college courses while Schneider gave only passing attention to this aspect of the pro- gram. Procedural methods also differed and the passage of some twenty years since Schneider's dissertation was cas- plated has outdated considerable portions of his study. lAmerican Association of School Administrators, Safety Education, 93. cit., pp. 237-278. 2Schneider, 92. cit. II '|l, ris‘~l‘ni flu n..e'_- .e. flush . . inflow 112 Despite these differences, however, some of Schneider's suggestions are echoed by the findings of this investigation. The following statements are of interest in this regard: . . .Institutiens working in the field of teacher preparation need continuous enco urage- ment to develop such safety and driver educa- - tion programs. . . .It may seem paradoxical but with more and more teacher-preparation in safety education there will be less and less need for statutory or board-of-educatien re- quirements for such instruction. . . .Pressure from outside sources may in part force schools to take this forward step, but manenttna of their own volition, must come fraa within the teacher-preparing institutions in order to meet this challenging problem.1 A 1911.9 publication related to this investigation was the American Automobile Association's Teacher-W Course in Driver Instruction.2 One-hundred thirteen mimeegraphed pages in length, this publication came to be the teacher's manual for scores of college instructors faced with the assignment of preparing hundreds of high school driver education teachers. Had this publication embraced course content and outline only it would not be properly included on these pages, for no attempt has been made herein to survey materials related to specific course content other than the course outlines submitted by 1Ihid. , pp. 213-211;. zWashington: American Automobile Association, 1914.9. (Himeographedd f—A A?" ‘m r #3 questionnaire respondents participating in this investi- gation. Because the introductory section of this publication did, however, include smns nineteen pages related to teacher education standards and administration it can be classified as related literature. Certification standards in Pennsylvania and Louisiana were included somewhat as models. A number of factors related to course length, credit, operational costs, materials and equipment, and similar concerns were also discussed. As indicated earlier,1 the First National Confer- ence on High-School Driver Education included reference to the critical importance of teacher competency. With an entire chapter of the conference reportz (both for this and succeeding national driver education conferences) devoted to teacher qualifications, preparation, and certification, it is evident that. teacher preparation and teacher preparation programs were given sane thought even in the early years of driver education. The minimal pro-service education recumendatiens set forth at this first national conference were: (1) a 1Supra, p. 13. 2National Conference on High-School Driver Edu- cation, High-School Driver Education: Policies and Recommendations, 22. cit. Mi two- or three-semester-hour credit course in general safety education, and (2) a two- or three-semester-heur credit course in driver education, including supervised teaching experience for the classroom and practice driving phases of the work.1 Further rscmamendatiens included: (1) each course should extend over a full semester or be offered during a regular sumaer session with a time allotment equal to that of a one-semester course, (2) teacher education institutions should explore the possibilities of offering a minor in safety education, and ( 3) teacher education institutions should consider offer- ing graduate courses in safety education.2 The same conference made recomendations with regard to in-ssrvice education which included the following: (1) teachers with a one week (he hour) course, or less, were to take an advanced credit course in driver education, (2) supervised teaching was to be a part of the in-service advanced course , and (3) opportunities were to be provided for annual or biennial attendance at refresher conferences, workshops, or institutes in driver education.3 134E" p. #9. 2Ibis. , pp. h9-5o. 31bit}. , p. 50. 15 In the section of the report concerned with "provision of preparatory and in-service education,” the following standards were set forth for institutions undertaking to prepare driver education teachers: (1) employment of qualified teaching personnel who have professional background in safety education, (2) provision for laboratory work that will allow experimentation and research, (3) availability of instructional (including audio-visual) materials in the field, (h) provision for supervised teaching experience (classroom and practice driving) in a local-area school, and (5) use of community resources to increase the effectiveness of the teacher preparation program.1 . At least one aspect of the doctoral dissertation prepared by A. E. Florio2 can be said to relate to the present study. The present investigation includes as one of its sub-problems a determination of the nature and extent of both the educational background and professional experience of college and university driver education instructors. In.much the same vein, Florio included in his study some comment relative to the major-subject IIbidn p. 51. 28Driver Education and Training: A Guide to Teacher Preparation," (Unpublished Efl.D. dissertation, Columbia University, Teachers College, l9h9). he preparation of high school driver education teachers. At this point the question may be raised: In what other major subject area should the teacher be competent? This question is posed because many times it is assumed that individ- uals with certain backgrounds, such as industrial education and physical education, are the only persons qualified to teach this subject. This is a false assumption. No hard and fast statement can be made regarding background or area of specialisation. Many successful teachers of driving have special- ised in social science, mathematics, indus- trial arts, general science, agriculture, and other subjects. or utmost importance are an enthusiastic interest in the work and an honest and firm conviction that something can be done for the prospective driver through the medium 2f education for creating safe highway travel. The false assumption to which Florio refers probably arose out of the mistaken interpretation of driver education as primarily (sometimes solely) a mechanistic skill exercise. As Florio has indicated the ”other” area of background or specialisation may not be of critical importance provided other criteria are met. With the growing scope of driver education and the profes- sienal demands placed upon college personnel in this field today, however, it is conceivable that more careful attention should be given to the 'othsr' area than was necessary some years age. 1Ihid., p. 168. h? In 1953 3352 939 Colleges 92 M £1}; Traffic Problem was published.1 The outcome of a may initiated in 1951 by Michigan.State College,2 this ninety-seven page document represented a ten thousand dollar research.effort supported by grants fras the Autasotive Safety Foundation and involving the assistance of a number of faculty at Michigan State College. The purpose and scope of the publication is best indicated by quoting directly from ‘Michigan.State College President John.a. Hannah's letter to the members of the Association of Land-Grant " Colleges and universities. I - Late in 1951 Michigan State College under- took a study under the auspices of our associ- ation to determine whether a land-grant college or university could be of substantial assist- ance to the people responsible for highway traffic administration.within.its state, to judge the appropriateness of an educational ins stituticn devoting some of its resources to that type of service, and to ascertain specif- ically what it could do to help. The locale of the study is the State of Michigan, and Michigan State College serves as the example in.determining what a college or university‘might do to assist those responsible for highway traffic administration. The needs 1Michigan State College, What Can Colle es Do About the Traffic Problem.(East Lansing, c gan: filohd- gan State CoIIege, I§S§). guano changed in.1955 to Michigan State Univer- sity. hB expressed by these Michigan people and the College's capacity to be of assistance are quite typical of the situation in many other states because the traffic problem of Michigan differs little fran that of other states, and the interest and capacity of universities and colleges in many other states are certainly quite similar to those of Michigan State Col- lege. Therefore in submitting this report, I suggest that you regard it not so much as a study of Michigan's problem but rather as a fairly applicable analysis of your state 's traffic problem and what your college or-uni- versity can do to help solve it. The proposal that a highway traffic administration center be established at Michigan State College applies equally to the many institutions which have a similar interest in serving the people of their states. This proposal is one to which each of us should give serious consideration to having adopted by his educational institution.1 Within this report there was spelled out in detail the blueprint for the establishment of a 'higtmay traffic administration center.“ .For each area ofconcern (e.g., teaching, research, field service, etc.) there was listed a year-by-year progression of steps that were to be initiated so that a sound and beneficial growth might be assured. The area of teaching was conceived in a broad sense and included provision for an expansion of effort along previously established lines as well as in new directions. Succiflly stated it might be said that the lMichigan State College, What Can Colleges 133 About the Traffic Problem, 92. cit., p. 3. #9 planning was all-inclusive, the document monumental. The Michigan State University Highway Traffic Safety Center was subsequently created along the guide- lines outlined in detail in this document. In the same year (1953) a second national confer- ence on driver education was held and the conference proceedings subsequently appeared in print .1 Perhaps note- worthy is the dropping of the term ”high school” from the name of the conference as it appeared initially. The name change was perhaps a reflection of the recognitiom'that both high schools and colleges and universities have important roles to play in the driver education movement. Policies related to teacher qualifications, preparation, and certification fonsulated at the second national conference on driver education followed the general theme and format established at the initial con- ference. While some reccmendations were simply a repetition of the policies set forth in ~191v), other recanmendations reflected newer concepts. Significant changes and additions included those reported below. The serious need for an upgrading of the pre- service program was emphasised by the recmendation that 1'National Conference on Driver Education (Michigan State College, 1953), Policies and; Practices for Driver Education, 92. cit. 50 each state establish.long-range requirements for the preparation.cf driver education teachers. These require- ments were to be met by all teachers within a period of five to eight years. A threeqphase long-range plan was suggested which.specified that the first phase consist of the two courses reomnended at the previous conference (vis., a general.safety course and a driver education course). Phase two suggested courses covered in phase one plus an.advanced (or second) course in driver edu- cation, and additional electives in and related to safety education, thereby enabling a total of at least ten semester hours. Phase three called for a fifteon semester-hour minor in safety education which was to be based on and include everything specified in.the first and second phases. Specific topics suggested for inelusion.in: the advanced driver education course were listed, as were courses that:night be offered as a.part of a minor in safety education.1 in.entirely'new section was titled, ”Desirable Differences in.Teacher Preparation.“ lhphasised in this section was the need for both.a general preparation for driver education, and specific-type preparation to enable 1213's 3 PP. 23‘26e 51 success in working with groups other than the typically encountered adolescent beginner (e.g., adult beginner, school bus driver) .1 ‘ is can be seen frm a review of the policies . indicated above, the Second National Conference on Driver Education presented the field with much more specific and inclusive standards than did the first national conference. In 1958, Courses in Highwg m _and M Traffic: 5 Director; _o_f_ College and University Offerings was published.2 The principal function of this publication was to provide the reader with a listing of courses in the field of highway safety and highway traffic as offered by colleges and universities in the United States (1956-1958). Details such as the frequency with which each course was made available, the hours of credit provided for each course, the major content-area of each course, and the level (i .e. , undergraduate or graduate) of each course were indicated. a breakdown of major-interest areas by state and region was included. Titles of each course were printed along with the names and addresses of each college ~ 311339,. pp. 22-23. 20.3. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and National Education Association, Courses in 111313.13; Safety 52g Highwaz Traffic: A Direct—Tog 9_ can.” Lug Universitj Offeri s, 92. gig. 52 and university offering a course. Technical infomtion about the survey was presented in one section. National organisations active in the promotion of highway safety were listed and the nature of their contributions recognised in another separate section. As implied in the title this publication is primarily a directory. It served this function well in providing the original listing of colleges and univer- sities to be contacted in the present investigation. One grouping of data collected on one questionnaire used in the present study was similar to data provided in the directory and tended, in general, to validate the accuracy of the earlier survey. At the Second Annual Conference of the American Driver Education Association at Boulder, Colorado in 1958, Claud R. McCamment discussed aCollege Driver and Safety Education. ‘1 Several colleges and universities were cited as having comendable programs and a brief overview of future needs in college and university teacher preparation programs was presented. A regional conference held in California in 1958 brought together fifty-two persons fraa a number of lflecond Annual Conferean g; the American Dr__i____ver and Safety Education Association (Washington: National Education Association, 1933). PP. 108-09. (Processed.) 53 western states. Members of state departments of education and representatives of colleges and universities were the two largest groups represented at the Conference. Included in the publication resulting fras this conference1 were: (1) the papers read on a variety of topics pertaining to teacher preparation, (2) the conference recommendations as to the course curriculum for driver and safety edu- cation teachers, and (3) skeleton outlines for five college-level driver and safety education courses. The most recent national conference on driver edu- cation was held late in 1958 at Purdue University. The printed report of conference recmendations (released in 1960) showed significant changes frm the previous confer- ence report. The three-phase plan of requirements set forth in 1953 which all teachers were to have met within five to eight years was abandoned. The revised minimum preparation for all driver education teachers was to '. . . include completion of a teaching minor or its equivalent in driver and safety education."2 Specifically, 2"Western States Conference, Proceedi s and Recommendations of the Western States Conference on eac r aratI— 011% n We 5 err Education acramento, CEIHorH a: fornia St ate Depar fie nt of Education, 1958). (Processed.) 2National Conference on Driver Education (Purdue 5h the minor was to include nine semester hours of required courses (vis., Introduction to Safety Education, three semester hours; Driver and Traffic Safety Education, six semester hours). Sixteen courses considered to be ”related elective courses” were listed as possibilities for acquiring the remaining credit.1 The total number of semester hours required for the minor was not listed. An attempt was made to structure some of the course content in the driver education courses as is evidenced by the listing of eight specific administrative aspects of driver education that all teachers were to be able to handle.2 At the Third National Conference of the American Driver and Safety Education Association, an infomal dis- cussion of course offerings and other aspects of teacher preparation programs took place during the meeting of college and university personnel working in the driver and/or safety education field.3 Nothing of substance was 1These courses are listed in Chapter VI of this .mdye 2National Conference on Driver Education (Purdue University, 1958), Policies and Practices for Driver Egg- Oation, 92o cite, pe e 3American Driver and Safety Education Association, Third Annual Conference _o_f_ the American Driver and Safety Education Agsociation, 92. cit., p. 127. 55 reported concerning these discussions however. The report of the Minimal Standards Cumittee at this conference included a emery of a master's thesis concerned with a course -content survey of driver education courses offered in selected colleges and universities.1 It was reported that the Board of Directors of the Amsr- ican Driver and Safety Education Association had sanctioned a request fraa the Minim Standards Committee to seek a graduate student interested in conducting such a research study, that such a person had been contacted, and that the major findings of his research were therefore presented as the committee report. The report contained extensive quotations from the thesis which is reviewed below. Charles E. Allard's thesis "Content of Driver Edu- cation Courses in American Colleges and Universities"2 touched upon several aspects included in the present investigation. The thesis was centered on a survey of methods, materials, and content associated withcollege driver education courses. Allard distributed a question- naire to two-hundred fifteen colleges and universities; libide’ ppe 121-121}. 2"Content of Driver Education Courses in American Colleges and Universities," (M.A. in Ed. thesis, American University, 1959). (Also reproduced in mimeographed om. 56 replies were received from 21.7% of this number. Findings of the study included mention of the lack of adequate facilities and laboratory equipment for college driver education courses, and lack of precise descriptions for the "advanced“ driver education course. The 1959 National Safety Congress meetings witnessed several presentations from men engaged in different aspects of the driver education field, but all speaking on the subject of teacher preparation in.driver education. Taking the negative side of the question.'Has Reasonable Progress Been Made in Driver Education?" Tom Seals scored both teacher preparation and teacher certifi- cation as areas badly in need of improvement.1 Seals' presentation was a pointed but convincing prod for the improvement of the total driver education field. State department of education consultant John R. Eales presented a paper on "Teacher Preparation in Safety and Driver Education" at the 1959 Congress Meetings.2 This presontation centered on.prevailing practices in.the state of California and included a summary of the IflationalSaf ss T__r__________ansactions: School and College Safetyc (C ago: fiafionzi Safety Council, I959)— 21bid., mv. 57-59. 57 proceedings and recommendations of the Western States Conference on Teacher Preparation in Safety and Driver Education;l Two additional presentations completed the 1959 Congress presentations related to teacher preparation in driver education at the college and university level. Speaking on the topic ”Preparing Driver Education Teachers to Meet Increasing Certification Standards ,' James E. Aaron explained the program at Southern Illinois University,2 while Richard Boyle did likewise for San Francisco State College.3 In both of these presentations courses required of prospective driver education teachers were listed and briefly described as to content. Elective courses were listed by title and programs of a special type were briefly explained. At the University of Wisconsin Conference in 1959 Daniel P. Webster spoke on ”Implications for Teacher Preparation in Safety Education.“ Webster was critical ISupra, p. 53. 2Nationalitaf Co ress Transactions: School and College aft—I e z, _o_c. “:11” %V, W 31bid., mv, pp. 61-62. hYO't (.de), 22o 22.-2e, PP. 31‘35e O O O 0 O a . . , . r . . . e ' e ‘ . s O a 0 g e - o e a e . - .._ | I 58 of the level of teacher canpetency in safety and driver education; he spoke in favor of teacher preparation in all. aspects of safety rather than along one particular line. At the Fourth National Conference of the American Driver Education Association1 (1960) the Minimm Standards Comnittee considered undertaking a research project that '. . . would be that of making a survey of the courses offered on a college and university level for certifi- cation, and for major or minor areas of competency."2 Other approaches to problems confronting the profession in the area of teacher preparation were also explored briefly. The present investigation was initiated shortly after this conference was held without knowledge of this potential undertaking. It is believed that the project considered by the camaittee has not yet been initiated. The National Safety Council, in 1960 reproduced reports suhnitted to the Council by a number of colleges and universities reporting some type of specialised safety lEhown as the American Driver and Safety Education Association prior to 1960. 2American Driver Education Association, Fourth Annual Conference Proceedings 9; the American Driver Edu- cation Association (Washington: National Education Association, 1931), p. 13.2. 59 institute, center, or program.1 Each institution submit- ting a report was given an opportunity to indicate the objectives, program, sponsorship, student composition, and staff composition of its safety organisation. Twenty- three separate programs existing in twenty-one colleges and universities were represented in the publication which was prepared for the second meeting on college safety centers sponsored by the Council. A few reports were not related to the present study in that they dealt exclusively with a safety area other than driver education (e.g., the fire protection curriculum at the University of Maryland). The publication was by no means inclusive in that several well known safety centers were not repre- sented (e .g., Michigan State University's Highway Traffic Safety Center). Most ofthe reports were, however, related to the present study and in a few instances permit- ted a cross-reference source for materials collected as a part of this investigation. At the 1960 National Safety Congress meetings emphasis was placed upon college and university ”safety centers." Herbert J. Stack traced college safety center developments from early to present times in his Jponiol P. Webster (ed.), Oéganization and Status Colle e Safet Centers and Institu as C cum-National Saety Counc , I965). _(Mimeograpfi'e'dd 60 presentation ”The Origin and Development of College Safety Centers."1 This presentation was followed by Marland K. Strasser' s discussion of the existing situation: "Status of College Centers for Safety Education."2 A projected look toward future development was provided by Gordon H. Sheehe's “Outlook: The Growth and Role of Centers in the Decade Ahead."3 These three presentations were all related, at least in part, to college and university teacher preparation programs in driver education, particularly as such programs reach extensive curricular development within the organisational structure of a ”center”. _All three papers included valuable guidance related to the establishment and operation of safety (or traffic safety) centers. Centers were seen as providing the optimum conditions for teaching, research, publication, and field service. Of the sixteen recomendations Key offered for the improvement of driver education, four can be said to JEational Safet Co ss Transactions: School and 92%saot (Chicago: Faggo’m Sae't'y Council, I955) vo . TI. pp. Sh-Sb. 2Ibid., xxIlI. 57-59. 3Ibid., XXIII, 59-6h. 61 relate directly to the subject of this investigation. Two recommendations were especially pertinent. Teacher education institutions and state teacher certification agencies should collabo- rate in establishing standards for college personnel who prepare driver education teachers as well as standards for the teacher prepara- tion offerings in the field. Such standards should be comparable to those for preparation of teachers in any other field. There should be a thorough study of the content of the basic, or introductory, driver education course for teachers in the field, and likewise a study of the content of advanced teacher preparation courses in driver educa- tion. Teacher education institutions should take steps more appropriately to delineate and articulate the basic and the advanced courses offers? for the preparation of teachers in this field. Late in 1960 the Safety Research and Education Project of Columbia‘University's Teachers College spon- sored a Driver and Traffic Safety Education.Sominar. A report of the proceedings and recommendations of this seminar was prepared for publication.2 Harold O. Carlton's paper ”Organization of Teacher Preparation for IKey, gp, gi3,, p. 65. 2Columbia‘University, Driver and Traffic Safety Education.Seminar, Teagher Preparation.ig Driver‘Edu- cation, 22, cit., p. 11. 62 Driver‘Education'l'was particularly pertinent to this investigation. Carlton cited numerous instances of a wide variation in content, activities, length, emphasis, credit, and titles of teacher preparation courses in driver education. These remarks were delivered as the present investigationuwas in.its early stages. Carlton's position with regard to the lack of uniformity has been: well supported by this study as an accurate appraisal of the situation. §EEE§£Z. In a quest to locate published:materials related to this investigation.soores of reports, theses, period- icals, and other sources published between 1933 and 1960 were screened. Pros this group the review of reports or research efforts presented on the previous pages formed the core of the related literature. Most of the related literature was found to have'been.published.within. recent years. Reports and presentations originating in regional or national conferences produced many pieces of related literature. Several recently published reports called for study and investigation.akin.to the purposes of the present investigation. 1Ibid., pp. 7-11. CHAPTER III HETHODOIDGY AND PROCEDURE The Questionnaire Approach The questionnaire is a major instrument for data-gathering in descriptive ~survey studies, and is used to secure information frm varied and widely scattered sources. . . . The ques- tionnaire is particularly useful when one can- not readily see personally all of the people fran whoa he desires responses or where there is no particular reason to see the respondent personally. This technique may be used to gather data from any range of territory, some- times international or national.1 As indicated above by educational research author- ities Good and Scates, the questionnaire serves well the data-gathering function for descriptive ~survey studies, particularly those where the range of territory is large (e.g., national). Principally for these reasons it was decided to utilise the questionnaire approach in seeking information both frm state departments of education and frcn colleges and universities. It was further decided to see]: data on a complete national basis rather than a J'Carter V. Good and Douglas E. Scates, Methods of Research (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts Inc. I§9+T pp. 666-6070 , , ’ 63 6h sampling of the country because of the alleged qualitative and quantitative differences between programs from state to state and region to region. Only by surveying programs throughout the entire country could a valid and nationally- representative picture he realised. In an attempt to secure both a high percentage of questionnaire returns and accurate responses to questions pertinent to the investigation, several authoritative publications were consulted for guidance in the preparation and use of the questionnaires. Good and Scates' Methods _o_f Research1 and Mildred Parten's Surveys, mg and 2 were used most extensively Smles: Practical Procedures in this connection. The relatively high percentage of returns for each of the three different questionnaires utilized, and the relative lack of conflicting or unusa- ble responses to the questions posed, seem to indicate both the soundness of Good, Scates and Parten's recas- mendations and the degree to which these recosmendations were considered by the investigator. The particulars connected with the preparation and utilization of each of the three different questionnaires 11.9.1.9.- 2New York: Harper and Brothers, .1950. 65 used to collect the data for this investigation are out- lined en the remaining pages of this chapter. The specific questions included on each of the three question- naires are not reproduced in this chapter, but may be seen in Appendices A, C, and H. The extent and nature of the responses to each of the questionnaire items is reported in Chapters IV, V, and VI. State Deparhnent _o_f Education Questionnaire Initially a six page questionnaire was prepared by the investigator for the purpose of securing information relative to driver education fras state department of edu- cation personnel in each of the fifty states and frau the office of the superintendent in the District of Colmabia. Factual information was sought in four principal areas: (1) certification requirements for teaching high school driver education in effect for the September, 1960-June, 1961 school year, (2) revisions of certification require- ments for teaching high school driver education approved by the appropriate state agency and scheduled to take effect during a future year, ( 3) education and training requirements set by the state for college and university personnel conducting teacher preparation programs in driver education, and (k) identification of colleges and 66 universities within the state known to offer (for credit) a teacher preparation course in driver education and identification, by name, of instructors of such courses. In addition to responses indicated on the questionnaire itself, respondents were requested to furnish teacher's guidebooks,1 brochures, pamphlets, or other materials- prepared for use in the driver education program of the state. Part IV of the questionnaire -- the part seeking the names of colleges and universities offering a driver education course and the names of the instructors of these courses -- required special attention prior to mailing. Courses in Highway M1 9.9. 11M Traffic: A Directggy 9; College _and University Offerings2 was consulted and the names of colleges and universities reported therein as offering courses in traffic safety and driver education were recorded. This list of colleges and universities was then screened to eliminate any college or university offering less than four years of study or not accredited lTeacher's guidebooks that were furnished are listed in bibliography form in Appendix B. 20.3. Department of Health Education and Welfare and National Education Association, Courses in Highwga 811361: and Hi hwa Traffic: A Direct—“Tog g_ C'o'Ilege an fiflversit; er s, 92. cit'. 67 by one of the six regional accrediting agencies in the United States.1 Because the American Colleges and Universities listing was complete only to January 1, 1960, each college and university reported as offering traffic safety and driver education courses in Courses in 1:15ng m 23.4 Highwgy Traffic, but not listed as accredited in the American Colleges and. Universities listing was cross-checked through correspondence with the appropriate regional accrediting agency so as to discover whether the institution in question had gained accredita- tion subsequent to January 1, 1960. One such institution, it was learned, had so gained accreditation. At this point in the procedure the names of the qualifying colleges and universities were placed on a list by states.2 Then, these names were typewritten onto the questionnaire to be mailed to the department of education in the state in which the colleges and universities were located. As indicated in the instructions accaspanying each questionnaire, respondents were to verify whether or not the named institutions were currently offering an J"Maury Irwin (ed.), American Colle es 2d Universi- ties (Washington: American Council on uca ion, . 2As used herein, the fifty states and the District of Columbia. 68 introductory teacher preparation course in driver edu- cation, and to add to the list the names of any other institutions within the state possibly offering such a course. Questionnaire mailings were addressed to the state officialnamed in the Education Directoql as responsible for the administration and/or the supervision of high school driver education within the state. In instances where no one was identified as responsible for the admin- istration and/or supervision of driver education programs , questionnaires were addressed to the ”Supervisor of Driver Education.” The initial mailing included a copy of the ques- tionnaire and a cover letter.2 Reminder post cards were used as the initial follow-up technique. A second copy of the questionnaire and cover letter, along with a personal letter of appeal calling for co-cperation in the study, was utilized as the second follow-up procedure: this correspondence was sent by certified mail. 1U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Education Directory, 2352-126 : Federal Government a_nd_;_ States lPart I: Washington: U.S. Goverment Printing 2Appendix A. 69 As the completed questionnaires from each.of the fifty states and the District of Columbia were returned to the investigator, Part IV of the questionnaire was immediately utilised in the preparation of mailing lists for the subsequent questionnaire concerned with the introductory teacher preparation course in driver edu- cation. "Details connected with.this procedure are explained on subsequent pages of this chapter. The other three parts of the questionnaire, as well as the teacher's guidebooke, brochures, pamphlets and similar materials furnished by state department of education officials, were set aside for later study and analysis. The results of the analysis are found in.Chapter V. Colleges and‘Universitieg_Basic ‘Driver Education Course Questionnaire A nine page questionnaire was prepared by the investigator for the purpose of securing information relative to the introductory (basic) teacher preparation course in.driver education as offered in colleges and universities of the United States. The first three parts of the questionnaire sought factual information. These parts were: (1) general information related to the class- room phase of the course, (2) information related to the laboratory phase of the course, and (3) infonmation related 70 to faculty engaged in teaching the course. The fourth part of the questionnaire sought both factual infomation and an expression of opinion. Opin- ions were sought relative to the status of certain aspects of the course and the instructor' s concept of the role a high school driver education teacher should play. Factual information was sought in terms of the ma; teacher- preparation curricular program in driver education offered by the institution: information supplied in answer to this request enabled selection of the colleges and univer- sities to be sent the third questionnaire employed in this investigation. In addition to return of the questionnaire itself, respondents were requested to forward to the investigator a copy of the course outline used in the introductory driver education course. After preparing the questionnaire in pilot form, copies were forwarded to seven college and university driver education instructors1 for their critical review. After receiving suggestions concerning the questionnaire from these seven instructors and after consultation with 1Inn 1.. Eland of Iowa State Teachers College; Ernest I. Schrot of Lock Haven (Pa.) State College; Douglas Tome of Los Angeles State College: James E. Aaron of Southern Illinois University: Richard H. Bishop of Michigan State University; A. E. Florio and Warren J. Huffman of the University of Illinois. 71 the thesis advisor, the questionnaire was revised in accordance with recomncnded changes. The questionnaire was then prepared in final form and reproduced in quantity. The mailing list for this questionnaire was formed from a portion of the data supplied on the fourth part of the canpleted questionnaire returned to the investigator by state department of education officials. As previously explained, the questionnaires sent to state department of education officials included names of ' accredited colleges and universities within the state reported in 1958 as offering courses in traffic safety and driver education.1 State department of education officials thereupon verified the names of colleges and universities appearing on their questionnaire that were known to be offering a driver education course, and added names of other colleges and universities located within the state and believed to also be offering such a course. Colleges and universities added to the listing by state department of education officials were checloed to detemine their fitness for inclusion in the study in the manner 10.8. Department of Health, Education, and Wel- fare Courses in Hi hwa Safet and Hi hwa Traffic: A Directory 92 Collegg aha fiaversfii fifgeri s, 22. cit. 72 previously described.1 As requested on the questionnaire circulated to state department of education officials, names of instructors and/or administrators of the driver education course or program were supplied in many instances. Sane state department of education officials, however, did not supply these names. In an effort to send each College and University Basic Driver Education Course Questionnaire to the person believed best qualified to respond to it (via., the instructor of the course), and in an effort to personalize each request by using the correct spelling of name, proper title, etc., a college and university catalog search was undertaken. College and university catalog collections housed in the libraries of Illinois State Normal University, Normal, Illinois and Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan were utilised. The catalog search was designed to both verify the . accuracy of name, title, and departmental affiliation of persons named by state department of education officials, and in the absence of such names, to discover the names, titles, and departmental affiliation of persons listed in 1Su ra, pp. 66-67. 73 the catalog as instructors of the driver education course. In instances where it was not possible to determine the course instructor's me from the catalog, but was possible to discover the department or administrative area under which the course was offered, the name of the department head or similar administrative officer was copied for use. Although it was not possible to secure catalogs for every college and university listed, and although in a few instances the catalogs on file were too old to be useful, it was possible to address 90% of. the questionnaire mailings specifically to either the course instructor or the administrator of the area in which the course was offered. Eighty-four per cent were addressed specifically to instructors. The less than 10% of the mailings for which there were no specific names available were addressed to the ”Director of the Driver Education Pro- gram.” It is believed that these efforts were well rewarded in terms of the mailings reaching the proper person and carrying a more personal appeal for co- operation than a questionnaire request directed simply and somewhat impersonally to the ”Driver Education Instructor." 7h The initial mailing included a copy of the ques- tionnaire and a cover letter.1 This mailing was made to two hundred ninety-three colleges and universities. This number represented two hundred forty-six institutions. listed in am in mm Safety org 1113th mourn.2 plus fifty-two additional institutions reported by state department of education officials, less five colleges failing to meet the standards for inclusion in the study. Two follow-up attempts were made in an effort to secure a high percentage of returns. The follow-up mailings were identical to the initial mailings except that a personal letter of appeal calling for co-operation in providing needed infomtion was also included in the second mailing. 7 0f the twa hundred and ninety-three questionnaires sent, two hundred and sixty were returned, a return of 89%. As questionnaires were received, information provided relative to the college or university's 3313;; program of teacher preparation in driver education, and A 1“Appendix C . 2.(_[.._8_. De artment ofHealth, Education, and Mel-- fare, Courses In Egfiway Safety and HIE—Traffic: _A_ Director; 2; 03321.5. and, University Offerings. 92. cit. 75 information provided relative to certain aspects of the laboratory phase of the introductory course was analyzed. This analysis was performed primarily for the purpose of determining the mailing list for the third and final questionnaire employed in conducting this study. Details connected with this procedure are explained on subsequent pages of this chapter. The other portions of the completed questionnaires, as well as the sixty-two course outlines submitted by respondents, were set aside for later study and analysis. The results of the analysis are found in Chapter V. Colleges and Universities Driver Education Teacher Preparation Program Questionnaire A twelve page questionnaire designed for the purpose of gathering information relative to the mug: teacher preparation program in driver education existing in colleges and universities was prepared by the investi- gator. The questionnaire ,1 as designed, included five distinct parts, the first four of which sought factual data. The fifth section sought an expression of opinion or Judgnent from the questionnaire respondent. The five lippendix H. 76 parts of the questionnaire, as they appeared in order, were: (1) program organization and administration, (2) teaching staff, (3) teaching and curriculum, (’4) allied services (e.g., research, field service, etc.) and (5) future develOpment. As with the previous questionnaires, printed materials were solicited. After preparing the questionnaire in pilot fem, copies were sent to two college and university driver education instructorsl for their critical review. After studying suggestions submitted by these reviewers, and after consultation with the thesis advisor, the question- naire was prepared in final form and reproduced in quantity. The mailing list for this questionnaire was detemined through a review of the data supplied by those responding to a portion of the earlier questionnaire- dealing primarily with the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education. The objective of such a review was to select from among the two hundred and ten colleges and universities identified in this study as offering an introductory teacher preparation course in driver educaticn, those institutions offering driver and safety education 1Robert O. Nolan of Michigan State University and Warren P. Quensel of Northern Illinois University. 77 courses in sufficient measure to enable prospective or in-service teachers to gain a substantial educational background in driver and traffic safety education. It had been the original intention of the investi- gator to use as the criteria for selection, the recommended minimum standards for preparation of pre- service high school driver education teachers agreed upon at the most recent national conference on driver edu- cation.1 This recomnendation was basically that of completion of a teaching minor, or its equivalent, in driver and safety education. Review of course listings supplied by college and university driver education teachers returning their questionnaires, however, quickly estab- lished the existence of three conditions that made this plan impractical. These conditions were: (1) the number of colleges and universities able to claim that their institution offered a minor teaching field in driver and safety education (or its equivalent) was limited, (2) colleges and universities offering a total of six semester hours credit in driver and traffic safety education2 were 1”National Conference on Driver Education (Purdue University, 1958), Policies and Practices for Driver Edu- cation, 93. cit., pp. 25-22. 21bid., p. 20. 78 almost nonexistent, with even five semester hours not offered by many institutions, and (3) some colleges and universities claiming a minor teaching field in safety and driver education listed the introductory driver edu- cation course but little beyond that course that appeared even remotely related to driver (or safety) education, while other colleges and universities not officially offering such a minor teaching field nevertheless listed a series of courses which appeared to satisfy recommended 1 for inclusion in such a teaching minor. requirements Because of these conditions it appeared likely that utilization of the criteria set forth at the Purdue Confer- ence might result in the selection of institutions which would not be representative of the colleges and univer- sities offering the more substantial course offerings related to the preparation of high school driver education teachers. In lieu of the original plan it was decided to utilize a modified version of recanmended teacher IIbid e ’ pp 0 20-22 e 79 preparation requirements set forth at the first1 and second2 national conferences on driver education. The criteria which were used are as follows: (1) the insti- tution offers an introductory course in safety education, "(2) the institution offers an introductory credit course in driver education during the regular school year (September-June), in residence (not extension or correspondence), (3) the institution offers a second course in driver education 31; other related courses ,3 and (1;) the laboratory phase of the course (or in the case of several institutions that offer the laboratory phase as a distinct and separate course, the laboratory course itself) includes opportunities for the prospective teachers to provide actual- practice driving instruction to beginning drivers in an automobile. Through the appli- cation of this criterion: thirty-four colleges and universities were identified and placed on the mailing list INational Conference on High-School Driver Edu- cation, Hi h-School Driver Education: Policies and Recenmendi'éions, 92. cit., p. 19. 2National Conference on Driver Education (Michigan State College, 1953), Policies and Practices for Driver Education, 22. cit., p. . 3National Conference on Driver Education (Purdue University, 1958), Policies and Practices for Driver Education, 92. cit., pp. 55-217 80 for the questionnaire relating to the total driver edu- cation teacher preparation program. One institution not qualifying on the fourth criteria was granted admission to the list for reasons fully explained in Chapter VI. This brought the total mmber of institutions to be con- tacted to thirty-five. The initial mailing of this questionnaire followed the same pattern as that of the previous questionnaire with regard to the inclusion of a cover letter. Follow- up procedures were likewise identical. Thirty-three questionnaires were returned. Hence, a 91% return was realized on this questionnaire mailing. Questionnaires returned were subsequently analyzed with the analysis reported in Chapter VI. CHAPTERIV sum unanimous AND PRACTICES RELATING TO DRIVER EDUCATION Personnel serving with state education departments in the capacity of supervisor or administrator of driver education provided the data reported in this chapter. All fifty states and the District of Columbia provided infor- mation for the investigation, and in the interest of brevity all fifty-one units are referred to herein as "states.” Where percentages have been cited such figures have been rounded to the nearest whole number. A comparison of the existing situation, as revealed through questionnaire responses, with the recommendations of the Third National Conference on Driver Education:l was made wherever such comparisons were possi- b1. e 1National Conference on Driver Education (Purdue University, 1958), Policies and Practices for Driver Edu- cation, 92. cit.- 81 82 Credit Course Requirements Leg Certification £2,Teach Driver Education Q Addition to Basic Requirements £33 gll_secondarz,Teachers - The State Department of Education Questionnaire sought information regarding the number of semester hours of college credit required of teachers in the areas of: (1) driver education, (2) safety education, and, (3) related fields. These requirements were those specified in addition to the basic education requirements for all secondary teachers. In addition to providing space to indicate the required number of semester-hours credit required, space was also provided for comments relative to this phase of the inquiry. These comments, as well as the descriptive materials provided by respondents representing thirty-four states, enabled clarification and confirmation of the numerical data provided on the questionnaire. Required semester hour; credit _i_n_ m education Nine states reported that no college credit was required in driver education courses as a condition for certification to teach high-school driver education, al- though in three of these states it was indicated that a non-credit ”short course" (typically of forty clock hours 83 duration) was required. Four states indicated that a credit course was required, but that the exact number of semester hours for such a course was not specified in the regulation. In three states the requirement was five semester hours, with a fourth state requiring between four and six semester hours. The remaining thirty-four states (67%) required something more than one, but less than four semester-hours credit; a two- or three-semester-hour stipulation was the most common. Twanty-one states specified a two-semester- hour requirement, with nearly half that number specifying a three-semester-hour course. . The minimum preparation in ”driver and traffic safety education” set by the Third Eational Conference on Driver Education'totaled six semester hours credit. Thus, only one state in the nation is apparently requiring the reoamended minimum in this phase of the teacher prepa- ration program. Even this state does not fully meet the recanmended mininmm in that completion of between four and six semester hours is allowed. The nine states reporting the absence of any college-credit requirement in driver education courses not only fail to meet the recent professional recommendations for certification, but also the recomsendations outlined 8h nearly a decade ago at the nichigan State Conference.1 A number of interesting and informative ccsuments2 were provided by respondents which were pertinent to these requirements in driver education. An official fran a state requiring no credit courses in driver education indicated that ". . . the state uses a 'General Secondary Credential' . . ~ . which entitles the holder to teach any- thing in an emergency, therefore, we cannot claim to require a teacher of English to have any college credit in English either." in official fran a state with a two-semester-hour requirement in driver education expressed apologies for an inability to reach a higher semester-hour requirement in the state. Another official from a state with a two- semester-hour requirement provided this comment: ”We feel the certification requirements are too meager. It is suggested that the candidate acquire a minor . . i . but our institutions of higher learning lack the adequate courses to make this practical." From still another state with .' J'National Conference on Driver Education (Michigan State College, 1953). Policies and Practices for Driver Education, 92. cit., p. . 2Although some of these cannents are quoted herein, the sources of such consents are not identified because some cements were provided with the understanding that they not be used other than anonymously. 85 two-semester-hour requirement in driver education it was revealed that before a teacher can renew certification to continue to teach driver education, two additional semester-hours credit must be completed in the nature of an "advanced" course in driver education. One state with a three-semester-hour requirement in driver education reported an alternate plan for certi- fication known as the ”State Equivalent Course." This alternate plan requires an applicant to submit to an examination covering four publicationsl dealing with traffic safety. Following successful completion of this examination the applicant is examined by a state police- man in a driving skill test. Those qualifying under this equivalency course are issued a special teaching license which may be used for a period of time not to exceed five years. The distribution of the state requirements per- taining to credit courses in driver education is indicated in Table 1. lThe publications were not specified. 86 TABLE l.--Semester-hours credit required for certification of high school driver education teachers as reported by state education departments (1960) 3 t t Driver Safety Related Minimum a ° ‘Education. Education Courses Total Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware ’Dist. of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine ‘Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Revada Foo H NON ONF’NOOOONOWONOONOO UIHOL:@N~OU S 0 w OOOOQF’NOOOONNUOQOOOOO mum-F’wmmmommwmmmmuowmflwwmommoo h'kfl c>nair\» Utc>¢r o~ OWOUOOOOOON O 87 TABLE l--Continued State Driver Safety iEducation Education Courses 1 — Related Minimum Total Mew Hampshire New'Jersey New Mexico New York North.Carolina North‘Dakota Ohio Oklahoma OregonY Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South.Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin ‘Hyomingz WNNONWOU‘leNNNHU 'I' H b NNNOWN ONOOOOHWNOOOU’ONOOOONOO OF’OOOOOOOOOOO‘OOOOOOOOO FHw H OU'IUONN [.1 NONOUNer'F’NONN S XL Credit course required, but actual number of semester hours not specified. IPer teachers participating in the reimbursable program requirements are 3+3+3 for a total of 9. Z Applies onl to teachers participati in rac- tice driving instruc ion. ng p 88 Required semester hours credit in safety education Thirty-four states (67%) indicated 93 requirement that safety education credit courses be completed as a condition for certification to teach driver education in the secondary schools. Of the remaining seventeen states, eight specified a two-semester-hour-credit course, four specified a three-semester-hour-credit course, and five specified a variety of credit-hour requirements. Details of the distribution of these requirements are shown in Table I. A comparison of the existing requirements with the professional recanmendations set at the Third National Conference on Driver Education reveals that most states have yet to move in the direction of specifying the recomended minimum requirements in this phase of the teacher preparation program. The professional recommen- dation indicated at the Purdue Conference consisted of the completion of a three-semester-hour introductory course in safety education. Only six states, 12% of the total, required a minimum of three semester hours or more. These states not yet meeting the professional recomnendations for this phase of the program set at the 89 Michigan State Conference:L in 1953 number thirty-four, or 67% of the total. Required semester hours credit _in_ specifically related courses Only thirteen states reported a requirement naming completion of credit courses specifically related to driver and safety education as a condition for certifi- cation to teach high school driver education. Thus, thirty-eight states (714%) do not require credit courses in specifically related areas. States reporting a requirement represented a range extending from that of a "course“ in one state (the exact number of semester hours for which there was no regulation), to that of a ten-to-sixtecn semester-hour requirement in another state. The state with the variable ten-to-sixteen semester-hour requirement reported the ten-semester-hour requirement for teachers engaged ”part time" in teaching driver education, the sixteen-semester-hour requirement for those teaching driver education on a full-time basis. The complete dis- tribution is presented in Table l. The Third National Conference on Driver Education did not specify the number of semester-hours credit that lThe Michigan State Conference specified canpletion of a two- or three-semester hour course. 90 should be completed in ”related elective courses.” Using a fifteen semester-hour minor as a base ,1 however, a minimum of six semester hours may be assumed for this phase of the teacher preparation program. Thus, five states in the nation, or 10% of the total presently meet the minimiun professional recomendations in this phase. Thirty-eight states, 75% of the total, list no credit requirement whatsoever. Courses recognised as I'related" are restricted to a single, designated course in five of the thirteen states requiring related course credits, with four of these states designating a first-aid course. One state accepted a specified combination of courses from fifteen general course areas while another state accepted any embination of course credits from among eleven courses named. Courses most frequently mentioned as a related course included the following: first-aid, advanced driver edu- cation, traffic safety education, audio-visual, auto mechanics, and various types of psychology courses (e.g., educational psychology, adolescent psychology, psychology of accident prevention). Less frequently mentioned were a 1The Second National Conference held in 1953 specified a fifteen semester-hour minor. 91 number of other courses including: traffic engineering, traffic law enforcement, industrial safety, and courses relating to the teaching, organization, and administration of safety education. Total semester hours credit reqfired The minimum total of semester-hours credit in driver education, safety education, and specifically related courses was typically found to be two- or three- semester hours. Twelve states reported the two-hour requirement while eight states indicated the three-hour stipulation.1 The two- or three-semester-hour requirement was, therefore, found in 39% of the states. The range extended from a low of no required semester-hours in nine states to a high of eighteen required semester-hours in one state. Table 1 reveals the total minimum semester hours required in each of the states. Assiming that the minor teaching field recommended as minimum preparation for high-school driver education teachers consists of at least fifteen semester hours credit, only two states in the nation can be said to 1"The two states listing requirements that include fractional parts of an hour (e.g., two and two-thirds) have been counted according to the nearest whole number. 92 presently demand compliance with the recommendation. More than 60% of the states, thirty-one to be exact, specify three semester hours credit or less. State Requiroments Relating £2 Content gprollege and‘University Driver Education Courses Overall 2223;: content As previously reported in this chapter, forty-two states reported the existence of a requirement stating that credit he earned in a college or university course in driver education as a prerequisite to the granting of certification to teach.driver education in the secondary schools. In eleven of these forty-two states the overall instructional content of the college or university driver education course is regulated by law or administrative ruling. One state did not provide infommation.on this topic. Thus, thirty of the states (71%) requiring come pletion of a credit course, do not specify the instruc- tional content of such a course. Practice drivigg phase Of the forty-two states requiring completion of a college or university credit course in driver education as a necessary condition for certification, twenty-three states (55%) specify by law or administrative regulation 93 that some form of instruction in behind-the-wheel practice driving be included as a part of the course. Eighteen states were devoid of such a regulation and one state did not provide data on the topic. In the space provided on the questionnaire for comments, respondents from several states indicated that while their state had no legal requirement concerning the inclusion of instruction in behind-the-wheel practice driving, nevertheless all college and university courses taught within the state actually included this phase of instruction. Pro-certification and Tomporggz Certification Status Pre-certification States reporting some measure of college or univer- sity course credit in driver education as a condition for certification to teach high school driver education were asked to indicate the nature of provisions made concerning those persons teaching driver education prior to enactment of the certification requirement and unable to immediately qualify under the new requirement. In the forty-two states faced with this situation, twenty-six states solved the problem by exempting such teachers from the new require- ments. This practice is commonly known as including a 91+ "grandfather clause" in the legislation. In eighteen of these twenty-six states the exemption was unconditional. The other eight states exempting such teachers did so according to the following conditions: (1) provided that the teacher remains in a teaching position within the same school district (two states), (2) provided that the teacher apply for renewal of certification on an annual basis, (3) Provided that the teacher was teaching in the practice driving phase for at least one of the tw0 years immediately preceding the effective date of the regu- lation, (1i) provided that at least a two- or three- semester-hour driver education course had been cmpleted (this in a state that enacted legislation requiring completion of credit courses in safety education and related courses), (5 ) provided that the teacher had completed an American Autmobile Association sponsored ”short course ," (6) provided that the teacher held a special license ,1 and (7) provided that the teacher held a permanent (as opposed to provisional) certificate. In the fourteen states requiring canpliance with the enacted certification laws, an unconditional compliance was indicated in ten instances. In most of these states 13u ra, p. 85. 95 it was reported that teachers had been advised well in advance of the effective date of the regulation and of their need to comply with the new legislation if they wished to continue to teach.driver education. Four states required compliance with the legislation, but allowed a grace period that ranged between.one and three years beyond the effective date of the certification require- ment. Respondents in two states failed to indicate whether an exemption was allowed or not with one respond- ent ignoring the question completely and the other claiming that no driver education teachers were employed within the state at the time the certification requirements went into effect that were unable to immediately casply with the new requirements. Temporgz certification State department of education officials were asked to report the provisions for temporal: certification to teach driver education in the secondary schools of their state. Since nine states indicated the lack of a credit course requirement for regular certification these nine states were not queried on temporary certification. The remaining forty-two states responded as follows: (I) twenty-five states reported no provision for temporary 96 certification, and (2) seventeen states reported a variety of conditions under which temporary certification could be granted. Of the conditions listed by the seventeen states granting temporary certification it was somewhat commonly noted (nine states) that such certification could extend for no longer than one year. A minimum of an introductory college or university teacher preparation credit course in driver education (or an equivalent forty-clock-hour course) must have been completed before the temporary certification can be allowed in nine states. Five states listed both of the foregoing conditions. Six states reported the necessity for “emergency conditions" before temporary certification could be permitted. he states did not provide comment as to the circumstances under which they grant temporary certification. State Financial Support for Driver Education Participating states Eighteen states reported existence of a plan for reimbursing local school districts conducting a high-school driver education program meeting state requirements. These states are: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, 97 New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, west Virginia, and Wisconsin. Two of these states, however, are not recognized in this study as providing special state financial support to local schools for conducting an approved driver edu- cation program. Indiana is not included because the financial support is provided, as for other courses, on a "tuition support formula" and funds are reportedly appropriated only for promotion (as opposed to operation) of a driver education program. West Virginia is not in- cluded because legislation providing for financial support was passed in 1957 and the state has yet to allocate the appropriated funds to schools. In a practical sense then, only sixteen states are actually providing special financial support for driver education. The Third National Conference on Driver Education recommended that the state provide funds for driver edu- cation through special appropriation in instances where local funds are not adequate to provide the minimum complete driver education course for all eligible students.)- 1'National Conference on Driver Education (Purdue University, 1958), Policies and Practices for Driver Edu- cation, _op. cit., p. . 98 Reimbursement paid per student Respondents in thirteen of the sixteen partici- pating states indicated the amount of reimbursement paid per student completing an approved course during the 1959-1960 school year. Payments made for Operation of both the classroom and practice driving phases of the course ranged fran a low of eight dollars per student in one state to a high of forty dollars per student in another state. One state reimburses for the practice driving phase only and this state reported a financial support figure of thirty-five dollars per student. When averaged, the reimbursement paid in the thirteen reporting states was found to be $22.21 per student. Table 2 shows the reimbursement paid (per student completing an approved course) by the respective states. Schools participatng _i_n state progpams A school's participation in a state program of reimbursement for driver education should not necessarily be construed to mean that such participation results in making a driver education course available to all those students enrolled in the school who wish such instruction. However, the number and percentage of schools participating in a reimburse able program provides a rough index of the 99 TABLE 2.--Reimbursement paid by states per student com» pleting an approved driver education course (1959-1960) State Amount California‘ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $35 Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Delawareb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RA Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Illinois° . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ho Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NA Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2h New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Oregon .................20 Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.50 RhodeIslandd.................NA Utah, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29.20 ‘Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 HANot answered. ‘Reimbursement for practice driving phase only. 1”Program administered and operated entirely by the state department of education. '°Reimbursoment paid separately for classroom: phase (up to $8) and, practice driving phase (up to 3 d’Entered into the program in 1960 with first reimbursement to be paid in the 1960-1961 school year. lOO extent to which driver education.is made available to students in the public secondary schools of a given state. Of the sixteen states providing financial support to local schools for the operation of driver education programs, .fourteen indicated the approximate percentage of public secondary schools within the state receiving this support during the 1959-1960 school year. In.these fourteen states, public schools offering a complete driver education course meeting minimum standards averaged 713% of the potential. By contrast, public schools offering a.complete driver education course meeting minimum standards in states 993 providing financial reimbursement averaged 14.1% of the potential during the same year.1 These figures appear to reveal the unpetus reimbursement gives to the growth of highpschool driver education programs. Teacher's gpides As reported earlier, twenty-one states provided the investigator with a copy of a teacher's guide developed for use in the state.2 On the assumptionthat state lInsurance Institute for Highway Safety, Four- teenth.innual National Hi h School Driver Education Iward Progam, .920 01t., pp. - 7e glisted in bibliography form in Appendix B. 101. officials would be willing to furnish a cepy of a teacher's guide (either gratis or upon payment of the specified fee )-, it might be assmned that hl% of the states have a teacher's guide for driver education avail- able for distribution. Sixty-two per cent of the states that reimburse. local schools for operation of an approved driver education program have teacher's guides available; 31% of the non-reimbursement states have teacher's guides available. - Additional Regulations Affecting the Driver Education Program 2.3:; Secondary Schools Driver education as _a_ imquirement for licensing Five states reported that laws in their respective states made it mandatory for persons of certain ages seeking to be licensed to operate a motor vehicle to show evidence of satisfactory completion of, an approved course in driver education. Typically such courses are offered through the secondary schools of the state, or as in at least one instance, offered elsewhere than in the schools but meeting standards established by the state department of education. These five states and the basic provision of law in each are as follows: (1) Connecticut: persons sixteen and seventeen years of age must complete an 102 approved course, (2) Maine: persons under age seventeen must complete an approved course, (3) Michigan: persons sixteen and seventeen years of age must complete an approved course, (h) New Hexico: persons under age six- teen.must complete an approved course, and (5) Rhode Island: persons under age twenty-five must complete an approved classroom course of thirty hours duration. In Connecticut, Maine, Michigan, and New Mexico an approved course consists of both the classroom phase and the practice driving phase. In these states the law stipulates completion of the course requirement as a.p£gf requisite for licensing -- an applicant is not typically excused from any portion of the required driver's license examinations. Further, in all five states the law is written so as to permit licensing without having completed such a course after the appropriate birthday is reached (e.g., at age eighteen). Finally, in all five states the law can affect only those not licensed previous to the effective date of the law. It was recommended at the Third National Confer- ence on.Driver Education ”that the minimum.lega1 age for obtaining a driver's license be eighteen years, with the exception.that students who have successfully completed a driver education.course approved by the state department 103 of education be eligible to apply for a license at six- teen."1 Actually, legislation in only three of the five states named above (viz., Connecticut, Maine, and Michi- gan) has the effect of requiring completion of a complete high-school driver education course as a prerequisite to the granting of a driver's license at age sixteen or seventeen. 4 Driver education 33 _a_ requirement for graduation Three states reported existence of a state law or administrative regulation requiring all public high school students to complete a classroom course in driver edu- cation and/or traffic safety prior to graduation. California reported a thirty-clock-hour course requirement while Illinois reported a twenty-four clock-hour require- ment. North Dakota was the third state reporting the existence of a law making a course in driver education mandatory for graduation. “A minimum of four weeks, or the equivalent of twenty class periods of instruction" was specified as the minimum requirement in North Dakota ac- cording to data provided on the questionnaire. Respondents 1National Conference on Driver Education (Purdue University, 1958), Policies and Practices for Driver Edu- cation, _93’ Cite, ppe 26-270 10h in six additional states included comments to the effect that although no such requirement existed throughout the state, a number of schools within the state had estab- lished such a requirement on a local level. The Third National Conference recommended against state legislation rquirigg schools to provide driver education. As can be seen from the information provided above, 911% of the states do not require that driver edu- cation be taught. Approved Chgges Ln Certification Regulations Scheduled 33 Become Effective Duripg _a_ Future Year Inquiry made concerning official state action resulting in future changes in certification requirements pertaining to driver education teachers revealed that at the time the questionnaire was circulated four states had certification changes approved. Another four states reported approval of certification changes pending. The states with changes approved, the nature of those changes, and the scheduled date for inmlementation are indicated below: ( 1) Illinois: The present five semester hour requirement in driver education will reportedly change to that of the present requirement plus three semester hours in safety education and eight semester hours in related 105 courses, for a minimum total of sixteen semester hours. Effective date for the new regulation was reported to be September 1, 1962. (2) £133.33: No change from the present two semester hour requirement in driver education was re- vealed. Hewever, persons certified to teach driver edu- cation who are not actually engaged in such teaching are to be required to complete a twe-semester-hour "refresher" course (driver education) if five years have elapsed from) the time of initial certification. The effective date of this regulation was not reported. (3) M: The present requirement of one and one-third semester hours in driver education plus one and one-third semester hours in safety education is scheduled to change to eight semester hours in driver and safety education plus four semester hours in related courses, for a minimum total of twelve semester hours. The regu- lation's effective date was listed as September 1, 1963. (’1) Wisconsin: The present requirement of a college or university credit course in driver education of an unspecified number of hours will not change, but is to become mandatory both for teachers engaged in the practice driving phase (as is new the requirement), and 106 those engaged in the classroom.phasc. The effective date is set for July 1, 1962. CHAPTER V THE COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY INTRODUCTORY TEACHER PREPARATION COURSE IN DRIVER EDUCATION Introduction The analysis of data presented in this chapter centers about factors pertaining to the introductory teacher preparation course in.driver education as found in the nation's colleges and universities. Most of the data included herein was provided by course instructors completing the Colleges and Universities Basic Driver Edu- cation Course Questionnaire.1 Additionally, some data ‘was extracted from the State Departments of Education Questionnaire,2 and from course outlines submitted by instructor-respondents. An overview of the national distribution of col- leges and universities found to be offering an introductory teacher preparation course in driver education on a credit 13cc Appendix C. 2See Appendix A. 107 108 basis, and a review of factors associated with these cel- leges and universities forms the first major portion of the chapter. This presentation is followed by a report of the data revealed in the fourwmajor areas of investi- gation pursued through the questionnaire sent to college and university instructors. The areas considered were: (1) the administrative and classroom aspects of the course, (2) the laboratory aspect of the course, (3) faculty teaching the course, and (h) Judgments and evalu- ations of instructors relative to the course. Two-hundred and ten colleges and universities are represented in this phase of the study by reason of having returned usable questionnaires. Not all question- naires that were returned, however, included responses to 353p of the forty-three principal items of inquiry listed by the investigator. Further, depending upon the nature of the course being offered, not every item.of inquiry ‘ppplg be answered by some respondents. Because of this fluctuation.of potential responses from.one question to another, the information revealed on the following pages includes reference to the potential and actual question- naire responses for each particular item.of inquiry. ‘Hhile this procedure can become cumbersome at times, it results in a more accurate representation of fact than other less- specific procedures. Percentages have been frequently 109 included throughout the chapter and in each instance of use have been rounded to the nearest whole number. To aid in the interpretation of data, some tables have been included with the text of the chapter. Also, a number of tables have been placed in the Appendix. On all tables where the abbreviation "NA" has been used its meaning should be interpreted as ”no answer received." National Distribution.p§_Colleges and.Universities Extent 2; survey participation Colleges and universities reported in 1958 as offering at least one credit course in driver education and traffic safety totaled 2h6.1 An additional fifty-We colleges and universities were reported in 1960 by state department of education personnel as possibly offering a credit course in driver education. This potential total of 298 institutions to be contacted was reduced in number when five colleges and universities on the list failed to qualify for inclusion in the study according to pre- determined standards. As a result, questionnaires were 1U.S. Department of Health, Education, and‘Wel- fare, and National'Education Association, Courses in Highwaf Safety and Highwgy Traffic: A Directory pfoollege and U vers y'Offerings, 3p, cit. 110 circulated to 293 colleges and universities. Replies were received from 260 colleges and universities or 89% of the total number contacted. Among the 260 replies were forty-four from colleges and univer- sities reporting that an introductory teacher-preparation course in driver education was no longer offered as a part of their curriculum. Additionally, data supplied on six returned questionnaires was so inadequate, incom- plete, or illegible that a proper analysis was not possible; these six questionnaires were not included in the tabulations. Therefore, colleges and universities offering a credit course designed as an introductory teacher-preparation course in driver education, that both participated in and are reported as a part of this inves- tigation, totaled 210. Table 3 shows the number of questionnaires mailed to each state, and the percentage of colleges and universities contacted in each state that responded with a usable questionnaire. Extent of state and national offering;, The 210 colleges and universities reporting the existence of an introductory teacher-preparation credit course in driver education, when analyzed by geographical location according to states reveals a range that extends 111 TABLE 3.--College and university basic driver education course questionnaires mailed to each state and percent- age of usable replies received Questionnaires Percentage of Usable 3““ Sent Replies Received Alabama 0 X Alaska 0 X Arizona 3 100 Arkansas 3 100 California 18 91; Colorado h 50 Connecticut h 100 Delaware 0 X Dist. of Columbia 1 0 Florida 5 100 Ge ergia 3 33 Hawaii 1 1: Idaho 2 100 Illinois 11 100 Indiana 11 82 Iowa 3 100 Kansas 9 78 Kentucky 3 100 Louisiana 8 88 Maine l 1100 insryland 2 100 Massachusetts 2 100 Michigan 9 100 Minnesota 7 71. Mississippi 5 80 ‘Missouri 6 83 Montana 6 100 112 TABLE 3--Continued Questionnaires Percentage of Usable State Sent Replies Received Nebraska 5 100 Nevada 1 100 New Hampshire l 100 New Jersey 5 10° New Hexico h 100 New York 9 78 North Carolina 17 71 North Dakota 5 80 Ohio 11 100 Oklahoma 7 100 Oregon 2 100 Pennsylvania 21 86 Rhode Island 1 100 South Carolina h 75 South.Dakota 6 83 Tennessee 6 83 Texas 2“» 83 Utah 3 100 Vbrmont 1 0 Virginia 10 80 ‘Washington 6 83 west Virginia 7 57 Wisconsin 9 100 Wyoming l 100 Total 293 Average 87 xNe colleges and universities were identified as offering a credit driver education course in this state. 113 from a high of seventeen institutions in one state to a low of no institutions in seven states. The average is slightly better than four institutions per state. Figure 1 illustrates the distribution of the 210 colleges and universities by states. The sixteen states providing financial support for driver education through special appropriation represent 31% of all the states. A total of ninety-two of the 210 colleges and universities (uni) offering an introductory teacher preparation driver education course are located in these states. The average number of institutions per state in this group of states is six. Population figures compiled in the 1960 census reveal that these same sixteen states represent the place of residence for 71,912,561 people1 (hO% of the total national population). In summary then it can be reported that the 31% of the states providing special financial support for driver education contain hofi of the popu- lation of the United States and hh% of the colleges and universities preparing high school driver education teachers. 1Harry Hansen (ed.), The Werld Almanac and Book.g£ Facts: 1961 (New York: New YorE‘WorId-Telegram Corp., , p. 81. .udnsn pauses s so compasses hobdho ca chance neauoasoeaolhonodep hhonosoOhunu so msdhemuo no oevhonea cases some dd coarsenebdad use newenaoo meaaoenoodrn.a .mwm e s Oh nu m o. c a S H o m .n N h N m .3 on N a 3 e m N m n m w H 0 on m m 4H m m o a e s H m l m a : 115 By contrast the thirty-five states not providing financial support for driver education.represent 69% of the nation's individual states, serve as residence for 60% of the nation's population, and include 56% of the colleges and universities preparing high school driver education teachers. Character g£,participating institutions Control.--An analysis of the 210 participating colleges and universities revealed 161 under state control (77%) and h6 under private1 or church control (22%). The remaining three institutions included two under municipal control and one under Joint state and county support. If a strict public versus private dichotomy were drawn it could be reported that l6u institutions (78%) operate under public control and financing while he colleges and universities (22%) operate under private or church control and financing.2 Function.--Analysis of these institutions as to function is difficult because many colleges and universities 1Including private-control institutions that re- ceive some state aid (e.g., University of Pittsburg). 211m (661.), 22o git-e 116 have come to exercise a.multiplicity of functions. Utilizing the identifications listed in.American Colleges _aipg’Universities,1 however, a six-category classification wms made and each institution classified in terms of its principal function(s). Distribution throughout the classification scheme (i.e., liberal arts, teachers col- lege, land-grant, university) proved to be fairly uniform with approximately the same number of institutions represented in each of these classifications. Sega-Enrollment is open to both sexes in 206 col- leges and universities, or 98% of all the institutions offering the course. In two institutions admission is epen to:male students only, and in two other institutions to female students only. Information Relating 32 the Administrative and Classroom.Aspects 2; the Course Course title The 210 colleges and universities reporting the title of their introductory driver education course indicated a total of fifty-eight different titles. "Driver Education"was revealed as the most commonly used 11bid. 117 title, having appeared on reports from 96, or h5% of the institutions. The title used most often other than ”Driver Educationf‘was found to be "Basic Driver Edu- cation" which was found in 9% of the colleges and univer- SitieS. In.8% of the institutions the title "Driver Edu- cation and Traffic Safety" was employed.1 Thirty-eight colleges and universities, representing 18% of the total, used a title not reported by‘ggz other institution. Some titles appear to indicate that topics other than.those generally considered to be specifically a part of a driver education course (e.g., first aid) are included in the course. The complete listing of course titles, and the number of institutions listing each.title is presented in Table ht meanders Data relative to the amount of credit granted by the college or university upon successful completion.of the driver education course was supplied by 200 insti- tutions. One respondent did not provide information and nine others failed to clearly designate whether the J"Ji‘we institutions listed an almost identical title. These universities added ”I" to the title indi- cating the first of two courses. 118 TABLE tin-Course titles designated by colleges and univer- sities for the introductory teacher-preparation course in driver education Course Title Institutions DriverEducation.............. Basic Driver'Education.. . . . . . . . . . . Driver‘Education.& Traffic Safety . . . . . Driver‘Education for Teachers . . . . . . . ‘Driver‘Education.& Training . . . . . . . . Methods 8: Materials in Driver Education . . Teaching Traffic Safety & Automobile Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Driver Education (Instructor's Course) . . . ‘Driver Education & Driver Training . . . . . Driver Education.& Highway Safety . . . . . Driver Education 8: Safety . . . . . . . . . Driver Education.& Traffic Safety I . . . . Driver Education'Workshop . . . . . . . . . Driver Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Highway Safety & Driver Education . . . . . Highway Safety Education . . . . . . . . . . Introduction to Driver Education . . . . . . Safety & Driver Education . . . . . . . . . Traffic & Safety Education . . . . . . . . . Administration of Driver Education . . . . . Beginning Driver Enucation . . . . . . . . . Driver & Safety Education . . . . . . . . . Driver & Traffic Safety Education . . . . . Driver Education I . . . . . . . . . . . . . Driver Education.& Traffic (Instructor's Course) A. . . . . . . . . . . Driver Education for High School h‘k‘ H HHHHHmmmmmmmmmmmmw #moomg T. “ch. r, O O O I O O C O O O O I O O O O O O 1 Driver Education.Methods . . . . . . . . . . 1 Education [and a specific course number] . . l 119 TABIE l|.--C ontinued Course Title Elementary Driver Education 8: Traffic safety 0 O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O 0 First Aid &Driver Training . . . . . . . Highway Safety 8: Driver Training . . . . . Introduction to Driver Education & DriverTraining ............. Methods 8c Materials of Driving Instruction Methods 8: Materials of Teaching Driver Education ................ Methods in Driver Education . . . . . . . Preparation in Driver Education . . . . . Prablems 8: Materials in Driver Education . Prablems of Driver Training, Testing, 8c Traffic safety 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Safety.................. Safety Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . Safety Education (Driver Education I) . . Safety Education (Driver Education 8: Training 0 O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Safety Education 8: Driver Training . . . . Safety Education Through Driver Training . Safety in Driver Education . . . . . . . . Teacher Driver Education . . . . . . . . . Teacher's Course in Driver Education . . . Teaching of Driver Education . . . . . . . Teaching of Driver Education in Secondary 8°h0018 O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O TeachingefDriving........... Techniques 8: Procedures in Driver 8: Traffic Safety Education . . . . . . . . . Theory & Practice of Driver Training Techniques . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . Theory 8: Principles of Driver Education ................ Institutions l-‘Hl-‘l-‘l-‘HH HHHH HPHH HI—I I-u-It-I 120 TABLE‘h--Continued Course Title Institutions Traffic & Safety Education . . . . . . . . . 1 Traffic Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Traffic Safety & Driver Education . . . . . 1 T OT“ 0 O O O O O O O O 21 0 credit listed was that of semester-hours credit or quarter-hours credit. or the reporting institutions 77% provided credit in terms of semester hours while 23% I provided quarter-hours credit. In the 153 institutions offering semester-hours credit, 102 colleges and univer- sities, or 67% of all institutions in this classification, provide three semester-hours credit. In the #7 insti- tutions offering quartershours credit, the three quarter- hour credit offering was most cannon, having been reported in 32 colleges and universities or 68% of the institutions in this classification. It should be remembered that these figures relate to the introductory course only; some institutions offer additional credit hours in the form of a second course. Since a three quarter-hour offering is equivalent to a two semester-hour offering it can.be reported that of all 200 institutions reporting, a three semester hour offering was found in 102 colleges and universities (h9%), 121 and a two semester-hour offering or its equivalent in 77 colleges and universities (37%). If the one institution: offering the course for ”two pp,three semester hours credit" is added to the former two classifications it can be reported that 180 of the 200 institutions (86%) offer the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education for either two or three semester hours credit, or the equivalent number of quarter hours. It was re- vealed in Chapter IV that 32 of the states (62%) specifi- cally require a two- or three-somester-hour credit course in driver education for certification to teach high.school driver education. The complete distribution of semester- and quarter-hour credits reported on questionnaires is shown in Table 5. QEESEEMlsisi In 123 colleges and universities undergraduate credit is allowed for completion of the introductory teacher~preparation course in driver education. This practice is representative, therefore, of 59% of all the institutions. The course carries ”undergraduate or grad- uate' credit in 83 colleges and universities (hos). Four institutions grant graduate credit (only) for successful course completion. 122 TABLE 5.--Credit hours granted by colleges and universities for successful completion of the introductory teacher prep- aration course in driver education Number of Institutions Providing Credit Credit Hours Semester' Quarter Hours Hours 2 ’45 o 2%- l l 3 102 32 it 3 10 5 o h Variable 2a 0 Total 1153 h? EOne institution offers 2 _o_p 3‘ hours credit, another 3 pp’h hours credit. Prerequisite requirements A variety of prerequisite requirements were re- ported. Since some institutions reported more than one requirement, other institutions reported a single require- ment, and still others reported either no requirement or failed to answer the question, a percentage breakdown for all replies was not possible. Replies fron til colleges and universities indicated that no prerequisite require- ments were listed. A total of 25 respondents did not 123 provide data on the topic. In the remaining lhli insti- tutions (69%) one or more prerequisite requirements were listed. I Possession of a valid operator' s license or permit was named most frequently as a course prerequisite require- ment, appearing in 714. instances. A specific college or university class standing was mentioned as a requirement in 51:. institutions with Junior or senior class standing commonly indicated as a requirement for enrollment. In li8 colleges and universities one or more specific courses must be canpleted before permission is granted to enroll in the introductory teacher-preparation course in- driver education. Specific courses mentioned frequently included an introductory course in safety education, a first-aid course, and various psychology courses. In addition to the requirements indicated above, nine others were listed by respondents in a small number of institutions. A complete listing is presented in Table 6. Administrative affiliation Respondents were asked to identify the school, col- lege, division, department, or other administrative unit within which the introductory teacher-preparation course in driver education is maintained on their campus. Replies indicated that all courses are affiliated in one or more 12h TABIE 6.--Prerequisite requirements listed for the intro- ductory teacher-preparation course in driver education Requirement Pessesses valid operator's license permit.............. College or university class (e.g., junior,senier) ......... A specifically designated course or courses 0 O O O O O O O O O O 0 An ”acceptable," "clean,“ or "good" driving record ._. . . . . A designated number of years driving experience . . . . . . . . Enrollment in teacher-preparation cmi culm O O O O O O O O O O O O Consent of instructor or ‘MMStratOr O O O 0 O O O O O O A designated level of academic standing 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Ability to successfully complete a road test . . . . . . . . . . . . 01‘ Ability to operate a manual-shift auto Free from physical disabilities that would prevent one from booming an instructor............ Ability to meet state department of education and bureau of motor- vehicle standards for instructors of three major areas. The area of health, Times Reported 7h 5h HP physical edu- cation, and recreation administered the driver education offering in 93 colleges and universities, W of the total. The area of "education" in 75 institutions (36%) maintains responsibility for the driver education course. 125 Included within this area are a variety of administrative units such as evening, extension, and summer programs. In 37 institutions (18%) the course was offered within some type of industrial or practical arts unit such as industrial arts, industrial education, practical arts, applied arts, technical education, or commerce. Three colleges and universities provide the course as a Joint offeringo-twe between the physical education and education departments, and one between the physical education department and the industrial arts department. No answer was provided for two institutions. Course enrollment Relatively few female students enroll in the introductory course. In 103 colleges and universities (19%) the proportion of male students as compared with female students enrolled in the course is better than nine to one. The complete range of distribution by sex is shown in tabular form in Appendix E (Table 21). Course enrollment distribution by vocational intent and teaching service is indicated below. Distribution 13; vocational intent.--Respondents estimated the percentage of students enrolled in the course intending to begin or continue a teaching career as opposed to some other vocational choice. As with the 126 distribution by sex, a clear picture emerged. In 138 reports (66%) better than nine of each ten students planned a teaching career. Better than eight of each ten were reported as planning a teaching career in 171 insti- tutions, or 81% of the total. The couplets listing of estimates is shown in tabular form in Appendix E (Table 22). 1 Distribution 21 teaching service.--Estimates were secured relative to the proportion of pre-service and in- service teachers (regardless of teaching field) enrolling in the course throughout the year, including both regular and summer sessions. Although a smewhat more even distri- bution was revealed between these We factors than was the casc with distribution by sex and by vocational intent, pre -service teachers were found to clearly outnumber in- service teachers. In 73 institutions (35%) the proportion of pre-service teachers to in-service teachers was better than eight to two while the reverse of this proportion was reported in only 11.3 colleges and universities, or 21% of the total. Details are shown in Appendix a, Table 23. Location _o_f course 9_r_i_-ca_mpus.--Of the 210 colleges and universities participating in the survey, 207 institutions (99%) con- duct the course on campus. Details concerningofferings 127 during the regular school year and during the summer session are presented in subsequent pages of this chapter. I_p extension.--Only 16 colleges and universities reported offering the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education on an extension basis. This figure represents 8% of all institutions and includes three colleges and universities not offering the course other than on an extension basis. With only one insti- tution not reported on this question, the remaining 193 colleges and universities (92%) are those currently 393 offering the course in extension. Several of the 193 institutions were reported as having offered the course on an extension basis in former years. p: correspondencew-th a single institution reported offering the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education on a correspondence basis. Respondents in 208 colleges and universities (99%) indi- cated that the course was not offered by correspondence. he respondents failed to answer the question. 9.29.1199. scheduling and registration Scheduling.--Colleges and universities offering the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education during one or more of the semesters or terms of 128 the regular (September-June) school year totaled 152. Thus 72% of the institutions afford students the opportu- nity to enroll for the course sometime between September and June each year, while 58 institutions (28%) offer the course 9513.; during the summer session. While three insti- tutions were not reported, 87 of the 152' colleges and universities (57%) offering the course during the regular school year offered it 2.313 semester, quarter, or term. The other 62 institutions (14.1%) offered the course some- what less than every possible semester, quarter or term. Data supplied by respondents indicated further that 183 of the 210 colleges and universities (87%) offer the course during the sinner session, while the remaining 27 institutions (13%) offer the course 211.11 during the regular sessions. In effect then, 125 colleges and univer- sities (60%) are offering the course 9233.1. during the regular and summer sessions. simmer session courses ranged fras courses ex- tending over a twelve week period of tine as reported in three institutions, to courses extending over a two week period of time as reported in 31 colleges and universities.1 The six week session was most commonly l‘rwelve institutions were reported as offering the course more than once during the summer session. However, only the first-mentioned stunner course was included in the tabulation presented herein. 129 reported. The complete range is shown in Table 7. TABLE 7.--Length of summer sessions in which the introduc- tory teacher-preparation course in driver education is offered Length of Session number of Colleges in Weeks and‘Universities 12 3 ll 0 10 3 9 13 8 30 7 l 6 57 S 23 u 5 3 16 2 31 l 0 NA 1 Total 183 Registration during the regular school year.--Re- spondents esthmates of typical total enrollment in the course for the entire regular school year ranged frcn a high of 175 reported by one institution to a low of 10 reported by six institutions. Total enrollment in the course (regular school year) reached 5,227 as reported by respondents in 13h of a potential 152 institutions. Aver- age enrollment reported (13h of 152 institutions) was 130 computed at 39 students during the entire regular school year. In Appendix E (Table 2h) the estimated enrollment figures for the regular school year are presented by classification. Summer school enrollment.--Respondents' estimates of typical total enrollment in the course for the entire summer session ranged from a high of 150 students reported in one institution to a low of 8 students reported in six institutions. In 169 of the 183 institutions offering a summer program.(92%) estimated enrollment was listed as ho or loss during the summer session. The computed aver- age enrollment was 25 students. The complete range of enrollment arranged by intervals is shown in.dppendix E, Table 25. ' Registrations 32 extension courses.--Typical en- rollment reported in the course taught during the one or more extension sessions conducted during a.full calendar year ranged from a high of 96 students reported in one institution to a low of 10 students reported in another institution. The average enrollment figure computed (15 of 16 institutions reporting) was 39. Thus, the average yearly enrollment figure computed for all extension classes held during the year was identical to that computed for all onreampus classes meeting during the regular school 131 year. Table 26 (Appendix E) reveals the range of typical enrollment for the course as taught on an extension basis. Designated textbooks Instructors and administrators concerned with the introductory teacher-preparation course in driver education were queried on the textbook(s) designated for student ‘ procurement and use in the course. This questionnaire item did not seek a bibliography for the course, but rather attempted to discover the number and kinds of text materi- als required for student possession and use as basic sources. Responses to this inquiry revealed that in 117 colleges aid universities (56%) a single text is required, in 14.? colleges and universities two texts are required, and in 36 colleges and universities three or more texts are required. Three institutions reported that no text was designated and seven college and university respond- ents did not provide data in answer to the question. ‘ Among the textbooks1 listed most often for student procurement and use by respondents representing the insti- tutions designating a single text were (1) gportsmanliloe 1111 texts identified in this portion of the study are listed in complete bibliography form in Appendix F. y sale ...? . a 132 Drivi , mentioned 66 times, (2) Highway §_a__f_e_t_y _e_._n_d 223.13}; Education, mentioned 35 times, and (3) gen and; the; 329.2233. 953, mentioned 9 times. In colleges and universi- ties naming two textbooks, the most frequently mentioned combination was that of gportsmanlike Driving and Highwg m _a_1_1_d_ Driver Education, mentioned 20 times. The complete listing of texts and the frequency of their use is indicated in Table 27, Appendix E. With three colleges and universities reporting that no text is designated, and seven institutions failing to indicate the practice followed on their campus, 200 colleges and universities were left to report their choices of texts. These 200 colleges and universities named a total of 17 different titles plus unspecified texts lmown only as "others.” These 17 different titles were named a total of 308 times. Only onetitle in the list-«Riggs: m 93; m Educationuis generally regarded as a driver education text written for the col- lege and university level. Of the 308 mentions of titles, 79 (26%) were that of this college-level text. f At least five titles in the list are those of texts written for use on the high school level. These titles are (1) §portsman- nan—Mu a(2).121_§2£‘13_1.1.2§2£9£9.2s cameraman neat. an maym. and (91925293222293 Drivigg. These five titles were mentioned a total of 176 133 times (57%) with the first three named above mentioned 171; times. Publications other than the college text and the five high school texts were mentioned 53 times, or in 17% of the instances. Course outlines Respondents in 66 of the 210 institutions offering the introductory teacher-preparation course in driver edu- cation, or 31% of the total, submitted a copy of the course. outline utilized in the course. Respondents in 10 institutions submitted descriptive materials relative to their college or university's driver education program in addition to or in place of a course outline. No less than 51 respondents (214%) included a statement to the effect that it was not possible to send a course outline because the outline was currently under revision. Completing a review of the 66 course outlines made possible the listing of observations presented below: 1. Outlines ranged in size from a one-page type- written copy to a thirty-nine page mimeographed copy. Most outlines were of two, three, or four pages in length. 2. Sane outlines appeared flexible, others ' seemed highly structured. ' 3. a strong emphasis on auto mechanics was evident in some outlines. 13h 11.. Considerable attention was given to psycho- physical testing in some outlines. 5. Provision for utilization of guest lecturers was found in many outlines. 6. Some outlines included provision for study of the content of high school driver education while others appeared devoid of any such specific emphasis in this area. 7. The overall course content appeared to be influenced in many instances by the nature of other driver and safety education courses offered by the insti- tution, or by the absence of such courses. 8. The influence of Brody and Stack's Highway Safety 55g Driver Education1 and the American Automobile Association's Teacher-Training Course _i_n Driver Instruc- _t_:!._9_z;2 was evident in a mmber of outlines. A few out- lines followed verbatim the major items listed in the to table of contents of Highway Safety and Driver Education. 9. More than anything else, the outlines appeared to manifest a wide variety of curricular content lBrody and Stack, 92. cit. 2American Automobile Association, Teacher-Train- ing Course in Driver Instruction, 92. cit. . BBrOdy and Stack, _o'Ee Cite, DP. 119117. 135 and course organization. While semantic disagreement may have accounted for sane differences, this did not seem to be the major factor. Information Relating go the Laboratory Aspect _o_f the Course Laboratory phase requirement Preceding the questions pertaining to the labora- tory phase of the course, the questionnaire sent to col- lege and university instructors included the following definition and explanation of the laboratory phase: For the purposes of this study laboratory sessions are defined as follows: ”A required part of the course which is characterised by: (1) an em hasis upon prac- tice driving instruction, (2 meetings or sessions held on a systematic basis, and (3) a departure fran the typical 'lecture' or classroom setting.” Uhile practice driving instruction utiliz- ing a dual-control car is perhaps the most coamon form of laboratory session associated with a basic driver education course, the ab- sence of such a car does not of and by itself, disqualify such a session from recognition as a laboratory session. In terms of the foregoingdefinition, 205 of the 210 colleges and universities participating in the study indicated that a laboratory phase was a required portion of the course. All five institutions not requiring such 136 a laboratory phase as a part of the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education offered this phase _a_s_ _a separate 93m. In these five instances the introa- ductory course was a prerequisite to the laboratory or practice-driving course. Thus, all the institutions offer some type of laboratory phase as defined for the purposes of this study, and 98% of the institutions offer this type of instruction as a part of the introductory course. Nature 9_f_ laboratory eggrience The majority of college and university courses were found to provide laboratory experience of the nature where- by students enrolled in the course provide 5911131 practice driving instruction for beginning drivers in a car. In 132 institutions, or 61% of the 205 institutions offering the laboratory experience as a part of the introductory course, this plan of operation was found in effect. Twelve colleges and universities in this group reported the technique of providing an actual practice driving instructional experience, but preceding it with sane smcial type of preparation. Most often mentioned was the technique of spending several weeks in simulated instruction with classmates, followedby the actual instruction with beginning drivers. Utilization of psycho- physical tests was also frequently mentioned as a pre- requisite to the actual instructional experience. One 137 university reported utilizing their Aetna Drivotrainer facility for simulated instruction prior to the actual practice driving instructional experience. Respondents in 18 institutions indicated that they used the plan of 522351 instruction.whenever possible, but due to practical problems associated.with.such factors as car procurement, availability of beginning drivers, and scheduling problems, it was usually necessary to resort to the use of a simulated instructional experience for at least some of the college students enrolled in the course. In h3 colleges and universities (21%) the labora- tory phase consists of college students enrolled in the course simulating practice driving instruction by uti- lizing fellow classmates in the role of ”beginning drivers." It was noted that in most, but not all, instances such.simulated instruction is performed in.a dual-control car. Seven institutions were reported as conducting a laboratory phase of the introductory course that consisted of neither an actual instructional experience, nor a simulated instructional experience such.as that described above. The six.different practices reported by these seven colleges and universities represent the opposite end of the continuum as compared to actual practice driving instructional experience. Practices reported are those 138 repeated below in the words of the respondents: (1) ”students observe practice driving instruction performed by a local-area high school. teacher," (2) "students study behind-the-wheel methods ," ( 3) ”instructor‘and students spend time in the car together" it (reported by two col- leges), (h) "instructor and state policeman demonstrate and supervise driving tests for students," (5) 'teecher conducts demonstrations,'.' and (6) "student drives and teaches himself.” . In mum, 132 of 205 institutions (61m utilize the actual instructional experience either alone or in combination with other methods for 5;; enrolled students. in additional 18 institutions utilize the. actual experience insofar as possible, but are not able to provide such experience for all. enrolled students on a regular basis. In li3 colleges and universities (21%) simulated experience is provided for all students. In 7 institutions neither actual, nor simulated experience is provided, but some type of special emphasis is given to practice driving in- struction. Five institutions did not report the nature of the laboratory experience provided. Length _o_f_ laboratory sessions f Respondents indicated the . approximate number of hours each student spends in the laboratory sessions 139 averaged over the entire semester or quarter. These figures‘were converted to a standard that made allowances for differences in the number of weeks between.a.semester course of eighteen Weeks as compared to a quarter course of twelve weeks. A total of 187 colleges and universities were included in this determination. The 23 institutions not included consisted of the five conducting the practice driving instructional experience as a separate course, the seven not providing data, and eleven failing to clearly designate either the period of time during which the laboratory sessions are held or the number of hours per session. It was revealed that 12h of the 187 institutions (66%) conducted laboratory sessions that totaled between eighteen and forty-one hours. The largest single number of hours designated by respondents was thirty-six, a reflection of the practice of scheduling two hours of laboratory work per week during an eighteen-week semester. Table 8 shows the distribution of hours spent by students in.the laboratory phase of the course as reported by 187 colleges and.universities. Student instructor-beginnigg driver assignments Beginnigg drivers assiggg .--0nly colleges and uni- versities that provided an actual practice driving lhO TABLE 8.--Total hours spent by students in the laboratory phase of the introductory driver education course as re- ported by 187 colleges and universities Total Hours Students Ember of Colleges Spend in Lab and Universities Over 73 1t 73-68 3 67-62 h 61-5h 19 5348 I ln-ltz h ““36 51 35-30 0 29-2h 30 23-18 ’43 17-12 1h 11-6 13 Under 6 1 Total 187 instructional experience (i.e., utilized beginning drivers) for the laboratory phase of the course were included in this phase of the survey. The number of institutions in- cluded, therefore, totaled 150. The practice of assigning one beginning driver to each college student for the purposes of practice driving instruction was followed in 76 colleges and universities, 51% of the total. The practice of assigning two beginning drivers to each college student was followed in Ill institutions or 27% of the total. Together then, 78% of the colleges and universities assign lege st entire shown 1 TTBLE 9 lege st‘ mponsib? aibinty g sent and ring. or 3. Wuhan 9 lhl assign either one or two beginning drivers to each col- lege student in the laboratory phase of the course. The entire range of beginning driver assignments reported is shown in Table 9. TLBEE 9.--Number of beginning drivers assigned to each col- lege student enrolled in the laboratory phase of the intro- ductory driver education course Number of Beginning Number of Colleges Drivers Assigned and Universities 1/3"L 1 1/2b 3 l 76 2 1:1 3 m h 8 S l 1-12° 1 NA 5 Total 150 ‘Indicates that three college students share responsibility for teaching one beginning driver. bIndicates that two college students share respon- sibility for teaching one beginning driver. °It was reported that introductory course enroll- ment and availability of beginning drivers forces this wide range of possible beginning-driver assignments. Student instructor-bgginning driver combinationa.-- Information.provided by the 150 respondents conducting 1&2 laboratory sessions involving actual practice driving ex- perience indicated that the most frequent combination of beginning drivers and student instructors in the practice driving car while a laboratory session is in progress is that of one beginning driver and one student instructor. This arrangement was indicated in 38 colleges and universi- ties. The second most frequent combination was that of two beginning drivers and two student instructors in the car during laboratory session, this arrangement having been reported in use at 29 institutions. The third most fre- quent combination consisted of two beginning drivers and one student instructor which was reported by 25 respond- ents. The complete listing of beginning driver-student instructor combinations reported is presented in Table 10. TABLE lO.--Beginning driver-student instructor combinations reported for the practice driving car laboratory sessions Number of Combinations Colleges and Universities 1 student instructor and IFbeginning driver 38 1 student instructor and 2 beginning drivers ‘ 25 1 student instructor and 3 beginning drivers 9 1 student instructor and h beginning drivers 8 2 student instructors and 1 beginning driver 12 2 student instructors and 2 beginning drivers 29 2 student instructors and 3 beginning drivers I; 2 student instructors and h.beginning drivers 1 1R3 TABLE lO--Continued Number of Caubinations Colleges and Universities 3 student instructors and 1 beginning driver 5 3" student instructors and 2 beginning drivers 2 1],. student instructors and 1 beginning driver 3 h. student instructors and 5 beginning drivers 2b NA 11 Total 150 ”Or less than one in the several instances were more than one student instructor teachel a single begin-- ning driver. 1)Use of a large station wagon was indicated in both instances. Analyzed in a different manner it can be reported that the total number of persons in the practice driving car (exclusive of any college or university supervisory personnel) while sessions are in progress ranges fran two to four in 118 of the institutions, or 79% of the total. A complete breakdown of the number of persons in the car is presented in Appendix G, Table 28. Analyzed in still another manner it can be reported that one student instructor is present in the car with a beginning driver or drivers in 80 colleges and universi- ties (53%), two student instructors are present in the car with their beginning driver or drivers in 11.6 colleges and luh universities (31%), and three or more student instructors are present in the car with their student or students in 13 colleges and universities (9%). There was no report submitted from.11 of the 150 institutions eligible for participation in this phase of the study. Source g£_beginningdrivers Information received relative to the percentage of beginning drivers utilized from five potential sources revealed that most colleges and universities secure the :major share of the beginning drivers used in the actual practice driving laboratory experience from the college or university student body. In 109 of the 150 institutions (73%) college and university students represented one of the sources utilized. In.56 of the institutions (hh%) students attending local-area high schools were utilized, and in so of the institutions (33%) college and university faculty and/or staff were utilized. Students in.campus or ”laboratory” high schools were utilized by 26 institutions, 17% of the total. A variety of sources not included in any of the former categories were utilized by 61 insti- tutions. The majority of those sources appearing in the 'other' category were described as "adults living in.the community." 115 It is evident from the foregoing presentation that many colleges and universities typically utilize more than one source when securing beginning drivers for the practice driving instructional program. When percent- ages of beginning drivers from each of the five categories are considered, the order of use from most-frequent to least-frequent is: (1) college and university students, (2) local-area high school students, (3) campus or "labo- ratory" high school students, ()4) adults in the cammlnity and ”others" not associated with the high schools or the colleges and universities, and (5) college and university faculty and/or staff. A detailed analysis of the extent to which these sources are utilized is presented in Appendix G, Table 29. A specific recommendation of the Third National Conference on Driver Education is that ". . . colleges offer driver education to those students who cannot demon- strate previously acquired canpetence in driving.“ It would appear from the foregoing data that a majority of the college and universities conducting a teacher prepar- ation program in driver education provide this opportunity, at least on a limited basis. 1National Conference on Driver Education (Purdue University, 1958), Policies and Practices for Driver Edu- cation, 92. cit. , p. . 1116 Fees assessed beginning 9.23.1219. 0f the 150 institutions providing actual practice driving instructional experience and utilizing beginning drivers from one source or another, 51 colleges and uni- versities (311%) charged beginning drivers some type of fee for their driving instruction. In 98 colleges and universities no fee was charged. One institution did not report its policy in this regard. 12 whom assessed.--Thirty-six of the 51 insti- tutions (71%) that assess fees against beginning drivers do so for all beginning drivers. The other 15 instituticns assess fees in a variety of ways all of which are indicated in Table 30 (Appendix G). 9391133 _o_f_ gan-Fees assessed beginning drivers ranged from a high of forty dollars to a low of twa dollars. The mode was found to be ten dollars, the average nine dollars and seventeen cents. A complete listing of fees assessedis found in Appendix G, Table 31. Utilization _o_f_ {gan-In 29 colleges and universi- ties (57% of those collecting fees) the fee collected from beginning drivers is used to partially. finance the oper- ation of a driver education program. Institutions that place beginning drivers! fees into a “general fund" and do It? not directly use the fees to finance the driver education program totaled 11;, or 28% of the total. Eight college and university respondents did not report the disposition of the fees collected. Supervision‘g£,practice drivingginstruction Persons pgrfonming_supervision.-éData gathered concerning the supervision of laboratory sessions in which actual practice driving experience was provided indicated that in 79 of the 150 institutions (53%)) the faculty'member teaching the lecture or classroom phase of the course also supervised the laboratory phase. Super- vision was defined on the questionnaire as actually being present in the car when lessons are being conducted. Respondents from 1h institutions (9%) revealed that no one supervised the laboratory sessions and at least eight other replies alluded to little or no supervision, but maintained the impression that periodically at least some supervision is conducted. Table 11 includes all the supervision techniques mentioned by the respondents. Extent 2;.supervision.--Respondents estimating the approximate amount of time the student-instructor is under actual inrthe-car supervision revealed that most student instructors are supervised 50% or less of the time they 1&8 TABIE ll.--Persons supervising the laboratory phase of the introductory driver education course Colleges and Supervisors Universities Faculty member teaching classroom ph‘sea O O O O O O O O O 0 O I. O O O O O O O 79 Faculty member and classmates in course 0 O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O NO om O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Faculty member and graduate assistant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graduateassistant..... . . . . . . . . Faculty member ”makes periodic spot checks" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Faculty member, but sometimes no one (varies) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Faculty member and local-area high school driver education teacher . . . . . . Local-area high school driver education teacher . . . . . . . . . . . . . Classmates in the course . . . . . . . . . . Faculty member, graduate assistant, classmates inthe course . . . . . . . . . . Faculty member and students who have previously completed the course . . . . . . Faculty member and representatives from the state traffic division . . . . . . Students enrolled in the advanced (second) driver education course as their laboratory assigment . . . . . . . 1 College students participating instudentteachingb............ 1 Faculty member and a member of the faculty not involved in driver education................. 1 Faculty member, graduate assistant, and students enrolled in student teaching in driver education . . . . . . . . 1 EE- N N N new to F’ 'F' U'lCD 111.9 TABLE ll--Continued Supervisors Colleges and Universities Faculty member, graduate assistant, and students previously completing the course . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l A.member of the faculty not teaching the classroom phase . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 NA. 0 O 0.. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I O 1 Total 150 "Hereinafter referred to simply as "faculty member. - 'bThe specific area of student teaching was not indicated. are teaching. ‘When.all types of supervision were con- 1 student instructors were estimated to be under sidered, direct supervision 50% or less of the time in.10h.insti- tutions (69%). with 22 institutions not reporting data on the extent of supervision this left only an colleges and universities (16%) supervising their student instruc- tors upwards of 50% of the time they are conducting their practice driving instruction. When the 79 faculty members both teaching the classroom phase of the course and supervising the xThe nineteen different types are listed in Table 11 . 150 laboratory sessions are singled out for analysis, the same pattern is evident as that indicated above for all types of supervision. In this analysis 73% of the insti- tutions were reported as conducting supervision 50% or less of the time student-instructors are teaching. Table 32 (Appendix G) shows the estimated per- centage of time each student is under direct supervision while conducting his practice driving instruction. Texts utilized $2 the laboratory phase In the portion of the questionnaire dealing with the laboratory phase of the course, college and university driver education instructors were asked to list the titles of texts or other printed materials designated for student procurement and use 3.9. _t_h_e_ laboratory session if such materials had not been listed in the previous portion: of the questionnaire. 0f the 205 respondents representing institutions conducting a laboratory phase as a part of the introductory driver education course, 78 (38%) listed additional materials while the remaining 127 (62%) did not. ‘With some of the 78 respondents listing more than one publication the total number of items listed reached 12h. These 12h items were distributed.among sixteen different titles or types of materials. The American Automobile Association's Driving Guides and other "kits" 151 and materials were listed most frequently. The complete listing is presented in Table 33 found in Appendix G. Automobiles utilized _i_n_ the laboratory sessions N__1§_n_b_e_r_ 2.93 mgr-The 205 colleges and universi— ties ‘conducting laboratory lessons as a regular part of the introductory driver education course reported utili- zation of a total of 335 automobiles in these laboratories sessions. An almost even split between manually-operated tranmission autos and autanatically-operated transmission autos was reported. _ Autos equipped with a manually-Operated trans- mission ntmibered 1614., or 15.9% of the total, while autos equipped with an automatically-operated transmission numbered 171, or 51% of the total. Nearly half of the colleges and universities were found to have one auto available for use as 101 of the 205 institutions (19%) re- ported this number. Two cars were reported by 59 colleges and universities, 29% of the total. Table 31, (Appendix G) shows all the combinations of car utilization that were reported. Utilization pg autos.--Autos were reported to be used only for laboratory sessions of the introductory driver education course in 99 colleges and universities, 152 118% of the total. It was reported that in 67 colleges and universities the autos were used both for laboratory sessions and related driver education activities (e.g., demonstrations, transportation to professional meetings, etc.): this represented 33% of the total. Another 31; colleges and universities (18%) were reported as using the autos both for driver education purposes and non- driver. education purposes. Five institutions did not provide data on auto utilization. _A_p_t_o_ procurement.--Infomation was sought relative to the plan used by institutions for procurement of auto- mobiles for use in the driver education program. It was found that 95 of the 205 reporting institutions (1.6%) secured their autos through a free -loan arrangement with a local-area auto dealer. In 111; colleges and universities (22%) the autos were purchased by the institution. a lease or rental arrangement, on a fee basis, was reported by 22 institutions, 11% of the total. A variety of other procurement practices including combinations of the above- mentioned plans (in some instances where more than one auto is made available) was reported by 111 colleges and universities. Three institutions did not provide data on auto procurement. At least seven institutions use autos owned by either the course instructor or by students enrolled in 153 the course. Table 35 (Appendix G) includes a complete listing of procurement practices. Although a recommended car procurement policy for college and university programs was not specified at the Third National Conference on Driver Education, auto purchase was recommended for high schools.1 It can be seen above that less than one-third of the college and university programs provide for purchase of this basic equipnent. Faculty Teachigg 1:113 Introductogy Driver Education Course Information provided relative to faculty teaching the course was confined to that of faculty teaching the glassroom portion of the course on a regular basis. By definition this meant that smmner, evening or extension course instructors would be included if their employment was arranged on a regular (e.g., yearly) basis. Since emphasis throughout the study was on the typical situation, teaching arrangements that were unusual for the institution were not to be included in the questionnaire report. lNational Conference on Driver Education, Policies and Practices for Driver Education, 9p. cit., p. 39. I 11.111? 151+ Number 9_f_ faculty teaching the course The 210 institutions participating in the study were reported as employing a total of 297 faculty members regularly engaged in teaching the introductory driver education course. This total was subdivided into faculty employed on a full-time basis, and faculty employed on a part-time basis. It should be remembered that such full- time employment does not necessarily refer to full-time teaching in driver education. Faculty employed by a col- lege or university only during a summer session, regard- less of whether such summer employment was full-time or part-time, were classified as faculty employed on a part- time basis. Under this classification system 2011 instruc- tors were reported as being employed on a full-time basis and 93 others on a part-time basis. In addition to these 297 individuals with faculty status, 21 graduate assist- ants were reported as being regularly engaged in teaching the classroom phase of the course. The majority of colleges and universities employ one faculty member on a full-time basis who devotes a portion of his time to teaching the introductory driver education course. Institutions reported as following this practice numbered 115 or 55% of the total. The second most prevalent practice reported was that of 155 employing one person on.a part-time basis to teach the introductory driver education course, a practice found in 25 colleges and universities. In a total of lho insti- tutions (67%), therefore, teaching the introductory driver education course is a one-person Operation. It was learned that 135 institutions (614%) employed full-time personnel only and 31 institutions (15%) employed part- thme personnel only. Forty institutions employed various combinations of full-time faculty, part-tmme faculty, and graduate assistants. The complete listing of combinations of full and part-time faculty and graduate assistants reported from 20h.institutions as teaching the course is shown in Table 12. State requirements for faculty teaching the course The State Departments of‘Education.Questionnaire sought information relative to the educational require- ments in driver education set by the individual states for college and university instructors preparing driver edu- cation teachers. In thirty-two states (63%). department of edu- cation officials reported either the lack of state Juris- diction or the lack of state regulation concerning the educational preparation standards of college and university 156 TABLE 12.--Numbers and combinations of faculty and gradu- ate assistants teaching the introductory driver education course as reported by 20h institutions Teaching Personnel Combinations Colleges and a Universities Full-Time Part -'1'ime Graduate Faculty Faculty Assistant 115 1 o 0 25 O 1 O 17 l l 0 l6 2 O 0 6 o 2 o S 1 2 o h 3 0 0 3 1 O 2 2 l O l 2 2 l 0 l O l l l O h. 0 l l l 1 1 l 2 l l 1 2 2 1 l 3 0 l 1 1 l; l 2 1 O l 1 l l 1 2 2 l l. 2 6 O 1 3 u 2 Total 201; 93 21 illq rug—41.13 _ ..IthMnL # 157 personnel preparing teachers for the field of driver edu- cation. A number of the reports returned from these thirty-two states included comments to the effect that any such requirements were determined by the particular college or university engaging persons to teach driver education. Nine states reported that completion of some type of non-credit institute, short course, or seminar in driver and/or safety education was required of personnel conducting teacher-preparation courses in driver education at the college or university level. Ten states (20%) require completion of some col- lege credit in driver and/or safety education for college and university driver education instructors. Six of these states reported a minimum requirement of undergraduate credit ranging fras as little as “0 semester-hours ‘ credit to as much as fifteen semester-hours credit (i.e., a minor teaching field) in safety and/or driver education. Four of the states specified sane type of graduate credit in safety and/or driver education, typically a major emphasis in the field at the master's degree level. Education 9_f_ instructors teaching the course Years 93 graduate studz.--Respondents in 1914. of the 210 institutions provided data relative to the years of graduate study completed by 202 full-time faculty and 158 67 part-thus faculty. Graduate assistants were not in- cluded in this phase of the study. The particular area or areas of emphasis and specialization in the graduate study were not considered in this category. Table 13 shows the distribution of both full-time faculty and part- time faculty according to the number of years of graduate study. As indicated in the table, a fairly even distri- bution was in evidence between.the:master's degree holders, those with a:master's degree plus one year of study, those holding the doctorate, and those with more than a year of study beyond the master's, but not in possession of a doctorate. . §pecia1 preparation.igiggizgg_education.--Respond- ents described the nature and extent of specialised in- struction in driver education completed or currently pursued by faculty teaching the introductory driver edu- cation course. A total of 225 instructors were included in this report--l9l of a potential 20h fullstime instruc- tors and 3h of a potential 93 part-time instructors. The relatively low percentageof reports provided for part-time instructors is probably explained by some respondents' lack of contact and definitive knowledge about the specialized background of part-time instructors employed by their in- stitution. Data supplied by respondents was classified according to five categories of specialized preparation. 159 TABLE l3.-&Years of graduate study completed by faculty teaching the introductory driver education course Years of Graduate Study Completed Instructors Full-Time Part-Time Total No graduate study (holds Bachelor's degree) Less than one year beyond Bachelor's degree One year (holds Master's degree) More than one, but less than two years (up to 29 some hrs. beyond Master's degree) More than two, but not possessing a doctorate degree (more than 29 sem. hrs. beyond master's degree) Doctor's degree com- pleted- 37 58 56 38 17 17 51 75 63 55 Total 202 67 269 Specialized preparation was confined to that of driver (as opposed to safety) education. As indicated in Table 1h, of the 225 instructors for which data was reported, 81% of the total had received specialized preparation of 160 TABLE lh.--Special educational preparation in driver edu- cation reported for 225 college and university instructors of the introductory driver education course H Instructors Highest Level of Special Preparationa Full -Time Part ~Time Total None 3 0 3 A non-credit workshop, short course, institute or seminar uh. 2 h6 A credit course A6 h. 50 More than one credit course, but not a minor (16 s.h.) 6h 20 8h A minor (16 ache) or major field on the undergraduate or graduate level 3h 8 ha Total 191 3k 225 ‘Figures listed are those representing the1mg§r imum special preparation for each individual. A number of Instructors who are counted as having completed a credit course or courses have also completed a workshop or short course(s). less than.a minor field of study. For 93 instructors (hl%) specialized preparation was confined to that of a credit course in driver education or less. The complete report on special preparation in driver education reported 161 for instructors is shown in Table 1h. The Third National Conference on Driver Edu- cationl recommended that college and university instructors hold a minimum of the Master's degree with a major (or its equivalent) in safety education. In this study driver education and safety education.have £22,been considered synonymously. Further, data provided by respondents relative to the specialized preparation of the faculty was that related to driver (not safety) education. Despite these different approaches, it nonetheless seems apparent that with 14.1% of the instructors reported as having cas- pleted a single credit course in driver education (or less), there are indeed.many instructors who do not begin to approach the minimum.recommendations as regards formalized educational preparation. ggpgrience 2;,instructors teaching the course An indication of the nature and extent of profes- sional experience relating to driver education possessed by college and university instructors of the introductory course in driver education was sought. A report of expe- rience prior to September, 1960 was requested with the 1Ibid., p. 23. 162 number of years service equated to full-time experience rounded to the nearest whole number. Data was secured for 269 of the 297 full-time and part-time instructors listed, 91% of the total. College and university experience in the teaching of driver education was listed for 125 of the 269 instruc- tors mm. For 30 instructors (11%) high school experi- ence teaching driver education was noted. In 91 instances (314%) instructors were reported as having 123th secondary and higher education experience teaching driver education. A variety of positions or canbinations of positions was reported for the remaining 23 instructors. Table 15 shows the entire range of experiences reported. Years of experience in each type of driver edu- cation involvement was reported by respondents for 260 instructors. Years of experience ranged frm one year to upwards of twenty years. When the average number of years of experience was computed for the instructors according to each type of experience, a similar length of experience was found to exist in each category utilized (viz., high school, college or university, state department of edu- cation, and ”other"). Average number of years experience in each category was found to be: (1) high school teaching of driver education--6.5 years, (2) college or university teaching of driver education--6.6 years, 163 TABDE 15.--Professional experience related to driver edu- cation reported for 269 college and university instructors teaching the introductory driver education course Type of Experiencea College or university . . . . . . . . . High School and college or university . High school . . . . . . . . . . . . . . High school, college or university, and supervisor of driver education in state department of education . . . . State department of education supervisor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . State department of education supervisor and college or university . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . High school, college or university, military . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . College or university and military . . . College or university and traffic safety supervisor in industry . . . . . High school, college or university, supervisor in.industry . . . . . . . . . High school, college or university, state police traffic safety ”8p0n81b111tYeeeeeeeeeeeee State department motor-vehicle administrator . . . . . . . . . . . . High School and college or universityb. High School and National Safety Council responsibility for driver education . . Owns and operates commercial driving Ochoa]. O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O I O 0 no experience prior to September, 1960 . Number of Instructors 125 91 30 P‘ F‘ #4 hard to #7 F‘IJ *4 F'P‘ 'Eflxperience is that of teaching unless otherwise indicated. b sessions only. College and university experience in.summer 161; ( 3) state department of education supervision of driver education--5.9 years, and (14) ”other” experience 5.1 years. These figures average approximately 6 years for all categories. It should be remembered that these fig- ures represent the average number of years experience. in each category, but do not reflect the average 1:333]; number of years experience (in all categories) for the instructors. 6 The Third National Conference on Driver Education recommended that the background of the college or univer- sity driver education instructor include ".I‘ . . (a) the teaching of beginning drivers and (b) several years in teaching and/or administration, preferably at the secondary level."1 Faculty eyloyment -time breakdown Information supplied on 206 instructors teaching the introductory driver education course indicated that 66 of this number (32%) are not officially engaged in gay 11bid. 165 research, administrative duties ,1 or other non-teaching responsibilities as a part of their employment. The information further revealed that'those instructors who are given released time from teaching to perform adminis- trative functions, conduct research, or engage in other non-teaching activities spend, as a whole, a comparatively small percentage of their time in these various non- teaching roles. Table 16 shows the distribution of employment time for the 206 instructors that were reported. As revealed in Table 16, only 119 instructors were engaged in research as a part of their employment (211%), and 35 of this number devoted less than one-tenth of their time to research. Faculty teaching-t ime breakdown The percentage of teaching time instructors devoted to teaching the introductory driver education course, other driver and/or safety education courses, and courses outside the driver and/or safety education field was sought. This question was not related to lAlthough responses indicated that some instructors were necessarily involved in some administrative work in connection with the driver education program. Because such work was generally considered by the institutions to be a part of the teaching responsibility, however, it was not classified as administrative. 166 TABEE 16.--Percentage of employment time 206 college and university introductory driver education course instruc- tors devote to teaching and non-teaching responsibilities Frequency of Mention Percentage of time Teach- Adminis- Research Other ing tration 100-91 71 0 O 0 90-81 ’ 2h 0 0 0 80-71 he h. 0 0 70-61 8 O 0 0 60-51 18 2 0 1 SO-hl 25 h l 12 hO-Bl 12 9 O 9 30-21 3 1h 5 20 20-11 3 16 8 16 10-1 2 37 35 111 Total 206 86 R9 100 responsibilities of the instructor other than teaching. Only full-time instructors were included in this deter- mination with information provided for 180 such instruc- tors. Six instructors were reported as devoting their entire teaching tame to the introductory driver education course. Instructors teaching courses in driver and/or safety education in addition to the introductory driver 167 education course numbered 101. An almost identical number (viz., 100 instructors) were reported to be teaching courses outside the driver and/or safety edu- cation field in addition to the introductory driver edu- cation course. Some instructors teach.the introductory driver education course, other driver and safety education courses, and courses outside the driver and/or safety education field. Table 17 shows the distribution of teaching reported for 180 instructors. Faculty teachi outside the driver and 2; safety education field Data on all instructors (full-time and part-time) teaching the introductory driver education course who also were engaged in teaching courses outside the driver and/or safety education field was sought. The area or areas in which teaching outside the driver and/or safety education field is done was the subject of the inquiry. Data was provided by respondents for a total of 178 instructors. As might have been expected, ”other" teaching areas were somewhat a reflection of the departmental affiliation of the driver education course. That is, the most frequently mentioned area was that of health, physical education, and recreation. This area involved 102 instructors, 57% of the total. Since it was the 168 TABLE 17.--Percentage of teaching time 180 college and university introductory driver education course instruc- tors devote to teaching the introductory course, other driver and/or safety education courses, and courses out- side the driver and/or safety education field Frequency of Mention Percentage of Time Intro- Other Dr. Courses Out- ductory & Saf.Ed. side Dr. a Course Courses Saf.Ed.Fie1d 100-91 6 l h 90-81 1 2 11 80-71 2 1 2h 70-61 2 5 7 60-51 3 5 10 So-hl l9 13 12 h0-31 17 13 11 30-21 h6 20 12 20-11 h? 2h h 10-1 37 17 5 Total 180 101 100 school, department or college of health, physical edu- cation, and recreation that was found to include the introductory course more often than.any other area of the college or university it is not too surprising to discover that 57% of the instructors who teach.courses other than those within the driver and/or safety 169 education field are teaching within the health and physical education field. Further, Just as the industrial arts, industrial education, and practical arts area ranked third as a departmental affiliation for the introductory course so are a number of teachers engaged in conducting courses outside the driver and/or safety education field teaching within these areas. Respondents reported 33 instructors (19%) teaching these industrial and practical education courses. The remaining h3 instructors taught a variety of other courses with professional education courses (e.g., audio-visual education) mentioned.mest frequently within this grouping. .Although.found only in isolated instances, the diversity of other courses taught by some instructors is made apparent by reports of instructors conducting courses in hbrary science, geography, chem- istry, social studies, mathematics, religion, physical science, and business education. Faculty eggaged is cmus safety and accident pre- vention activities Canpleted questionnaires received fran the 210 colleges and universities participating in the survey revealed the nature and extent of participation in.campus safety and accident-prevention activities on the part of introductory driver education course instructors. 0f the 170 297 introductory course instructors, 80 were reported as being charged with some such responsibility. Thus 73% of the instructors were reported as taking no official part in.campus safety activities. The 80 persons reported as having some measure of responsibility for campus safety represented 73 colleges and universities. Hence, only »35% of the 210 participating institutions make official use of the introductory course instructors in campus safety planning or activities. membership and service on some type of campus safety committee was the manner in which 76 of the 80 instructors fulfilled responsibilities for campus safety and accident prevention. Of the 76 serving on such committees, 29 act as chairman or director for the commit- tee, 38% of the total. The four persons not serving on committees were reported as acting as advisers to the college or university administration in matters pertaining to safety on the campus. Some committees were general in scope, others‘were specific. Areas of concern mentioned most frequently were general campus safety, parking, fire, security, building inspection, traffic, laboratory inspection, civil defense, safety in athletics, and bus transportation. Several instructors (not included in the above tabulation) were reported to regularly involve their 171 classes in campus safety surveys, the findings of which are transmitted to the administration of the institution for possible utilization. Several respondents indicated that while they did not have any official responsibility for campus safety there was a definite need for recognithni of and attention to the problem.of campus safety. Although the question was restricted to campus safety activities, 15 respondents wrote marginal notes on the questionnaire to the effect that they were parti- cipating in some type of organized commmnity safety work. Ag Evaluation 2; the Introductory'Driver Education Course and Related ' Information Phrased in question form and presented in open-end fashion, the questionnaire contained several requests for information of a self-evaluative nature concerning the introductory course. The comments provided by respondents in answer to these queries are presented on the pages that follow. ‘When.analyzing the comments supplied by the respondents every attempt was made to identify and preserve the individual evaluative comment and to avoid generalizing comments into a few convenient categories. Inevitably some comments were found to be similar with.any apparent differences mostly that of degree rather than 172 kind. In these instances, of course, the comments were grouped together in a common category. In an effort to enable the respondents' words to be heard, rather than the investigator's version of the respondents' words, comments supplied by some respondents are quoted through- out the section. Sources of these comments have not been identified because of the anonymity promised each respond- ent by the investigator in the original letter requesting co-operation in the study. Asmcts 9;. the; introductory course believed ‘_o_y respond- gh__angg and grovement Respondents from 192 of the 210 participating college and universities supplied comments relative to needed changes and improvements for the introductory course, thereby enabling a 95% response to the question. Equigaent . --The factor mentioned more frequently than any other was. that of the need for more and better equipment. Forty-nine respondents mentioned this aspect of the course as most in need of change and improvement. These expressions of frustration at the lack of needed equipment ranged from fairly mild statements about a lack of classroom supplies (e.g., a traffic board) through comments about sanewhat more costly pieces of equipment 173 such as psycho-physical testing devices, and culminating in requests for more autos. One or two respondents expressed the need for off-street driving facilities and/or simulated driving equipment (e.g., Aetna Drivo- trainer). Several respondents expressed a desire to purchase autos rather than secure them through a dealer, free-loan arrangement. One reason prominently mentioned as justification for more and better equipment was typified in the comment supplied by a Midwestern respond- ent and quoted below. There should be more cars available so that a greater number of students could take the course, as we have to limit the class under present conditions and therefore prevent some from taking the course. The other prominently mentioned reason justifying the need for more and better equipment was summed up in the comments written by another Midwestern respondent: I feel that a training program should make available and present all possible devices and techniques in the field. Money is the problem. we have not been able to buy the equipment we should have. Facilities.--Along a similar line sixteen respond- ents expressed the need to somehow provide better practice driving facilities. Lack of a proper place to initiate behind-the-wheel instruction was the principal concern and was understandably voiced most often by respondents teaching at institutions located in urban areas with a 17h real measure of traffic congestion. Another sixteen respondents found themselves in need of either more classroom space than that presently provided and/or a regularly assigned classroom that would enable a central location for storage and use of materials and equipment. Teaching time.--Concern about insufficient time both for the classroom phase and the practice driving phase occupied the thinking of some thirty-eight respond- ents. A respondent in a Southeastern college using the quarter-term system.gave a reason for the need for more practice driving time that was shared by a number of his colleagues when.he wrote: The time spent in the course should be in- creased to two quarters instead of one, thereby providing the potential teacher with.more time to acquaint himself with the problems of driver education and to develop sound driving habits. Most drivers in these programs did not learn to drive under systematic instruction, consequent- ly their driving habits need to be improved before the students [beginning drivers] are exposed to than. A respondent teaching in a Midwestern university wrote of this type of problem.despite a recent change in the program along this very line. This respondent wrote: We need more time. The quarter systmm is theoretically a 12-week plan, but actually only gives us slightly more than 9é'weeks 175 teaching thme. This is not enough. It leaves me breathless, anyway. We always manage to squeeze in.what we need, but I don't have time to review and give emphasis where needed . . . A number of comments relating to insufficient time included discussion about a lack of provision on the part of the college or university administration.for time needed in administering and supervising the course. Typical of these comments was the one quoted below which originated in a Southern college. The greatest problem in the present arrangement is the amount of time required to -supervise the practice driving. It requires almost as much.time as to teach a regular three-semester-hour course.1 However, no graduate assistants are available and I would not want to entrust supervision to anyone with less maturity and experience. Curricular development.--There were twenty-one respondents who decried the practice of "trying to put a quart in a pint container" as one of their number stated it. This reference was to a lack of courses beyond the introductory driver education course and the need, there- fore, to teach everything bearing upon driver education in a brief one-course exposure. These comments might have been classified under the ”teaching time" category, but seemed to deserve special recognition. 1It is necessary to point out that this college limits enrollment in the introductory course to a maximum of twelve students per semester. 176 Enrollment procedures.--An apparent concern was expressed by a dozen respondents relative to the lack of screening of students enrolling in the course. ‘Espe- cially in institutions operating on.the quarter-term basis, it is often the practice to place the college students and beginning drivers in an auto under limited supervision after only a few class meetings and (some- times) a quick read check. Particularly in situations where course prerequisite requirements are weak or non- existent this practice is potentially filled with problems not the least of which is the safety of all concerned. Stmulated practice drivigg instruction.--Ten of the respondents conducting simulated (rather than actual) practice driving instruction considered the lack of actual instructional experience to be the aspect of the course most in.need of change and improvement. ggheduling the course.--Eleven respondents teaching at institutions that offer the course only during the summer session expressed the need to have the course offered during the regular session as well. Most fre- quently this need was based on the belief that the summer session was operated as a ”one-shot quickie course” in the words of afiWestern respondent, therefore not permitting sufficient development of the course. 177 Other aspects.--In addition to the aforementioned aspects, a number of additional aspects were reported by respondents to be most in need of change and improvement. For the most part these aspects tended to be local con- cerns. These aspects mentioned most frequently in this grouping were: (1) need to offer graduate as well as undergraduate credit for the course, (2) need for more staff, especially full-time staff, (3) need for £93; administrative support for the program, (14) need for better public relations development, (5) need for ”more numerous and more adequate" texts written at the college level, and (6) need to develop better techniques for evaluating the student instructor's performance. Interestingly, fourteen respondents were apparently completely satisfied with the introductory course in its present form in that this number of questionnaires were marked ”none" in answer to the question of what aspects of the course were most in need of change and improve- me nt . Aspects _o_f_ the introductory course believed by respond- ents 33 be; most noteworthy 9g satisfying Respondents" from 183 of the 210 institutions (87%) supplied comments relative to those aspects of the intro- ductory course they personally find most noteworthy and 178 8 ati smug e High degree g£_student interest, acceptance, and sincerity.--The high degree of interest, acceptance and sincerity shown.by students enrolled in the course was listed most frequently by respondents as that aspect of the course they found most noteworthy and satisfying. This aspect was mentioned by thirty-five respondents. Student growth and development.--Closely allied to the former aspect is that of the satisfaction instructors feel when.their students develop and mature in safe driving, in the teaching of safe driving to beginning drivers in.the course, and (eventually) in professional appointments in the field of driver edu- cation: A comment typical of this viewpoint and repre- sentative of the thirty-one responses along this line is quoted below. The change in attitude of the students as they begin to really study driving. Also the realization that develops in the student that he has been making many errors in his own driving. I would feel that the course would be very worth while even if none of the students later entered the teaching field in driver training. Of course, quite a number of the students who take the course later become teachers of driver education, and help directly in developing better drivers. Practice drivipg phase.--Some of the aspects of the introductory course listed by respondents as most in 179 need of change and improvement when conducted in one manner were listed by other respondents as most note- worthy and satisfying when conducted in a different manner. The practice driving or behind-the-wheel aspect of the course was a case in point. Many of the twenty- eight respondents indicating this involvement as most noteworthy and satisfying did so because of their pleasure with an actual (rather than simulated) practice driving experience. Some of the respondents noted the practical and experimental nature of the practice driving phase as a refreshing counter-balance to the more theoretical and structured nature of typical classroom and lecture sessions. Twenty-three respondents were particularly pleased to report that their student instructors were worldng with high school beginning drivers as opposed to other types of beginning drivers (e.g., adults), men- tioning that close co-Operation with local-area or laboratory high schools provided the basis for a sound practice-driving instructional program. Nature and scope _o_f_ facilities and resources.» Freedom to develop the course along broad lines and the ability to secure and use a variety of human and mate- rial resources was mentioned by eighteen respondents as particularly noteworthy and satisfying. The comment quoted below is representative. 180 The driving lab, the familiarization of the prospective teacher with the better teach- ing films, and the utilization of resource people before the class (i.e., highway patrol education officer, department of public in- struction representative, etc.). Also, the projects carried on by the class-~both group and individual. Other aspects.--Listed below are several aspects of the introductory course found most noteworthy and satisfying by several respondents, but not mentioned 'with great frequency throughout the entire group. These . aspects are: (1) a feeling of personal contribution to accident prevention and reduction, (2) the entire course in all of its aspects, (3) acceptance of the course by college or departmental colleagues and/or the adminis- tration, (h) interest, co-operation, and comments of driver licensing officials, (5) small class size enabling a.mere personal type of teaching, (6) impres- sive (i.e., good) traffic records maintained by students after completing the course, (7) excellent practice driving facilities, (8) a situation.whereby students enrolling in the course can be screened or "hand picked," and (9) size, location, and permanency of an assigned \ classroom. From this group, comments provided by an instruc- tor teaching in a Midwestern university are presented below. The quotation is included because it discusses 181 both the "hand—picking" of students and also provides justification for this particular university's practice of 3333; including the practice driving phase of driver education instruction in the introductory course. Five of the 210 colleges and universities participating in the survey followed this practice. In the quotation the respondent' s reference to the ”methods course" is a reference to the introductory driver education course. The fact that I do not have to lay the groundwork and still let the student instruc- tors teach concurrently. The methods course is completed before the experimental teaching begins. I am not in favor of the two being offered in the same course as is so cannon. Thus I really know my beginning teacher and he has been completely prepared; this cuts down on the constant watching that must be done in the other set-up. Also, I have the authori it to ”ban hand ick” 111,11 students.—'This means tfiafzI— get only the cream of the crop.” The enrollment is limited and those who are admitted strive to maintain their eligibility. Thus you get hard-working, trustworthy candidates. Fewer supervision problems result. Concept o_f_ t__h_e_ r__o___le a high school driver education teacher s_h____ould Elay__ as s_e____en by college and uni- varsity driver education instructors Respondents who indicated their personal concept of the role of the high school driver education teacher numbered 136, 65% of the total. Although the statements 182 submitted by respondents varied somewhat from one another, and although some reflected a rather restric- tive concept while others reflected a broader concept, it was nevertheless possible to identify two principal concepts fran among the 136 statements that were sub- mitted. The first of these concepts can be described as that whereby the high school driver education teacher is seen in a leadership role pertaining to safety (espe- cially traffic safety) in both school and community. Evidence of this viewpoint was found in whole or in substantial part in the statements of fifty-three respondents. One statement typical of this viewpoint was written by an instructor in an Eastern college and is quoted below. The high school driver education instruc- tor should be the school and community leader in safety education. He should be the direc- tor of the comprehensive program in the school, with responsibilities in the area of traffic, civil defense, accident reporting, and fire prevention and protection. Along with this he should assist in curriculum de- ve10pment so that safety education will be included in the school from first through twelfth grade. He should also aid in estab- lishing policies pertaining to safe living and a safe school enviroment. Another respondent, this one teaching at a Midwestern university, focused more upon preparation of the high school teacher than upon the Job he should be 183 expected to perform, Because the Job to be done is somewhat dependent upon professional preparation, and because the preparation program seen as desirable by this respondent reflects the broad school and community concept, his remarks are included. Our concept of the competent driver edu- cation teacher is a person who has (a) the general qualifications necessary for teaching in any field, (b) an enthusiastic belief in the potential contribution of driver education to the total traffic problem, and (c) a broad professional preparation which includes, in addition to driver education, an understanding of such areas as traffic enforcement and one gineering, general safety education, community safety organizations, principles of school ad- ministration, research techniques, and child development and guidance. The latter area is certainly basic in teaching, an area which essentially involves modification of attitudes and behavior. The second of the two principal concepts advanced by the respondents was centered upon the teaching done in the high school driver education course. Most of the thirty-two respondents who identified with this concept emphasised the importance of developing in the high school students sound attitudes, good skills, and a thorough knowledge pertaining to safe driving. A few respondents concentrated specifically upon one of these areas (e.g., attitudes or citizenship). Typical of statements written within.this conceptual framework is the following: 181; His most important role is that of creat- ing the proper environment for building proper attitudes in new drivers. He must believe in the importance of his role. In addition to this, he must teach specific skills that new drivers need. In a large measure, he needs to challenge new drivers to a high level of citizenship and responsibility. He must set a good example in.his own attitude and by his teaching, give an.atmosphere of importance and dignity to his class. The fifty-one respondents not identifying with either of the two principal concepts advanced the fol- lowing themes most frequently: (1) the driver education teacher should not be regarded any differently than any other teacher, (2) the driver education teacher should set a good example, (3) the driver education teacher must act as a public relations person for driver education, espe- cially among the school faculty and in the community, (h) the driver education teacher needs to correct bad driving habits, and (5) the driver education teacher must act as does a good coach or counselor. Estimate 2;: administrative support for the teacher Lreparation program _ig driver education College and university instructors of the intro- ductory driver education course were asked to cheokaark a scale (i.e., none, little, some, much) at the point they estimated to be descriptive of the degree to which 185 "the administration encourages, assists, and promotes the improvement and expansion of a driver education teacher preparation program on your campus.” Analysis of check marks placed such marks at or near the point marked "none“ in five instances, at or near the point marked "little" in forty-three instances, at or near the point marked ”some” in eighty-six instances, and at or near the point marked ”much" in seventy-one instances. There were five questionnaires returned unmarked. Thus, the upper end of the scale (viz., some, much) was reported by 157 respondents, 75% of the total. 8111111111331 Inquiry concerning the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education was made by means of a questionnaire with usable responses received from a total of 210 colleges and universities. A primary objective of gathering the information was that of determining the instructional and administrative charac- teristics typical of the introductory course in driver education as taught in the nation's colleges and univer-' sities. In an effort to summarize those characteristics of the course which were found to by tzpicallz represented in the 210 colleges and universities the following description is presented. The course as described below 186 reflects those characteristics reported most frequently and typically in the data presented in the previous pages of the chapter. The title of the course is ”Driver Education.” The course is offered ”on.csmpus” in a college or univer- sity under state control and is listed as a three- somester-hour credit course offered on the undergraduate level. It is possible to enroll in the course either during the regular year or in the summer session provided the prerequisites of (l) possession of a valid driver's license and, (2) at least Junior standing are satisfied. The course is offered through.the department of health and physical education, and although the college is co-educational, the ratio of male to female students enrolled in the course is about nine to one. AALmost everyone enrolled in the course intends to teach although not all plan to teach driver education. One or two students are in-service teachers. If the course is pursued during one of the semesters of the regular school year class enrollment will probably average about fifteen to twenty students. In summer the course will be offered during a six week session with about twenty-five students enrolled. Students will be required to secure and use a copy of §portamanlike‘Drivigg for their classroom work. 187 The instructor's outline of the course may bear some resemblance to the content of the American Automobile Associations' Teacher-Training Course in Driver Instruc- tigg}-or to the outline and table of contents of Highway Safety and,Driver Education.2 Perhaps the most distinguishing feature of this three or four page outline is its variance in content with the outlines used in many other college and university introductory driver education courses. The laboratory phase of the course consists of sessions held twice weekly over the entire eighteen- ‘week semester. In these sessions the students will gain experience in conducting practice driving instruction in a dual-control car. Each student will be assigned one or two beginning drivers who will receive driving in- struction free of charge. These beginning drivers will probably be either college students seeking to learn to operate a motor vehicle or local~area high school ' students enrolled in their high school's driver education program.the practice driving phase of which the college provides. The student-instructor and his one or two 1AmericanAutomobile Association, Teacher- Training Course in Driver Instruction, op. cit. 2 Brody and Stack, gp. cit. 188 ' beginning drivers will use an automobile which is provided for use by the university on a free-loan basis by a local-area auto dealer. The same member of the faculty that teaches the classroom phase of the introductory course also supervises the student-instructor in his practice driving instruction, and is actually present in the auto less than 50% of the time practice driving sessions are in progress. The member of the faculty teaching the introductory course is employed on a full-time basis and in addition to teaching the introductory course (both phases) he teaches one or more other courses. The other courses he teaches are driver and safety education courses unless an insuf- ficient number of such courses are offered in his department. The instructor holds a Master's degree and has completed approximately one year of graduate study beyond the Master's degree. Although the instructor has can- pleted several courses in driver and/or safety education during his college years (as well as a non-credit seminar in driver education some years ago), he cannot claim to have completed a minor teaching field of sixteen semester hours in driver and/or safety education, or its equivalent. He has been teaching driver education at the college level nearly seven years. His assignment is that of teaching 189 and this leaves no opportunity for rcsearch--at least not as a part of his employment. The instructor finds the aspects of the course most in need of change and improvement to be:- (1) the lack of adequate equipment and facilities, (2) the lack of a sufficient number and type of courses in driver and safety education other than the introductory course, and (3) the lack of a really adequate "screening” of students enrolling in the course. First and foremost’in his mind is the need for more and better equipment and facilities-- new psycho-physical testing equipment, a second auto- mobile, a better location for initiating practice driving instruction. Despite this need for improvement along the lines indicated, the instructor is of the belief that the administration is supporting the driver education program, at least to some extent. The aspects of the course most pleasing to the instructor are: (1) the way in which his students mature in their outlook toward traffic safety and in their progress toward becoming good driver education teachers, (2) the way in which the practice driving phase lends itself to the immediate and practical application of theory covered in the classroom, and ( 3) the presentations made by resource people assisting with and strengthening 190 the program of instruction. Although the instructor is not easily persuaded to describe his concept of the role of the high school driver education teacher, when pressed he will state that the high school driver education teacher should be "Mr. Safety” in both school and community. CHAPTER VI COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY'TOTAL PROGRAMS OF DRIVER EDUCATION In this chapter there is presented a review and analysis of information supplied by college and univer-’ sity driver education instructors pertaining to various aspects of the teacher preparation programs in driver edu- cation in their respective institutions. This information is in contrast to the information presented in the previous chapter in that it embraces the 3223; driver education program rather than being confined specifically to the introductory driver education course. It has been necessary on some pages of this chapter to speak of driver and/er safety education, rather than driver education alone, because of the lack of a clear point of division between the two areas. A portion of the information that is presented herein centers about the curricula provided by colleges and universities in driver education, safety education, and related areas. This information.was gathered from among the same 210 college and university respondents 191 192 who provided information relative to the introductory driver education course. The information was in fact provided on the questionnaire principally concerned with the introductory course.1 Another portion of the information presented on the following pages was gathered through the utilization of the Colleges and Universities Driver Education Teacher Preparation ProgramQuestionnaire.2 This questionnaire was circulated to the thirty-five colleges and univer- sities that had been found to offer what was defined as a substantial number and type of teacher preparation courses in driver education, safety education, and related areas. The specific conditions under which col- leges and universities were determined to be offering a substantial number and type of courses were discussed in Chapter III. Thirty-four of the thirty-five institutions which were sent these questionnaires qualified fully under the conditions set forth for the purposes of the study. The thirty-fifth institution was placed on the questionnaire mailing list even though it failed to fully qualify on 1Appendix C 0 2Appendix H. 1193 one consideration. Because of its geographical location in a traffic-congested major city, this institution does not provide actual practice driving instructional expe- rience for all students enrolled in the introductory driver education course. It did not seem.advisable to eliminate from this grouping of colleges and universities an institution that has made a national contribution to the field of driver and safety education which extends through more than two decades -- at least not on the technicality mentioned above. From the group of thirty-five institutions that were sent this questionnaire, replies were received from thirty-three, a total of 9h%. Data on one questionnaire that was returned was found to have been provided in answer to only a few of the stated questions. This questionnaire was, therefore, excluded from consideration when analyzing the findings. The names of the thirty-two selected colleges and universities whose programs fenced the basis for one portion of this chapter are indicated 19h inAppendixD.1 In the first portion of the chapter the programs listed by all 210 colleges and universities are presented. In the latter portion of the chapter attention is con- centrated upon the programs described by respondents from the selected group of colleges and universities. Curricular Programs g§_All the Colleges and Universities Number 2; courses offered Respondents provided lists of credit courses offered by their institutions. Courses listed were those which.could be applied toward completion.of a major or minor teaching field in.driver and/or safety education, or toward certification to teach driver education. Courses were listed by title with 206 of the 210 insti- tutions represented. All courses listed specifically by 1Michigan State university (through its College of Education and Highway Traffic Safety Center) was one of the thirty-two institutions included on the list of selected colleges and universities. ‘Within a few'months of the receipt of a completed questionnaire from.Michigan State'University, its Highway Traffic Safety Center was "phased out” of operation. This action had the immediate effect of reducing the scope of the teacher preparation program in driver education, as well as other aspects of the Center's program, to that of a small portion of its former stature. Because the Center was in full operation, however, throughout the 1960-61 school year the data' cglfiected on its program is reported as a part of this Buy. ' 195 title were included in the tabulation. In several in- stances a specific title was not furnished (e.g., "psychology courses”) and in these instances no tabu- lation was made. Some respondents indicated that in addition to the courses listed there were courses offered in other colleges or departments which might be counted. Because these were not specifically named they could not be included. The 206 institutions represented listed a total of 78? specific courses which could be applied toward certification or toward a major or minor teaching field in driver and/or safety education. The total mmber of courses offered most frequently by the reporting insti- tutions was that of 2513 course (viz., the introductory driver education course) ; this situation was reported by 57 colleges and universities, 28% of the total reporting. Next in order of frequency was: (1) two courses offered-- 38 institutions, (2) four courses offered-30 institutions, and (3) three courses offered--28 institutions. When averaged to the nearest whole mimber the number of courses offered per institution was found to be four. m 93: courses offered As a part of the analysis an attempt was made to classify the 787 courses reported by respondents into a I96 umber of categories. This was done with the objective of determining the nature of typical offerings. On the assmsption that a course title is representative of the content of the course, and because some course titles carry almost universal meaning (e.g., first-aid) many courses were classified with comparative ease. Unfortunate- ly, not all the course titles listed were so easily categorized and some courses were necessarily placed in an ”unclassified" category so as to avoid possible errors in classification. » . The introductory driver education course was, of course, mentioned 206 times. The next most-frequent mention was that of the introductory safety education course 3 it was reported to be offered by 110 institutions, 53% of the total. Other courses mentioned frequently-1 are as follows: (1) first aid-mentioned 83 times, (2) an advanced or “second” driver education course-«mentioned 57 times (3) courses grouped under the heading of health and/or physical education and safety-«mentioned 11.3 times, and (1;) courses grouped under the heading of psychology, 10ther than for the introductory driver education course and the introductory safety education course, it is not possible to assume that the mention of a particular number of courses within a grouping necessarily means that such courses were listed by that same number 0 institu- tions. As an example, of the twenty auto mechanics courses listed seven were reported by a single institution. This situation is, however, the exception rather thanthe rule. 197 guidance, and counseling-smentioned hz times. The courses mentioned, as arranged in groupings, are presented in their entirety in Table 18. Comparison.g§ National Conference gg,Driver Education recommen- dations with‘thg courses offered Recommended courses for minimal teacher prepa- ration in driver education as prepared by the 1958 National Conference on Driver Education; included a three- somester-hour course titled 'Introduction to Safety Edu- cation” and six semester hours in.”Driver and Traffic Safetthducation.' For the purposes of the discussion below, one introductory course in safety education and two courses in driver education.were accepted as equiva- lent to this recommended requiroment. It was found that forty institutions of the 206 reporting offered an introductory safety education course and two courses in driver education. This number repre- sents 19% of the total number of institutions. Seventy institutions offer the introductory safety education course but no advanced driver education course. Seventeen 1National Conference on Driver Education (Purdue ‘University, 1958), Policies and Practices for‘Driver Edu- cation, 22o Cite, pe 26o 198 TABLE 18.--Types of courses listed by colleges and univer- sities as applicable for teacher preparation and/or certi- fication in driver and/or safety education Type of Course Times Mentioned An introductory driver education course 0 O O O O O O 0 O 0 O O O O O O O O 206 An introductory safety education ' course . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 A firSt-aid course e e e e e e e e e e e e 83 An advanced driver education course . . . 57 Courses in health and/or physical education and safetya . . . . . . . . . . #3 Courses in psychology, guidance, and counselingb . . . . . . . . . . . . . he Audio-visual education courses . . . . . . 25 23 Seminars or workshops in safety or driver education . . . . . . . . . . . A course in the organization, administration, and supervision of safety education . . . . . . . . . . . 22 An advanced safety education course . . . 21 Autoomechanics courses . . . . . . . . . . 20 Courses in life saving and water safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Courses in industrial and occupa- tional safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Courses in sociology . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Courses in law enforcement and/or traffic engineering . . . . . . . . . . . 1h Courses in the psychology of safety education and accident prevention . . . . 12 Courses in school safety . . . . . . . . . 9 Courses in government and city planning . 6 Courses in research in driver and safetyoduoation............. ll. ‘Unclassified courses . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Total 787 ‘But not including courses in "the s chology of safety and accident prevention" which are l 3 ed separately. bBut not includi courses in "life saving and ‘water safety" which are l sted separately. 199 colleges and universities offer the two driver education courses, but do not offer the introductory safety edu- cation course. Thus, among the institutions that offer teacher preparation in driver education, in only one college or university in five is it possible for a person to complete the three courses recommended as minimum preparation to teach driver education in the secondary schools. Related elective courses recommended by the Conference for the purpose of acquiring sufficient credit to complete a teaching minor in driver and safety education were these: Psychology and Safety Education; Organisation, Administration, and Supervision of Safety Education; Problems in Safety Education; Methods and Materials in Safety Education; Child Growth and Development; Guidance; Understanding Group Behavior; Sociology; Occupational Safety; Recreational Safety; Hone and Commmity Safety; Automotive Mechanics; Traffic Law and Enforcement; Traffic Engineering; Audio-visual and other Teaching Aids; Evaluation and Research in Safety Education; and other courses related to safety.1 Most of these recoimnended courses appear to be represented, at least by similarity of title, in the list libido, Pp. 20-210 200 of courses supplied by college and university respondents. 149.121: 9.1: nine: £42.12 Respondents in thirty-seven colleges and univer- sities indicated that their institution awards a major or minor in driver and/or safety education. Thus, 18% of the 210 colleges and universities offering an introductory course in driver education claim to award a major or minor teaching field in driver and/or safety education. The majority of these thirty-seven colleges and universities award an undergraduate minor; there were twenty-nine institutions that indicated this arrangement. Four institutions place their driver and/or safety edu- cation field at the graduate level with half this number offering a minor and the other half a major. ho univer- sities offer both an undergraduate minor and a graduate major. These thirty-seven colleges and universities were located in 18 different states. Nine of these states were among the group of sixteen states providing financial support to local schools for driver education. Insti- tutions located in these states which offer a major or minor field were found to number twenty-two. Ten of the eighteen states involved listed only one institution offering a major or minor field. One 201 state listed seven institutions offering a major or minor and another state listed five. Those institutions offering a.minor or major field were discovered to list courses available for the major or minor field that ranged in number from three courses (reported by two institutions) to seventeen courses (offered by two institutions). The average number of courses that could be utilized in the major or minor that were offered by each institution was computed to the nearest whole number and found to be seven. Thus the average number of courses offered by those institutions offering. a major or minor was three more than the average number of courses offered by all the institutions offering the introductory driver education course. Reports from institutions offering a major or minor field.were analyzed so as to determine the number of these colleges and universities that offered a program that would meet the minimum requirements set forth at the 1958 National Conference on Driver Education with respect to an introductory safety education course and two courses in driver education. Only eighteen of the thirty-seven institutions claiming to offer a major or minor field in driver and/or safety education.(h9%) were able to qualify under these recommended standards. Fifteen of the institutions offered an introductory safety education 20?. course and an introductory driver education course, but no advanced driver education course. Four colleges offered no separate safety education course although in three of these instances the introductory driver education course incorporated the word safety in the course title. Programs _o_f_ the Selected Colleges and Universities Program organization and administration Administrative placement.--The teacher preparation program in driver education was found to be maintained within several different administrative units (i.e., departments, colleges) in the selected colleges and universities. The same pattern discovered for the admin- istrative placement of the introductory driver education course among all the participating colleges and univer- sities was also found among the selected institutions. That is, fourteen teacher preparation programs in driver education were found to exist as a part of the department or college of health, physical education, and recreation. This area represents h3% of the total number of programs surveyed. Eight programs (25%) were attached to the industrial arts or industrial education area, and five programs (16%) were offered in conjunction with a depart- ment or college of education. Twa programs were located 203 outside these three principal administrative units and the awnistrative placement was not reported for three other institutions. flinistrative 2.11.232. 93 ccnnnand.--The administra- tive hierarchy relative to the teacher preparation program was investigated. It was found that the person held administratively responsible for the teacher preparation program in driver education in the selected colleges and universities is most frequently a department or division head or chaiman, or the college dean. This arrangement was indicated by twenty respondents representing 62% of the selected institutions. These administrative officers are in turn typically responsible directly to a dean (e.g., Dean of the College of Edu- caticn) or to the college or university president or vice- president. Eleven institutions (M) were reported as having a person functioning as a director, chaiman, or head of the driver and/or safety education teacher preparation program. In these instances this person typically is charged with administrative responsibility for the teacher preparation program and he in turn is responsible to the division, department, or college dean, director, or head. One institution was not represented in these figures. 20h. Financew-The operation of the teacher preparation program in driver education is financed exclusively from the college or university budget in most of the selected colleges and universities; twenty-four institutions (75%) were reported as receiving all their funds in this manner. Three additional colleges and universities were found to receive their financial support from the insti- tution's budget except for a relatively small amount of money collected as fees from beginning drivers. Three institutions were reported as receiving a portion of their finances from private sources as well as from the institution's budget. THO of these universities it was found, garnered 25% of their funds from private grants 3 the other university reported a 10% inccme originating in the form of private grants. No institutions were listed as having three sources of incane with grants from public sources (e.g., governmental agencies) being added to the institutional source and the private-grant source previously mentioned. Program service emphasis.--In an attempt to dis- cover the mount of emphasis given the teacher preparation program in driver education as compared to other aspects of a total driver education program, respondents were asked to estimate the percentage of time given to teacher 205 preparation, research, publication, and other efforts. By definition, these efforts were restricted to official functions of the faculty and staff, not personal ventures into research, publication, and other service areas. In eighteen of the selected institutions (56%) a single- purpose emphasis (viz. , teacher preparation) was reported. Two-purpose emphasis was reported for five colleges and universities and three-purpose emphasis for eight insti- tutions. Data was not provided on one college. Of the thirteen institutions giving emphasis to more than teacher preparation, nine listed a research emphasis, five a publication emphasis, and six an emphasis other than research or publication. Consultant and field service, especially to area schools, was most frequently mentioned in the ”other" service category. In no instance was an institution reported as: (l) devoting less then 50% emphasis to teacher preparation, (2) more than 25% emphasis to research, (3) more than 20% emphasis to publication, and (h) more than h0% emphasis to "other" areas. W 2212!. Maw-Faculty teaching in the driver education program in the selected colleges and universities totaled fifty-seven. This number included both full-time and . _ 4 206 part-time faculty teaching the 9.111.333. education courses, but not those teaching the many related courses only. The figure did not include those with less than full faculty status (i.e., graduate assistants). Sixteen institutions (50%) were reported as having one faculty member, seven institutions had three staff members each, six institutions had two faculty members each, and two institutions reported a staff of four at each university. Especially when it is remembered that some faculty members are engaged only part-time in driver education teaching, it appears that in the selected institutions, as in all the colleges and univer- sities, teaching in the driver education field tends to be primarily a one-man operation. Highest gig-gag; _h__e;_l_d_. --The percentage of faculty holding a doctorate degree (any field) and teaching driver education courses in the selected institutions was almost double the percentage holding a doctorate degree and teaching driver education in sl 1 colleges and univer- sities offering an introductory driver education course. In both the selected institutions and in all the institutions the majority of the faculty hold the Master's degree with some of this mmber having completed course work of more than a year's duration beyond the Master's 207 degree. Table 19 shows the percentage of driver edu- cation faculty in the selected institutions and in all institutions that hold the various degrees. TABLE l9.--Highest degree held by faculty teaching driver education courses in selected institutions and in all in- stitutions w t " Percentage of Faculty Highest Degree Held In Selected In All Insti- Institutions tutions (N=32) (N=22S) Doctorate no 20 master's 53 70 Bachelor's S 10 Not reported 2 O Total 100 100 Special preparation.§g§,egpgrience.--The instruc- tors teaching driver education courses in the selected colleges and universities were found to reflect, as a group, much.the same extent of special preparation to teach driver education as did the driver education instructors in all colleges and universities. In.both instances the largest percentage of the group was re- ported to have completed more than one driver education course, but less than a sixteenéhour teaching field in 208 driver and/or safety education. The situation with regard to the professional experiences of the instructors which related to driver education was likewise similarly , represented in the two groups. Both in the selected colleges and universities and in all the colleges and universities, college-level teaching in driver education was mentioned more frequently than any other type of experience. Euploment-timg breakdown.--A comparison of the instructors in the selected institutions with the instruc- tors in all the institutions on the basis of time devoted to teaching and non-teaching responsibilities revealed the following: (1) the percentage of instructors in the selected institutions engaged in research as a part of their employment is nearly identical to the percentage of instructors engaged in research in all the insti- tutions and, (2) a smaller percentage of instructors are engaged in administrative duties and "other" functions in the selected institutions than are “the instructors in all institutions. As to the research function, data ' indicated that although the percentage of time spent in research differed little between the two groups of instructors, in the selected institutions those engaged in research spend a greater proportion of their time in 209 this endeavor than is the case with the research- involved instructors in all the institutions. Table 20 indicates the percentage of instructors involved in research, administrative, and other non-teaching respon- sibilities. TABLE 20.--Percentage of instructors involved in research, administration, and other nonpteaching responsibilities in selected institutions and in all institutions =="...'=-.:‘ m m Percentage of Instructors.Involved Official "’ Duties In Selected In All Insti- Institutions tutions (Hr-32) (112206) Research. 25 2h Administration 30 142 Other non-teaching 3S h9 Graduate assistants.--Ten.of the thirty-two selected institutions utilize graduate assistants in their driver education teacher preparation.progreme. A total of twenty-two graduate assistants were reported by these ten inmtitutione with.four of the institutions deploying one assistant each and another four institutions employing three assistants each. Typically the graduate assistant holds a Bachelor's degree (eleven of the twenty-two 210 reported) or a.Master's degree (eight reported). The three 'graduate” assistants that were reported by one respondent were described as "outstanding college seniors who assist with.the program.” Teaching and curriculum Courses offered.--Selected colleges and univer- sities listed a total of 297 courses which.were considered applicable toward a teaching minor or major field in driver and/or safety education, or toward certification to teach driver education. The range of courses listed extended from a low of three courses reported by three of the institutions to a high of seventeen courses reported by three institutions. The average number of courses listed per institution was found to be nine, or five more than the average number of courses listed by all the institutions offering an introductory driver edu- cation course. ggggggfllgzgl.--Sixteen of the thirty-two selected institutions were reported as offering a total of ha courses gglz at the graduate level. This represents 16% of all courses listed. Nineteen of the selected insti- tutions were reported as offering 80 courses which could be taken for either graduate gg,undergraduate credit, 27% of the total. The other 57% of the courses were offered 211 at the undergraduate level m. Course location.--Eight of the selected insti- tutions were listed as offering a total of twenty-two courses through extension. One institution was listed as offering a total of two safety courses by correspondence. The other 273 courses (92%) are offered only on-campus. Major 2;; minor offered.--Sixteen of the thirty-two selected institutions were found to be offering a major or minor teaching field in driver and/or safety education. Majors or minors were offered in ten instances on the undergraduate level, five instances at the undergraduate and graduate level, and in one instance at the graduate level. The minimum number of hours specified for a minor field was typically reported to be sixteen. Of the sixteen institutions offering a major or minor field, half this number were reported as having first offered the major or minor field since 1955; four initiated their new offering as late as 1960. Five different names were given to the minor or major field in the various institutions with Safety and Driver Education, Safety Education, and Health and Safety the three designations reported most often. Four of the sixteen institutions not presently offering a major or minor field were reported as having rather definite plans for the inauguration of such a major or minor within the forthcaning two or three years. 212 Student assistance.--Students in pursuit of course ‘work in connection'with the driver education programs offered in the selected colleges and universities can find scholarship grants available in ten of these insti- tutions. Such grants were reported to be typically'madee available during summer sessions to in-service teachers. Grants provided by the Allstate Insurance Company were mentioned more frequently than any other. Fellowships and/or assistantships are available on a limited basis in eight of the selected institutions according to reports. Student teachigg ig,driver education.--Twenty- one of the thirty-two selected institutions reported no student teaching in driver education other than that done in the laboratory phase of the introductory driver edu- cation course. Six institutions reported a student teaching arrangement for some, but not all, students in driver education which typically took the form of teaching classroom driver education as a part of a health education assignment. Five colleges and universities reported an arrangement whereby student teaching was done exclusively in driver education.and involved both class- room and practice driving instruction. Unigue aspects g£_the teachigg progrem.--Fourteen respondents described some aspect of their program in the 213 questionnaire space provided for reporting any features which they believed were unique or atypical when compared to most college and university driver education programs. Most of these reports described the availability of driving simulators (e.g., the Aetna Drivotrainer) or other special laboratory facilities as the unique aspect of the program. One respondent reported the research-oriented aspect of his university's program as being unique. Another respondent mentioned the practice of sponsoring seminars for college and university driver and safety education personnel as being unique. Allied Services Research by students.--Respondents from twelve of the thirty-two selected institutions (38%) reported that students on their campus were from time-to-time en- gaged in research relative to driver education and traffic safety. In most instances such research took the form of afiMaster's thesis.) One institution was reported as involving students in research mostly in terms of partial fulfillment for a Doctor's degree. Four respondents explained that their curriculum contained ”independent study” type courses which were being used to involve stu- dents in small-scale research projects in driver education and traffic safety. 21h Research by.faoultz.-6Mombers of the faculty in fourteen of the thirty-two selected colleges and univer- sities (hh%) were reported as being engaged in research in driver education and traffic safety as a regular part of their omployment, with several instructors in this group also conducting their own research study to be used to satisfy degree requirements. One instructor, it was reported, does no research as a part of his employment, but is engaged in a research study necessary for completion of an advanced degree. Respondents submitted brief des- criptions of representative studies indicative of a variety of projects being conducted. Field services.--Eight of the thirty-two selected institutions (25%) were reported as providing some type of field service.1 Some type of visitation or consultant service, particularly for high schools, was most fre- quently listed. One university respondent reported that he and others on the staff visit between three and six high schools each year in specific places where it is felt that a driver education program can be initiated or improved if driver education can be better interpreted 1The offering of extension courses or service provided by instructors not as a part of employment was not considered to be a field“ service in this phase of the survey. 215 to the school and community. Publications.--According to data received, three of the thirty-two selected institutions regularly publish teaching materials in the field of driver education. In. one institution.such publication was restricted to a four-page periodical (monthly). In another institution the proceedings of conferences in driver and traffic safety education which were sponsored by the university were subsequently made available in published form. The third university has published a variety of books, pamphlets, and other materials in driver education and traffic safety, and continues to regularly publish additional materials in the field. Special projects.--Respondents representing nine of the thirty-two selected colleges and universities (28%) described special projects related to driver edu- cation sponsored by their institutions. Most respondents listed a single project. A variety of projects were reported including: (1) organization of a television program for teaching classroom driver education, (2) providing a workshop area where students can construct visual aids and other teaching materials, (3) sponsoring a safety conference for area high school students on an annual basis, (h) conducting driver education short- courses for senior police officers from a large city 216 department so as to prepare them to teach junior officers in their department, and (5) conducting traffic surveys in the local community. The description of one special project reported is quoted below:1 We check all university students who are sent to us from the university motor vehicle division. These are students who have not had a U.S. driver's license for at least one year. We give them a comprehensive written exam and road test. If they pass the university gives them a permit to drive a car on.university property. If they fail we provide a training program for them. Eighty-five per cent of this group are foreign students. We received a special budget and a quarter-time assistant to handle this program. Future develgzment 9_o_1_1_r_§_e_ revisions flair-Respondents teaching driver education in ten different colleges and universi- ties included in the selected group of institutions, described certain aspects of their driver education courses which they believed were in need of revision. Four of these ten respondents revealed that consideration is being given to changing the existing practice of including the practice driving instructional phase in the introductory course. It was suggested that this phase might more profitably be covered in the second or "advanced" driver education course. One respondent qualified his statement 1As has been the practice throughout the study, neither colleges and universities, nor respondents are individually identified. 217 with the comment that such a change could not even be seriously considered for adoption until the certification requirements in his state were raised beyond the present requirement of a two-smmesteréhour course in driver edu- cation. Two respondents stressed the need on their respective campuses to provide a studentteaching experi- rience (classroom and practice driving) for their driver education students, and to offer at least some of their courses to inpservice teachers at the graduate level. The comment provided below was written by a respondent in a Midwestern college, and reveals that a practice of former years has not altogether disappeared from the scene. The comment is self-explanatory. At present our enrollment is c on to both beginners (those seeking a license and the licensed driver (teacher preparation). It is difficult to slant the lectures so that both groups maintain.interest or understanding, particularly when there is so much material to be offered and insufficient thme to do the job thoroughly. One respondent expressed concern over the dissimilar nature of what is purported to be the same courses as taught in the various colleges and universi- ties of the state. His comment included the hepeful note that an.attempt would be made to rectify this situation at a state conference of college and university driver 218 education instructors to be held in the near future. Finally, one respondent suggested a movement in the direction of greater school and community emphasis in driver education and traffic safety endeavors when he wrote ". . . We are revising our advanced driver edu- cation course to emphasize camnunity or 'extra-curricular' driver and traffic safety activities, as well as the strictly professional career problems of driver education teachers . " Additional driver education courses needed.-- Fifteen of the respondents representing the selected col- leges and universities “(7%) were of the opinion that an additional course or courses ought to be offered at their institution in connection with the driver education teacher preparation program. A total of thirty-one courses were thought to be needed in these fifteen insti- tutions; tvmnty-twa different courses were named. Courses named as being needed most often were an advanced driver education course, an industrial or occupational safety course, a graduate seminar in driver and safety education, a psychology course related specifically to driver be- havior, an auto mechanics course, and a course concerned specifically with the legal, insurance, and liability aspects of highway safety. The courses listed by respon- dents, but not mentioned above were listed by no more than 219 one respondent and included no courses not included on the list of courses presently offered in one or more of all the colleges and universities.1 ‘Eight of the respondents among the group of seven- teen that reported no need for additional courses conceded that an upgrading of teacher certification requirements ‘would create an.immediate need for additional courses. ‘Essential non-driver education courses.--The questionnaire included provision for respondents to list courses outside the strictly defined area of driver edu- cation which they believe prospective or in-service teachers of driver education should be encouraged to pursue. All thirty-two respondents provided data, listing a total of thirty-four different courses. ‘With some courses named more than once the total number of courses listed by all respondents reached 112. Courses outside the strictly defined area of driver education that were mentioned by four or more respondents were (1) psychology courses, (2) first-aid courses, (3) courses pertaining to safetz education, (h) audio-visual education courses, (5) courses pertaining to traffic law and enforcement, (6) traffic engineering courses. (7) sociology courses, IBu ra, Table 18, p. 198. 220 (8) auto mechanics courses, and (9) courses in guidance and counseling. Teaching £133.33 _f_'_<_>_l_-_ related courses.--Question- naire respondents were asked to respond to the question, "Do you believe it is better to have the courses listed above [courses outside the strictly defined area of driver education] developed and taught by your driver education teaching staff and thereby specifically related to driver education, or developed and taught by other faculty members along more general lines?” Respondents were asked to explain the reasons for their answer. The thirty-We respondents' answers to the ques- tion were these: (1) fifteen (h7%) thought ”other" faculty members should develop and teach these courses, (2) ten (31%) were of the Opinion that driver education teachers should perform this function, and ( 3) seven indicated that 293:2 approaches should be used, the particular) circmnstances determining which approach should be given greatest emphasis. Comments of respon- dents representative of each view are presented below in the order of most- to least-frequent mention. Speaking in favor of faculty other than driver education personnel developing and teaching these related courses is the viewpoint expressed below. 221 Taught by other faculty members along more general lines, so that students see their discipline in its proper perspective and rela- tionship to other disciplines. As Dr. Cutter:L says, 'We need specialists and generalists at the same time.’ Somewhat typical of the viewpoint expressed by those favoring driver education personnel as instructors for these courses was this comment: . . . these courses should be taught by faculty members that are experienced and have proper academic background to do so. Other- wise proper emphasis is lacking, the real intent and purposes of such instruction are confused or lost among the area where the teacher feels he belongs. The safety and driver education area is as important as any other teaching area and therefore should not be subserviant to other teaching areas. Representative of the view that both approaches should be used was this ccsment: Driver education teacher and other faculty when interest and quality and standards are upheld. We aren't staffed to do otherwise here. Students gain by exposure to experts in other fields even if approach is general. Critical problems.--The final question appearing on the questionnaire circulated to the selected colleges and universities asked the instructor to identify what he believed to be the most critical problems facing the 1The reference is to Walter A. Cutter, Director of New York University "s Center for Safety Education. The respondent who is quoted is not affiliated with New York University. 222 continuance, improvement, or expansion of the insti- tution's teacher preparation program in driver education. Each respondent listed at least one such problem in his reply. Those problems identified by four or more re- spondents are discussed briefly in the following para- graphs. The problem mentioned more frequently than any other appeared on 31% of the completed questionnaires. This problem was identified as that of the need to gain faculty and administration understanding of and support for the driver education program. Interestingly the need for facultl, rather than administrative, understanding and support was specified most often, and in some instances the reference was to high school, rather than college, support. One respondent stated it this way: A recognition by faculty and administration as to the value of a solid classroom and dual program. When this is accepted we can continue to develop our own program on campus. Our interested future teachers will then be satis- fied to remain in the teaching minor program and not jump to their major field at the first opportunity. Another frequently-mentioned problem was that of a lack of funds for a number of purposes : funds for equipment and research were reported as needed most often. Off-street driving areas and/or simulated driving devices were listed as needs by five respondents. 223 Procurement of qualified staff was identified by several respondents as a critical problem. One respondent with this problem said: We need college faculty with experience and training in the field of safety who will. be interested primarily in traffic and gen- eral safety. We need one or twa full-time specialists rather than four or five "part- time" teachers who have a major interest in some other field. It was not discernible from the comments supplied whether or not the staff procurement problem results primarily fran an unavailability of competently prepared personnel or from a lack of administrative support for creating and filling additional staff positions. The need to develop graduate courses and/or a Master's degree program was mentioned by several respon- dents. One respondent's camnents reveal not only this consideration, but also how faculty and administration support and understanding are needed if such a program is to be approved, and how procurement of staff will influence future development. This respondent stated his problems in these words: The only problem that we might be confronted with at the present time would be the selling of our various committees on the need for a Master's degree program in safety and driver education. . 22’4- . . A second real problem will be the procure- ment of additional staff. This very definitely will influence expansion of, our program from now one Fear of legislative action on the state level unsympathetic with driver education was mentioned by four respondents. In varying degrees these instructors feared cut-backs in or elimination of the reimbursable driver education programs in their respective states. In the wake of such an action these instructors felt the next step would be the reduction or dissolution of their college teacher preparation program in driver education. Finally, four respondents expressed concern about the quality of instruction provided by sane driver education teachers employed at the high school level, and the reflections that suchsituations cast upon the col- lege teacher preparation programs. One respondent from the Midwest blamed reimbursable programs as at least partially the cause of this problem when he wrote, ”The big problem as I see it is the number of teachers who teach in toms of compensation not dedication-snore so because of our reimbursement program.” In a Western state another respondent leveled charges at (”school administrators as the cause of this situation when he said: 225 A big problem is that of dishonest admins istrators who go out of their way to hire incompetent staff. There are many teaching in the . . . suburbs with no certificate, and who never took a driver education course. The result is extremely poor instruction. CHAPTER VII SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS The purpose of this study has been to determine the nature of teacher preparation programs in driver edu- cation as found in the colleges and universities of the United States, and to recommend improvements for such programs. A brief review of the procedures that were followed in attempts to fulfill the purpose of the study is presented on the following pages. Accompanying each review of procedures is a summary of the most significant findings and conclusions arising out of the three major phases of the investigation. The chapter is concluded with a listing of recommendations which are provided in the interest of improving teacher preparation programs in driver education. Summary and Conclusions Certification.p§,high-school driver education teachers In the first major phase of the investigation a questionnaire was circulated to state department of 226 227 education personnel in each of the fifty states and to the office of the superintendent in the District of Columbia. Answers provided by each of these fifty-one sources were principally centered about policies and practices of the state relating to teacher certification regulations in the field of high-school driver education. Some portions of the data provided could be compared with the professional recommendations of educators and con- sultants.1 The findings arising out of an analysis of the data supplied by state department of education respondents have been presented in detail in Chapter IV. The most significant of these findings are listed below: 1. Minimum certification regulations actually in effect for high-school driver education teachers in the various states are lagging many years behind minimum certification regulations recommended at national driver education conferences. Not a single state in the nation lists minimum certification regulations for driver education teachers that fully meet the recomnended minimum certification 1Unless noted otherwise subsequent references to such recommendations are to those set forth at the most recently convened national conference on driver education: National Conference on Driver Education (Purdue Univer- is,éty,:‘i.958), Policies _a_n_d Practices 333.: Driver Education, e G e 228 regulations in the three phases of specialized prepa- ration.1 The recanmended six semester-hours course work in driver and traffic safety education is not required in any state. The recommended three semester-hour course in safety education is required in only seven states. Nine semester-hours credit;2 in "specifically related courses" is recommended; nine semester-hours (or more) credit in this phase is required by only six states. In ten states there is pp college credit requirement in pg; of these three phases of preparation. 2. At the present time state certification regu- lations in driver education in the majority of the states are not being upgraded in accordance with recommendations. At the time of the investigation3 only four states had changes in existing certification regulations approved by the appropriate agency; four additional states were reported as having proposed changes under consider- ation by this agency. None of the four states with changes lAlthough one state (Missouri) does appear to meet the spirit, if not the letter, of the recommenda- tions. 2Assuming a fifteen semester-hour minor as indi- cated at the Second National Conference on Driver Edu- cation in 1953. 3Sep tember-December , 1960 . 229 approved will meet the recommended.minimum certification regulations when these changes become effective.1 This finding carries the implication that not only are the actual certification regulations lagging years behind the recommendations, but also there is little evidence of accomplishment in.hringing about a change in this situation. 3. ‘When certification regulations are instituted or upgraded, in-service driver education teachers are typically exempted from the requirements specified under the new act. Of the forty-two states requiring some college credit in driver education only ten.of these states required full compliance with the upgraded regulations on the part of these teaching driver education prior to enactment of the regulation. A possible implication of this practice would seem to be the lack of interest in further educational preparation on the part of many in- service teachers. ;Although one state (Illinois) will apparently meet the spirit, if not the letter, of the recommen- dations. 230 The introductory teacher preparation course _i_n_ driver education In the second major phase of the investigation questionnaires were sent to 293 colleges and universities that had been identified as possibly offering an intro- ductory teacher preparation credit course in driver edu- cation. Replies received from 89% of these institutions revealed that forty-four colleges and universities were not offering the course; a number of these institutions reported dropping the course within.the past several years. A total of 210 institutions were identified as currently offering the course. Respondents teaching driver education at these institutions provided data concerned principally with: (l) administrative and instructional practices typical of the introductory course, (2) factors relating to the status of faculty responsible for teaching the course, and (3) anevaluation of the introductory course. A complete analysis of this data was provided in Chapter V} the significant findings are given below: 1. A number of important aspects of the intro- ductory teacher preparation course in driver education show a marked lack of consistency from one institution to another. 231 There are some administrative and instructional practices associated with the introductory course that have gained consensus agreement by professionals in the field; these practices need to be implemented more exten- sively than is presently the case. There remain many areas of concern for which there have been no guidelines developed through consensus action; this lack of agree- ment and understanding tends to promote the growth and solidification of a wide variety of practices. The net effect appears to. be that of growth and develOpment devoid of leadership and direction beyond the institution immediately concerned. Perhaps most important in this regard is course content. Response to a request that copies of course outlines be provided the investigator was poor -- only 31% of the potential actually oanplied with the request. mamination of these sixty-six outlines revealed a wide diversity of both content and instructional approaches. The concept held by a college instructor relative to the role a high school driver education teacher should play doubtless has some influence upon the content and approach employed in the introductory course. A total of 614$ of the 210 instructors surveyed co-operated in providing a description of their personal concept of the role of the high school driver education teacher. Two 232 viewpoints were revealed to have some measure of a following; a number of additional views were also provided. Analysis of this data placed 39% of those providing a written statement in partial or complete agreement with a concept that might be described as that in which the teacher is seen in.a leadership role per- taining to safety (especially traffic safety) in both school and community. Another 23% of those providing written statements were identified primarily with the concept whereby teachers are seen developing good skills, a thorough knowledge, and (especially) sound attitudes pertaining to safe driving in their students. The firste mentioned concept appears of:much broader gauge than the second; the second is in turn of broader gauge than a number of other concepts suggested by one or a few respondents. The implication'would.seem.to be that there is less agreoment as to the philosophy, objectives, and legitimate areas of concern of high-school driver edu- cation than is sometbmes supposed. College and univer- sity teacher preparation programs are likely both reflecting and promoting this lack of agreement in.terms of the apparent diversity of content and approach. The course title itself is not common to even half the institutions. In h5% of the colleges and universities the title ”Driver Education" is used. No 233 less than fifty-eight different titles were reported with eighteen institutions using a title not reported by any. other institution. ‘While the title of the course is perhaps not a consideration of top priority, the present situation does reveal a lack of agreement and adds to the confusion in attempts to interpret teacher preparation in driver education to those (e.g., faculty, administration) unfamiliar'withsit. The amount of credit awarded upon completion of the course, hence the length of the course, also differs widely among the institutions. The level of credit (i.e., undergraduate, graduate) also presents a variable situation. In h9% of the colleges and universities the course is offered for three semester-hours credit. Two semester hours credit (or its equivalent of three Quarter hours credit) is granted in 37% of the institutions. As to level of credit there is a greater degree of agreement, but certainly also some variety. In.59% of the insti- tutions credit is granted at the undergraduate level only, in 39% at either the graduate or the undergraduate level, and in 2% at the graduate level only. APractices existing in the laboratory phase of the course also vary widely. The nature of the laboratory experience for Ell students enrolled was found to consist of that of teaching beginning drivers in a dual-control 23h car in.57% of the institutions1 with the other colleges and universities employing a variety of other approaches. Because the length of the course itself varies among the institutions, the amount of time devoted to laboratory experience similarly varies. Prerequisite requirements listed for the course indicate existence of a variety of practices, and at the same time show evidence of little opportunity to screen drivers who are either inexperienced or who possess undesirable driving records. The supervision of instruction conducted in the laboratory phase in some programs, varies both in terms of who performs the supervisory function and the amount of time devoted to supervision. The relative lack of consistency found in the areas of the course described above, as well as in additional areas, tends to suggest that the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education as taught in one institution may bear little resemblance to what purports to be the same course in another institution.. ‘Hhile a certain.amcunt of diversity is generally conceded 1No attempt was made in the study to determine the extent of similarity or disshmilarity within this type of experience. 235 to be desirable, an.implication.of the data summarized above may be that the diversity of practices associated with this course has passed the desirable point. Variation can be good and opportunities for the intro- duction of new ideas and approaches should prevail. The programs must, however, have some common agreement in critical areas. 2. Most colleges and universities offering the introductory teacher preparation.course in driver edu- cation currently provide this course under administrative and instructional circumstances that imply a lack of concern for a quality teaching-learning environment. With regard to the employment of staff, the recommended minimum.standards for (1) special educational preparation in driver and safety education, and (2) teaching and/or administrative experience (preferably at the secondary level) are met by few instructors. Data provided for 225 instructors revealed hl% to have completed a single credit course or less in driver edu- cation. Specialized educational preparation in driver education was less than that of a m_i_._1_l_93_ field (at any level) for 81% of the instructors. Teaching experience for the largest percentage of these instructors was gained on other than the secondary level. 236 In 67% of the institutions, teaching the intro- ductory driver education course is a one-person operation. Twenty-five colleges and universities use part-time personnel to teach this course. Forty per cent of the institutions do not offer the course both during regular session and summer session. ‘More than half the instruc- tors teaching the course during the regular year teach courses outside the area of safety and driver education and are thereby faced with the problem of where to place their maximum effort and attention. Circumstances such as these, particularly when in combination, have the effect of relegating the course to that of a secondary concern and in such situations even the best-intentioned and conscientious instructor is likely to be working under a considerable handicap. Inadequate budgetary provision for laboratory facilities and procurement of equipment, and lack of administrative assignment of a permanent classroom (including storage areas) were prominently mentioned by course instructors as limiting effectiveness. Reliance on loaned, leased, rented, or borrowed automotive equip- ment is evident in approximately two-thirds of the institutions. Provision for equipment and facilities (classroom and laboratory) often takes on the appearance 237 of halfdway measures instituted on a temporary basis. A curious contradiction to respondents' stated needs for more equipment and facilities was the rela- tively high rating given by respondents to administrative support for the program. 'Whether this represents the instructors' lack of concern and knowledge about the lbmitations of the program, the situation of being "better off" than in former years, or some other consid- eration could not be determined from the available data. 3. A limited number of colleges and universities offer a sequence of courses which can enable interested students to gain the recommended minimum preparation to become certified to teach high school driver education. Only forty colleges and universities (19% of the 210 institutions offering the introductory driver edu- cation course) offer both an.introductory safety education course and two courses in driver education and traffic safety.1 In thirty additional colleges and universities the course that is lacking is a second or ”advanced" 1Actually the recommendation for special prepa- ration in driver and traffic safety education specified six semester-Eburs credit. For the purpose of the stud , however, two courses (e.g., a "basic" plus an ”advanced, course) were considered the equivalent of the recommen- dation even though the combination of these courses usually totals no more than five semester-hours credit. 238 course in driver education: in seventeen additional institutions the safety education course is the missing link. The forty institutions offering all three courses are not, unfortunately, evenly distributed throughout the nation. A few states have several, a number of states have none . Total programs _o_f_ driver education The third major phase of the investigation con- sisted of questionnaire mailings to thirty-five selected colleges and universities. Institutions were selected primarily on the basis of offering a substantial number of courses leading toward certification and/or a major or minor teaching field in safety and/or driver education. Usable questionnaires were returned by respondents in thirty-two of the institutions. Data collected dealt with the 393;; teacher preparation program in driver edu- cation including consideration of curriculum, research, publication, staff, and other aspects. Analysis of this data was presented in detail in Chapter VI. The signif- icant findings are reported below: 1. More than half of the thirty-seven colleges and universities that claim; to offer a minor or major teaching field in safety and/or driver education fail to 239 offer a curricular program that permits a student to complete the professionally recommended program of re- quired and elective courses. Nineteen of these institutions do not offer the recommended combination of one safety education and two driver education courses. Further, a comparison of the recommended related courses with these actually offered I by these institutions reveals a considerable divergence between the recommendation and the practice. A curious paradox is that some of the alleged minor or major field programs leave much to be desired in terms of meeting recommended standards, while other programs although not officially recognized by their institution as a major or minor field program, otherwise meet recommended standards. 2. The selected colleges and universities, insti- tutions that offer the more extensive curricular programs in the nation, devote significantly little time and effort to research, publication, or field service activities as an adjunct to the driver education.program. In no instance was institutional effort devoted more than 25% of the time to research or more than 20% of the time to publication. The bulk of the research and publication efforts are concentrated.amcng a very few institutions. 2&0 An implication of these findings would seem to be that colleges and universities are failing to exercise a leadership role in the growth and development of driver education as manifested through comprehensive programs of teaching, research, publication, and field service. Recommendations An integral part of the problem under investi- gation was that of recommending improvements for college and university teacher preparation programs in driver education. Support 3; existipg profes- sional recommendations The following recommendations, discovered through a review of the literature, are reinforced and supported by the findings and conclusions of this study. iDirectly or indirectly these recommendations are seen.as important to the growth and development of college and university teacher preparation programs in driver education. 1. State financial aid should be provided through.special appropriation to local schools conducting an approved driver education program.when.1ocal funds are insufficient to provide this opportunity for all Zhl eligible students.1 Although some exceptions can be found, as a general rule states with reimbursement pro- grams have more extensive teacher preparation programs in driver education than those states lacking this type of assistance program. 2. Legislation.shculd be enacted in all states that establish the minimum legal age for obtaining a driver's license at eighteen years, with the exception that students who have successfully completed an approved driver education course be eligible to apply for a license at age sixteen.2 Such a recommendation implies both provision.for adequate financing and consideration of numerous other questions, not the least of which is ade- quate provision for teacher preparation so that the high- school programs may be adequately staffed. 3. Certification to teach high school driver edu- cation in all the states should require completion of a minimum.of a bachelor's degree program with a minor in safety and driver education (or its equivalent) as proposed by the Third National Conference on.Driver 1National Conference on Driver Education (Purdue University, 1958), Policies and Practices for Driver Edu- cation, pp, cit., p. 28. 2Ibid., pp. 26-27. 2&2 Educationel’a A growing recognition of the knowledge and skills essential for conducting a quality high-school driver education program demands that teacher preparation programs be extended and enriched by a series of courses that will include these essentials. h. Colleges and universities should establish standards for college personnel assigned to prepare high school driver education teachers that are comparable to standards in effect for those preparing teachers in any other field.3 College instructors should hold at least the:master's degree with a major, or its equivalent, in safety and-driver education.h"Where it is not possible to secure an instructor with the appropriate graduate study, consideration should be shown for an equivalent educational and/or experiential background, particularly in those persons demonstrating a sincere interest in the field and in further professional growth along this.line. ‘Unless college and university programs are staffed with 11b1de, Pp. 20.21.. 2Key, 92. cit., p. 65. 31bid. hNational Conference on Driver Education (Purdue University, 1958), Policies and Practices for Driver'Edu- cation, pp, cit., p. 3. 2MB personnel possessed of this minimum.educational back- ground (or its equivalent), attempts to upgrade the programs are likely to fall short of essential goals. 5. A thorough study of the content of the introductory teacher preparation course in driver edu- cation should be undertaken.1 The diversity of content and approach apparently existing in connection with this course may make orderly development of additional courses difficult. Deliniation of the introductory course and the second course in driver education should be under- taken.2’3 Recommendations based pp, the findings 25 the studl Recommendations based on the findings and conclu- sions of the study are listed below in the interest of the quantitative growth and qualitative development of college and university teacher preparation programs in driver V education. 1. Recommended standards for all major aspects of college and university teacher preparation programs in 1Kby.,22o cit., p. 65. 21bid. 3Allard, QBe fie, pe 53e 21m driver education need to be develOped and articulated. Standards and guidelines have been deve10ped at national conferences for certain aspects of these programs, but other aspects have no such established standards. ‘DevelOpment of additional standards would appear to be a logical starting point in any upgrading process, and might conceivably be accomplished through a national conference called to consider this problom. All major aspects of these programs, some of which.have been investigated in this study, should be considered. 2. College and university personnel should take steps to change and upgrade their teacher preparation programs in driver education in accordance with the general standards and guidelines developed through imple- mentation of the former recommendation. It would be hoped that each college and university program.will necessarily and desirably be somewhat unique and possessed of potential strengths not shared by other institutions. Programs in all institutions would, how- ever, be characterized by a basic and common foundation. 3. State teacher certification agencies and other groups responsible for or influential in matters per- taining to certification, should be apprised of the recommended minimum standards for certification of high- school driver education teachers and of the need to take 2&5 steps that will lead to compliance with these minimum standards. Some states have yet to take the initial step in this direction despite the development of:minhmmm standards over a decade ago. h. Consideration should be given to placing the laboratory experience new typically provided as a part of the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education within a subsequent course in driver education. Such a change assumes existence or development of a second or advanced driver education course in the teacher preparation program. Incorporating the laboratory expe- rience in the initial course was a necessity in earlier years of one-course preparation. From both an educational standpoint and for liability considerations it now appears desirable to provide this experience at some time later than a student's initial exposure to driver education. 5. Consideration should be given to providing a greater measure of assistance to ineservice driver edu- cation teachers on both the high school and the college and university levels in.terms of strengthening the edu- cational background of these teachers relative to safety education, driver education, and specifically related areas. The problem.of providing this assistance for college personnel is perhaps of greater immediate necessity, and at the same time of greater difficulty, 2&6 than for high-school personnel. 6. Consideration should be given to plans that would enable at least one college or university in each state to assmme primary responsibility for teaching,- research, publication, and allied services in driver edu- cation and traffic safety for that state. Such a plan would centralize teacher preparation efforts and enable deveIOpment of driver education.programs that would be sizable enough to (a) offer gall-m positions in driver and safety education thereby attracting the more-qualified instructors, (b) include provisions for conducting research, providing field services, and planning for the production and publication of instructional aids and materials, (0) enable the development of a strong curric- ‘ular program in driver and safety education.and related fields, thereby exceeding the Third National Conference, on Driver Education standards, (d) provide the basis for seeking financial support from without as well as within the college or university, (e) make the most economical use of appropriations for equipment and facilities, and (f) give greater opportunities to colleges and univer- sities for exercising responsible leadership in the state with regard to a qualitative and quantitative development of driver education on all levels. Operation of such a 2h? plan at one institution would not preclude other colleges and universities within the state from conducting teacher preparation courses in driver education; it would permit a more extended program.-- particularly to serve the functions of research, field service, publication, and graduate preparation -- at one institution. 7. A thoughtful effort needs to be made by way of presenting college and university faculty members and administrators with factual information that offers convincing evidence of the need and value of teacher preparation in driver education. A lack of understanding and support on the part of faculty and/or administration places severe limitations on the growth.and development of teacher preparation programs in driver education, as was revealed by respondents participating in the study. 8. Research and experimentation should be under- taken with the purpose of determining the most appropriate administrative and instructional techniques and practices for teacher preparation in driver education. A number of existing techniques and practices seem to be based more on opinion than on demonstrable fact. Problems needing investigation include aspects of both the introductory teacher preparation course and the total teacher prepa- ration program. ‘More definitive knowledge is needed 2&8 relative to (a) the most desirable and beneficial overall curricular organization and content for teacher prepa- ration in driver education, (b) the most desirable and beneficial type(s) of laboratory experience to provide for prospective driver education teachers, and (c) the educational background and competencies needed by college instructors of driver and traffic safety education. Specific investigations within each of these broad areas, as well as in additional areas, should lead to an eventual improvement in the policies and practices associated with teacher preparation in driver education. Consideration and possible implementation of these recommendations should proceed without delay. With some few exceptions it appears that college and university teacher preparation programs in driver education.have failed to assume a leadership role in the driver education movement. Further delays in bringing about an upgrading of teacher preparation and certification in driver edu- cation could prevent high-school driver education from achieving the life-saving and citizenship objectives that are a part of its heritage. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Books American Association of School Administrators. Safet Education. Eighteenth Yearbook of the Associa- tion. Washington: American Association of School Adiliinistrators, National Education Association, 19 O. Brody, Leon and Stack, Herbert J. Hi hwa Safety;___ and Driver Education. Englewood' Cliffs, New Jersey: Pr,entIce-Ha11 Inc., l95&. Good, Carter V. (ed.). Diction of Education. 2nd edition. New York: McGraw-fi'fll Book Co., Inc., 19 9. . Good, Carter V. and Scates, Douglas E. Methods of Research. New York: Appleton-Con wryt -Cr6'fts, Inc., 0 Hansen, Harry (ed.). The World Almanac and Book _o__f Facts: 1961. New York: New York World-flagram Corp., Irwin, Mary (ed. ). American Colleges and Universities. Washington: American Council on Education, T960. Ladd, Walter D. Organizi for Traffic Safet in Your Communit . Spring ield ,Mis: harTe-s C. THomas, E959. Parten, Mildred. Surve s, Polls, and Samples: Practical Procedures. New York: Harper an Brothers, I935. U. S. Department of Health., Education, and'Welfare. Edu- cation Directorp, l9E9-l960: Federal Government Egg States. ‘Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1959. 250 251 Articles, Bulletins, Reports, Periodicals Aaron, James E. ”Preparing Driver Education Teachers to Meet Increasing Certification Standards: At Southern Illinois University," National Safet Co ess Transactions: School and Colle e Safet . vaggziifv. Chicago: New 0 meiy Com cii, l9 9. American Automobile Association. State Regulation of Safety Education ip the UnIEEH'States. Reviked edflé'Washington: American.AutomoEile Association, 19 . American Automobile Association. TeacherT Mn Course in Driver Instruction fore Co 666W Pro essors an s raters Responsm or eac or r n1“ ‘Washington:)American Automob bil le AssociaEion, ig&9. Processed American Driver Education Association. Fourth.Annual Conference Proceedin s of the American.Driver Edu- cation Association: une _lz-ZO, IEEQ. 'Wasfiingfafi: Nationai Commission on Safety Education, National Education Association, 1961. American.Driver and Safety Education Association. First Annual Conference of the American Driver an 3333t_ Education AssoEiation. ‘Wasfiington?_Na- Eionai Cafifiission on Safety Education, National Education Association, 1957. (Processed. ) American Driver and Safety Education Association. Second Annual Conference of the American Driver and Skfgt Education Assokiktion. 'WasEingion?_Na- tionai Commission“ on Safet Edu ucation, National Education Association, 1955. (Processed. ) American Driver and Safety Education Association. Third Annual Conference of the American.Driver and—Safet Educafion Associatian. WaShington: NaEioEEI Commission on Safety Education, National Education Association, 1959. (Processed.) Boyle, Richard. ”Preparing Driver Education Teachers to Mbet Increasing Certification Standards: At San Francisco State College, National Safet: Copgress Transactions: School and Colle e 8 V0 . e . fit. CEIcago: Naiio-nzi e y Councii, 1959. 252 Carlton, Harold 0. "Organization of Teacher Preparation for Driver Education," Teacher Preparation.gp ‘Driver Education. New York: Teachers Coliege, ColumBia University, 1960. (Processed.) Cutter, Walter A. ”The Challenge We Face," Third Annual Conference pf the American Driver and Safe§y_Edu- cation Association. Washington: National Commik- sion on Safety Education, National Education Association, 1959. (Processed.) Eales, John R. ”Tgacher Preparation in Safety and Driver Education National Safet Copgress Transactions: School and CoIIese Safeiy. o . XXI . Chicago: NaiionaIkS' e y ounc , 1959. Eland, Ivan L. ”State Aid for Driver Education," Safet: Education, XL (November, 1960), pp. 15-17. Engelhardt, M. E. "Safety Education Competencies for the College Instructor," Teacher Preparation in Safet Education. Proceedings 0 Wisconsifi Con- Terence for College Instructors of Safety Edu- cation. Edited by Charles P. Yost. Madison, Wisconsin: Extension Division, University of Wisconsin, 1959. (Processed.) Holley, J. Andrew. "Teacher Training in Safety Edu- cagion,” The Phi Delta Kappan, XXI (January, 1939). 20 ‘20? e Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. Fourteenth Annual National High School Driver Education Awafi _Mo. ‘Washington: Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, 1961. (Processed.) Key, Norman. Status of Driver Education in the‘United States: A Studk'pz Courses as DesEFikzd Ex Skate and Locai ScHool SysEems ipTResponsefpg §peciaI Inguipy. Revised version of an Ed.D. disserta- on. ational Commission on Safety Education, National Education Association, 1960. McCamment, Claud R. ”College Driver and Safety Education," Second Annual Conference p£.ppngmerican Driver gpd_3afetz Education Association. ‘Washington: National Commission on Safety Education, National Education Association, 1958. (Processed.) 253 Michigan State College. ‘What Can Colle as Do About the Traffic Problem? East Lansing,‘MicHigan: Michi- gan State Cdllege, 1953. National Association of State Directors of Teacher Edu- cation and Certification and National Commission on Safety Education. National Conference pp Teacher Education, Cerkification, and’Program Standards for Driver Education. Washington: National CommissiOn on SafdkykEducation, National Education Association, 1956. (Processed.) National Commission on Safety Education. "Special State Support for Driver Education,” The Bulletin, IL (February, 1958) , Ills-1&9. National Commission on Safety Education. Summ Report pf Conference p£.Driver Education and Sdiey E u- ggtion Association Leaders. Washington: National Commission on Safdty Education, National Education Association, 1956. (Processed.) National Conference on.Driver‘Education (Michigan State College, 1953). Policies and Practices for Driver Education. ‘Washington:‘NationEIKCommissiBn on Safety Education, National Education Association, 195A. National Conference on Driver Education (Purdue Univer- sity, 1958). _Policies and Practices for Driver Education. ‘WaEhington: Nationél Commission on e y ucation, National Education Association, 1960. National Conference on High-School Driver Education. High School Driver Education: Policies and Recommen- dations. Washington: Nationai Commission on dafety Education, National.Education Association, 1950. National Safety Council. Accident Facts. 1961 edition. Chicago: National Safety Uouncii, 1961. Neyhart, Amos E. "Next Steps and Priorities for the Section and.Driver Education,” National Safet: Copgress Trangggtions: School afid‘ddiidge etz. VoSé XXVII. Chicago: National Safe y Council, 19 . 25h Quensel, Warren P. "Teacher Qualifications, Preparation, and Certification,” Third Annual Conference of 222 American Driver and Safety Education Associakion. Washington: National Commission on Safety Edu- cation, National Education Association, 1959. (Processed.) Seals, Tom. "Has Reasonable Progress Been.Made in.Driver Education?" National Safet Co ress Transactions: School and CoIIe 6 Safety. VdiédkaVT__dhicago: Naiionai_§ e y Congress, 1959. Sheehe, Gordon H. "Outlook:.The Growth and Role of Centers in.the Decade Ahead National Safety Copgress Transactions: School and Coliege S ety. ol. XXIII. Chicago: National Safety Council, 1960. Stack, Herbert J. ”The”0rigin and DevelOpment of College Safety Centers, National Safet Copgress Trans- actions: School and Colic e Safet .~ Vol. XXIII. Chicag : Nationai Safety Councii, 1960. Stack, Herbert J} The Prepgration and Certificatigp g; Teachers prgggggpiEducation. New‘York: Center for Sdiety uca on, New York University, l9&9. Stack, Herbert J. ”Training for Leadership on the Safet Front," The Phi Delta Ea an, XXI (January, 1939 . Strasser, Marland K. "Status of College Centers for Safety Education," National Safet Co ress Trans- actions: School and Coliege S e y. o . XXIII. CEicago: NaiionaI_§a e y ounc , 1960. Teacher Preparation.ip;Driver Education. Proceedings and Racommendations of EEeIDriver and Traffic Safety Education Seminar. New‘YOrk: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1960. (Processed.) U.S. Department of Health, Education, and‘Welfare, Office of Education and National Education Association, National Commission on Safety Education. Courses in Highway Safety and Highwa Traffic: A Directqu 3? Co e e and'Universitk O eri s. Wishington: ‘thidfidigfiducation Assoc ation, i658. 255 Webster, Daniel P. "Implications for Teacher Preparation in Safety Education,” Teacher Pre aration.ip Safet: Education. Proceedings 0 Wisconsin Con- erence for Coiiege Instructors of Safety Edu- cation. Edited by Charles P. Yost. Madison, ‘Wisconsin: Extension.Division “University of Wisconsin, 1959. (Processed.) Webster, Daniel P. (ed.). Organization and Status: College Safety Centers and Institutes, ;§%§:§Q. Chicago: National Safety Councii, i960. Mimeo- graphed.) Western States Conference. Proceedings and Recommendations pf the‘Western States Coiiercnce on.Teacher Pro a- ration ip Safdti Egg Driter Educakion. Sacramento, Caiifornia: Ca fornia State Department of Edu- cation, 1958. (Processed.) Unpublished'Materials Allard, Charles Edward. ”Content of Driver Education Courses in.American Colleges and Universities.” Unpublished M.A. in Ed. Thesis, The American University, 1959. Florio, Aurelio Eugene. ”Driver Education and Training: A Guide to Teacher Preparation.“ Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia Univer- sity, 19&9. National Safety Congress, Chicago, Illinois. Minutes of the Annual Meeting of the Committee on College Safety Education. October 18, 1960. (Type- written.) Schneider, Nathaniel 0. “Teacher Preparation for Safety Education.” Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, New York University, l9&O. APPENDICES APPENDIX.A State Departments of Education Questionnaire and Cover Letter ILLINOIS STATE NORMAL UNIVERSITY NORMAL, ILLINOIS September 27, 1960 Dear Sir: In your supervisory capacity you are undoubtedly aware of many research studies dealing with various sepects of high school driver education. That you have received re- quests for information needed in such studies seems to be a safe assumption. Currently the writer is embarking upon a research study that constitutes an attempt to analyze teacher preparation programs in driver education in colleges and.universities of the United States. This research will form the basis for a doctoral dissertation. Dr. William A. Mann of Michigan State University's Highway Traffic Safety Center is serving as advisor for the project. Your cooperation in gathering pertinent data for this study is earnestly requested, Enclosed you will find a questionnaire dealing with various aspects of driver education. Although some of the requested information may appear remote from the principal objective of the study, it is nevertheless essential for a complete understanding of the situation in your statee Attempts have been made to keep the requested information non-technical and to avoid the necessity for long, time- consuming responses. In most instances completing the question- naire should take no longer than ten to fifteen minutes. A stamped, self-addressed envelope is enclosed for your conven- ience in returning the completed questionnaire. 'Because subsequent parts of the total research study hinge upon information requested from your office, attention to this request at your earliest convenience will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Charles H. Hartman Assistant Professor 258 25 9 QUESTIONNAIRE - STATE DEPARTMENTS CF EDUCATION Explanation and Instructions The four parts of this inquiry deal with: Part I: Current certification requirements (September, 1960 to June, 1961) for teachers of high school driver education, and related information. Part II: Certification requirements for teachers of high school driver education that have been approved by the state, but do not take effect until sometime following the current year. Part III: Special education and training requirements in driver educa- tion for college and university personnel who prepare teachers in this field. Part IV: Colleges and universities located within the state that are known to offer a credit course in driver education. Many questionnaire items can be answered by placing a check mark or figure in the appropriate blank or ballot square. Space for written or typed answers or explanations is provided immed- iately following those questionnaire items requiring longer responses. Special instructions regarding the completion of Part IV will be found at the beginning of that section of the questionnaire. PART I - CURRENT CERTIFICATICN REQIIRWTS Unless otherwise instructed, please answer questions in this part of the questionnaire in terms of certification requirements in effect for the current school year (September, 1960-June, 1961). 1. In addition to the basic requirements for all high school teachers, how many semester hours of colle e credit does your state require of high school driver education t3ac5era§ a Semester hours credit required in driver education. (b) Semester hours credit required in general safety ed‘lcationO O O O O O O O O O .O O O O ' O O O O O O O (c) Semester hours credit required in other specifi- callyrelatedcourSCSe e e e e e e e e e e e e e e Total semester hours required. . . . Comment (if appropriate): 260 2. If your state does not require college credit in_drig§:.ggn§gtigg (part "a" in previous questi'c—n') check this ballot square [:1] and dis- regard.the remaining portion of this question. If your state requires some college credit in driver education, does the law specify what the instructional content of this course in driver education shall be? D Yes D No Does the law specify that behind-thedwheel practice driving shall be included in this course? :3 Yes [:3 No Comment (if appropriate): ,_ vi 3. If your state does not require college credit in "Specifically re- lated courses" (question 1, part "c") check this ballot square C] and disregard the remaining portion of this question. If your state requires college credit in "specifically related courses", list below the areas or courses that are acceptable under this category: b. If your state does pot require college credit in driver education and/or general safety education (question 1, parts "a" and "b") check this ballot square [:3 and disregard the remaining portion of this question. If your state does list certification requirements in driver and/ or safety education, in what year did the current certification require- ments first take effect? Year of . Comment (if appropriate): If your state does list certification requirements in driver and/ or safety education: When the current certification requirements first took effect what provision was made for those who had been teaching driver educa- tion prior to enactment of the certification law, but did not possess a sufficient amount of specified college credit to qualify under the new law? [:3 These teachers were permitted to continue teaching and were exempted from the new certification requirements. :3 These teachers were required to earn the specified college credits regardless of prior teaching experience in the field. D Other (please explain): ‘— ‘ L 1261 5. Does your state make provision for t or certification for teaching high school driver education? 1:] Yes i I No If "yes" , what are the conditions of this emporary certifica- tion? (please explain fully): 6. Does your state provide any form of financial reimbursement to local school districts operating an a. roved driver education (classroom and practice driving)program? Yes , No If "yes", appro a ely how much money (per student trained) were school districts reimbursed during the proceeding (1959-1960) school year? $ per student trained. Approximately what percentage of all public high schools in your state received reimbursement under this plan during the preceeding (1959-1960) school year? %. 7. Does your state have any "compulsory" driver education program? That is, are any operator's license applicants required to com lets a driver education course as a pre-requisite to licensing? I Yes I No If "yes", what are the requirements of t]. s aw? (please explain fully) : 8. Does your state require any classroom and/or practice driving instruction in driver education as a pre-requisite for high school graduation? Yes No If "yes , what are the particulars of this requirement? (please explain fully): Note: In addition to the information requested above, the investigator would appreciate an opportunity to review more detailed information concern- ing driver education in your state. Mimeographed or printed outlines, bro- chures, manuals, etc. dealing with the driver education program in general, and certification requirements in particular, would be especially helpful. Please check one of the following categories indicating action on this request I Materials will be forwarded. B Materials cannot be forwarded at state expense. If you will send $ to at these amount person or agency add—ress materials will be sent to you. C] Materials will not be forwarded. -3- 1262: PART II - CERTIFICATICN REQUst APPROVED BY CFFICIAL STATE ACTION, BUT NOT IN EFFECT DURING CURRENT YEAR If there has not been any official state action taken that would have “the effect of chaniifig the current ceFIification requirements during some fumure year, please check this ballot square [::J and disregard all ques- tions in Part II. If your state has officially approved changes in the current certifi- cation requirements ( to take effect during a future year): 1. On what date are these new certification requirements to take effect? . 2. ‘In what ways will these new certification requirements differ .from the current certification requirements explained in Part I? (please explain fully): BART III - SPECIAL EDUCATICN AND TRAINING REQUIREMENTS IN DRIVER EDUCATION FOR COLLEGE PERSONNEL WHO PREPARE TEACHERS IN THIS FIELD Check the ballot square below that applies to the requirements for college aggzuniversity instructors of driver education in your state. No special requirements. ‘Workshop, or short course, or institute in driver education. 'Workshop, or short course, or institute in driver education and safety education. Seminar in teacher preparation in the field of driver education. A two or three semester hour credit course in driver education. .More than three but less than ten semester hours credit in driver education. Minor (15 semester hours) in driver and/or safety education. Major (30 semester hours) in driver and/or safety education. Master's degree with.major emphasis in driver and/or safety education. Graduate credits beyond master's degree in driver and/or safety education. Doctor's degree with major emphasis in driver and/or safety education. Other (please explain): [I [I 1] DUB HUD DUB Comment (if apprOpriate): 263 PART IV - COLLEES AND UNIVERSITIES (FFERING A CREDIT C(IJRSE IN DRIVER EDUCATICN The information you provide in Part IV will form the‘ basis for a mailing list. A subsequent part of this study involves a questionnaire to be sent to institutions offering a credit course in driver education. Listed below are the names of both public and private colleges and universities located within your state that were reported in 1956-1958 as offering a teacher preparation credit course in driver education. Please verify, correct, and up-date this listing by: (a) Checking the ballot square at the left of those institutions that, in so far as your office can determine, currently offer a credit course in driver education. (b) Deleting from the list the names of those institutions that, in so far as your office can determine, 93 longer offer a credit course in driver education. (0) Adding to the list the names of those institutions offering at least four years of study that, in so far as your office can determine, currently offer a credit course in driver education. Please include names even though u cannot be absolutely certain o a driver education course 5 now ered as rpm curriculum if you have reason to believe such a course was considered for adaption. Another item of information requested below is that of the name and title of the person responsible for conducting the basic driver education course in each of the named institutions. The first choice of a name here is that of the faculty member actually teachin the course. If this name is not known, as an alternate choice please Iist the administrator (depart- ment head, dean, etc.) who is the immediate superior to the teacher of this course. In the event that more than one person in the institution is known to teach the driver education course, please list the senior faculty member's name. Verification College 93 University Instructor Title .93 met. Administrator 33E; [II 1:] --—— E:l --—-- l:l _— I:l -—-—- l:] ‘ ———"' [2:1 m [:1 W 1:23 ——'——' 1:] -"'——" :3 -———' :3 _— Verification UDDUUUUUUUUDUUDU 261; College _o_r University Instructor 33 Administrator Title _o__f Inst. orm ~— Your cooperation in completing this questionnaire is greatly appreciated. Comments you wish to make in the space below concerning this questionnaire study are welcomed: Person completing questionnaire: Title : -5- APPENDIX B Bibliography of Teacher's Guidebooks in Driver Education Published by State Education Departments APPENDIX B Bibliography of Teacher's Guidebooks in Driver Education Published by State Education Departments Except where indicated otherwise, authorship is that of state education department sponsorship. The listing is arranged alphabetically by states. To be considered a "teacher's guidebook" at least some portion of the publication had to be devoted to recommended course content. Arizona Driver Education: A Guide for Instructors. Phoenix: Traffic Safety DivisIon, ArIzona Highway Depart- ment, 1957, pp. 55. California Driver Instruction, A Guide for Driver Education and Driver Trainifi . Revised'ed. Sacramento: CEIITEFEIa State DEpar en. 0 Education, 1958, pp. 96. (Price $1.00) Colorado Juchem, Marguerite and Hopper, Robert O. Develo i Responsible Drivers:A_Bulletin on Driver'Education EEK 1Training. Denver: Colorado Stat? Department of Education, . pp. 25. Connecticut A.Manual 23 Driver Education. Hartford: State Department of Education, I9§§, pp. I2. (Mimeographed.) 266 267 District of Columbia Curriculum Guide for Driver Education. Washington: Public SEhools Of_the District of CoItmEia, 1950, pp. iv + 23. (Mimeographed.) Illinois Driver Education for Illinois Hi h Schools. SpringfieIH: Office of the Superintendent of‘PEEIic Instruction, 1958, pp. 83. Indiana Learning to Live: Driver and Traffic Safety_Edu- cation (Bulletin.§EOI. Indianapolis: State Department of PuBIic Instruction, ned., pp. 97. Kansas A Guide for Driver Education.ig Kansas Second Schools TBulIetin 365). Topeka: State Department of Putlic Instruction, 1958, pp. 71. Louisiana Morgan, Hemby. The Driver Education Pro ram in Louisiana (Bulletin 911). Baton Rouge: State Department of Eiucation, 1959, pp. 29. Morgan, Hemby and Morel, Ralph J. Regulations Governi the Issuance of School Instruction Permits in Hi? chooIT-Coiie e, an—d' A'd'uIt Driver Education Pro _ims C rcuIar No. K609.) Eaton Rouge: State Department oi Education, 1960, pp. 10. Maine Driver Education.ig Maine Secondary Schools. Augusta: State Department of Education, 1958, pp. 36. (Price $.75) 268 Michigan The Michigan.Driver Education Manual. Lansing: The Department of Public Instruction, 1953. pp. 85. Missouri A Guide for Driver Education. Jefferson City: State Department of Education, I959, pp. 83. Montana The Montana Plan of Presenting Driver Education and Training for High School Administrators aLd Teachers. Helena: State Department of *Public Instruction, 1957, pp. 29. (theographed. ) New'York Driver Education, A Syllabus fLr Secondary Schools. Albany: The State Education_ Department, 1957, PP. North Carolina Driver Education, A Manual fLr Instructors. Raleigh: Department of Public Instruction, 1958. p . 105. North Dakota Safet and Driver Education for North Dakota Hi h Schools. Eismafk: Department of PfiinE Instruction, I959, EST-E77 ' Oklahoma A Guide fLr Teaching Driver and Traffies fietz Education in Oklahoma Schools. Oklahoma City: State Department of Education, n.d., pp. 35. (Mimeographed. ) e n . . - ~ - . . v '. ‘ I i " ' rr 7 -. ' ‘ | . . A,-}1 . . . . -.... n ., . . ... J _ \ ~ ~ - ‘ . ' . . ' 1 mt, gm. . i ‘ ‘4. ,g' V . no I»; . O . . . C ..' 3.. ' '- 71.1,) Lem.” 651-.) .~ F'j'zo'r. r" . ‘ u ’1‘? -.-“~-' . . h ' ' -' ' ' . : '3 [FCAJ -‘ _ ... -..... 0‘...“ o‘I': , . swig-inf- - A. . ._, . . '» ' . o" - ~f . r‘ M . _,_. 1 ‘. . ...“ ljnrg’me: v . . _ ... . A ._ uremsxs 19C! 269 Oregon Driver Education in Oregon Second Schools. Salem: State Department of Education, 19 , pp. 31. (Price $1. 00) South Carolina Driver and Traffic Education, Part I: Im lementi the Pro ram. Columbia: Department of Education, 19E7, 28. PP- Driver and Traffic Education, Part II: A Guide for geachers. Columbia: Department of Education, 1937, pp. ‘7- Utah Automobile Driver Egucation Standards. Salt Lake City: Department of PuBIIc Instruction, 1957, pp. 6. (Processed.) Virginia Let's Learn to Drivez'Driver Education Source Material for Virginia—Secondw Schools. Richmond: ‘Department of Education, Depar ent of State Police, Division of Motor Vehicles, 1958, pp. xi+l68. West Virginia A Course of Stud in Driver and Traffic Safet Education fLr West—V rg nia “HIgH Schools, Revised ed. CharIeSton: State *Department of Education, 1957, pp. 56. APPENDIX C Colleges and Universities Basic ' Driver Education Course Questionnaire and Cover Letter ILLINOIS STATE NORMAL UNIVERSITY NORMAL. ILLINOIS November 15, 1960 Dear Sir: The teacher preparation course in driver education available at your institution is somewhat unique. 0f the more than 1,900 colleges and universities in this country, your institution is one of less than three hundred that offer a "basic" driver education course. Your program, therefore, is an important part of the "national" teacher preparation program in driver education. In an attempt to secure a clearer and more refined picture of this nationwide program, the writer has undertaken a doctoral research study concerned with this area. Dr. William A. Mann of Michigan State University's Highway Traffic Safety Center is serving as advisor for the study. Responses to the enclosed questionnaire will be kept confidential; no person or institution will be individually identified in the completed study. Respondents should not look upon the questionnaire as an "evaluation” of either a person or an institution. The ques- tions seek only to determine "what is", not what one might ideally wish it to be. With your assistance it is hoped that the study will indicate the current national status of the basic driver education course and related factors, and perhaps serve as a guidepost in future planning. A stamped, self-addressed envelope is enclosed to aid you in returning the questionnaire at your earliest convenience. Because any status study is in danger of quickly becoming outdated it is desired to have all returns no later than December 16. Your cooperation in this request will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Charles H. Hartman Assistant Professor 271 \IIIIIsl) A‘- 2?72 QUESTIONNAIRE - COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES BASIC DRIVER EDUCATION COURSE Explanation and Instructions This inquiry is concerned with the introductory or "basic" teacher preparation course in driver education offered by your college or univer- sity. The questionnaire seeks to determine the typical and current situ- ation at your institution with regard to this first course in driver education. In most instances responses can be recorded by checking the appro- priate ballot square or by placing a short written or typed answer in the space provided following the question. Should your response be too long to fit into the space provided, please feel free to make marginal notes or to conclude your statement on the reverse side of the page. PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION CONCERNING THE BASIC DRIVER EDUCATION COURSE Course title: Credit (specify semester or quarter hours): Level (check one): [:1 undergraduate credit only D graduate credit only [:3 undergraduate or graduate credit Course pre-requisite requirements: Text(s) designated for student procurement and use in this course (please list by title): Administrative unit (Department and/or College) under which course is offered (please be specific): Is this course typically offered during the regular (Sept.-June) school year?[::IYes[::INo. If "yes", please check one of the following: [:3 course offered each semester (or quarter) of regular year [:3 course offered less than each semester (or quarter) or regular year If "yes", what is the typical total enrollment in this course for the entire regular school year? Is this course typically offered during the summer session? DYesD No If "yes", for what length of time does the course run during the summer session? weeks. If "yes", what is the typical total enrollment in this course for the entire summer session? - 1 _ 273 > 9. Is this course typically offered in extension75 Year: No If "yes", what is the typical total enrollment in this extension course during a calendar year? 10. Is this course typically offered in correspondence? .EJYesD No If "yes", what is the typical total enrollment in this corres- pondence course during a calendar year? 11. Based on the typical enrollment in this course during a calendar year (including regular, summer, extension, and correspondence sessions). indicate below your estimate of the percentage breakdown: a. By sex: % are male students. % are female students. b. By vocational intent: % plan a career in some teaching field. % plan on a career other than teaching. 12. Indicate your estimate of the percentage of students enrolled in this course during a typical year (including regular, summer, extension, and correspondence sessions) that are igpservice teachers (any field of teaching). % are in-service teachers. PART II'- LABORATORY SESSIONS THAT ARE A PART OF THE BASIC DRIVER EDUCATION COURSE For the purposes of this study laboratory sessions are defined as follows: "A required part of the course which is characterised by : (1) an emphasis upon practice driving instruction, (2) meetings or sessions held on a systematic basis, and (3) a departure from the typical "lecture" or classroom setting." While practice driving instruction utilising a dual contrbl car is perhaps the most common form of laboratory session associated with a basic driver education course, the absence of such a car does not, of and by itself, disqualify such a session from recognition as a laboratory session. 1. Is laboratory work (as defined above) required of students enrolled in this course? EZIYes :1 No If "no", please disregard all remaining questions in Part II and cantinue your responses with Part III. 2. Text(s) and other printed materials designated for student procurement and use in the laboratory session (if not listed previously in this questionnaire): 3. Hours per week each student spends in laboratory session (averaged over entire semester or quarter): hours per week. 27h Please note: For the purposes of this study the terms "learner" and "beginning driver" are used interchangeably to identify persons of any age who are making attempts to learn to operate a motor car and to become licensed by the state for this purpose. What is the nature of the laboratory work performed by the college student? (please check all that apply in your situation) E:](a) College student provides actual practice driving instruction for beginning drivers in a car. [::](b) College student provides simulated practice driving instruc- tion utilizing fellow classmates as "beginning drivers". C:](c) Others If you checked either "b" or "c" in question 4 (above), please explain fully the nature of your laboratory sessions: Please note: Most of the questions remaining in Part II are appro- priate for the type of laboratory session wherein college students provide actual practice driving instruction for beginning drivers in a dual control car. If your laboratory session differs from this plan of operation some of the subsequent questions in Part II will have little, if any, application to your situation. Where such is the case please print a large "NA" (meaning not applicable) in the spaces pro- vided for answering such questions. What are your sources for securing "learners" or beginning drivers? (Please indicate percentage you typically utilize from each category listed) % from a "campus" or "laboratory" high school % from local area high school(s) % from your college or university student body % from your college or university staff and/or faculty % from other sources (please describe) Total 7. 8. 100% Each student instructor is responsible for teaching [:3 one [:tho :1 three E four E: f ive beginning drivers . A typical laboratory session in the practice driving car consists of El oneEZ'I two D threeIZIJ four student instructors andf: one [:3 two [3 three Ejfour [:3 five beginning drivers. _ 3 - 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 275 . Supervision of laboratory sessions (i.e., the person supervising is actually present in the car) is handled by (check square(s) that apply): C3 faculty memb'e'r teaching lecture portion of course [:3 some other faculty member [I] a graduate assistant [:3 fellow classmates in course [:3 no one :3 other (please explain): v-v——— Please estimate the approximate amount of time during the laboratory sessions (based on a semester or quarter) that the student instructor is under actual in-the—car supervision. % of the time. Are any beginning drivers under your program charged a fee for their instruction? :1 Yes :I No If "yes", which groups (e.g., high school students, college students, faculty and staff members, etc.) are charged? If "yes", the fee is set at s r per person; If ”yes", the fee D is CZIis not applied directly to the financing of the driver education program. Automobiles used in the laboratory sessions total with automatic transmission and with standard transmission. ‘ Automobiles in use in the laboratory sessions (please check appropriate ballot squares): . c::]are used only for laboratory work (:23 are used for laboratory work and related driver education activities (e.g., demonstrations, transportation to professional meetings, etc.) [2:] are used for both lab work and nonvdriver education activities. Automobiles used in laboratory sessions wereprocured as follows (place number in appropriate blank): cars are owned by the institution cars are on loan from local area dealer cars are leased or rented cars are procured by other arrangement. (Please explain): PART III - FACULTY TEACHING THE BASIC DRIVER EDUCATION COURSE The questions appearing in the third portion of this questionnaire relate to the faculty teaching the basic driver education course on a regular basis at your college or university. It is therefore requested that summer school or evening school instructors be included in this report if their appearance on your campus is typical for the summer or evening sessions. Please do not include information on those who teach the course only on an occasional basis. _ a - 276 "Teaching the course", for the purposes of Part III, refers to the lecture or classroom portion of the course. Most of the followinguquestions request information on each faculty. member regularly teaching the course. Space is provided for recording this information as "Teacher A", "Teacher B", "Teacher C", and "Teacher D". Please be certain to list information for a given teacher under the same letter (viz., A.B,C, or D) throughout all the questions. 1. Number of faculty employed on a full-time basis by your college or university that,;ggulg;1y teach the basic driver education course: Number of faculty employed on a "part-time" basis by your college or university and regularly engaged in teaching the basic driver educa- tion course (include AAA lecturers, visiting professors, etc.): Number of graduate assistants (or others with less than professional teaching status) regularly engaged in teaching the basic driver educa- tion course: 7 Please indicate (by checking the appropriate blank) the highest category of formal education for each faculty member who teaches this course on a regular basis. Teacher Formal Education QOAIO 'OB'O OOCIO CID" Holds Bachelor's degree Completed 1 to 14 s.h. beyond Bachelors Completed more than 14 s.h. beyond Bachelors Holds Master's degree Completed 1-29 s.h. beyond Masters Completed more than 29 s.h. beyond Masters Holds Doctors's degree Please indicate below the approximate percentage of time each faculty member regularly teaching this course devotes to the several categories listed. (Do not include teaching, research, etc. done independent of or apart from college or university employment.) Teacher Employment Time Breakdown "A" IIBQO 'IC'! 09D?! Time devoted to teaching (any field) Time devoted to research Time devoted to administration Time devoted to other official duties 3333333“ aflaflaflafi aisflafiai afiafisfiai t-’!.l‘.|’ll'l. II!~E I. . in 277 Considering teaching_ time only, please indicate below the percentage breakdown in the three areas listed for each faculty member regularly teaching the course. Teacher Teaching Time.Breakdown 'IA'O DOB” O'CIO "D'O % % % % Time devoted to teaching basic driver -__ "T". ——' _fl— education course ‘__J% ‘__J% .__;% ___$ Time devoted to teaching other driver and/or safety education courses % % % % Time devoted to teaching outside driver and/or safety education field Please indicate below for each faculty member regularly teaching the basic driver education course who teaches courses outside the field of driver and/or safety education, the area(s) of his other teaching responsibilities (e.g., physical education, industrial arts, health, social studies, etc.). Teacher "A" Teacher "B" Teacher "C" Teacher "D" Indicate below for each faculty member regularly teaching the basic driver education course any responsibilities for safety or accident prevention on your campus that are exclusive of teaching or research. Please be specific in your description, indicating whether such re- sponsibilities are, for example, in the form of an official adminis- trative position, service on a campus safety committee, or other forms of service. Teacher "A" Teacher "B" Teacher "C" Teacher "D" Please describe briefly the nature and extent of the formal educational backg_ound of each faculty member regularly teaching the basic driver of driver education. _Kindly be as specific as possible by indicating the nature and extent of background such as short courses, seminars, institutes, credit courses, etc. completed or currently under study in the field of driver education. -6- 10. 11. 278 Teacher "A" Teacher "B” Teacher "C" Teacher "D" Indicate below the nature and extent of the professional experiences related to driver education possessed by each faculty member regularly teaching the basic driver education course. Place the number of years of such experience in the blank provided,based upon experience prior 32 September, 1960 and rounded to nearest whole number. Teacher-Years of Experience . Nature of Professional Experience Related "A" "B” "C” "D" To Driver Education Teacher and/or administrator of high school driver education Member of college faculty teaching driver education Member of state department of education supervising driver education —_ _— _— —" —“ ** Some faculty members regularly teaching the basic driver'education course may possess an educational and/or experience background that cannot be said to be directly related to driver education, but which nevertheless gives such a person some unique qualifications as a driver education instructor. Please describe below for each faculty member that falls into this category, the nature and extent of such background.~ (Kindly identify person as "Teacher "A" or "B", etc.) 279 PART IV -SELF-EVALUATION OF BASIC DRIVER EDUCATION COURSE AND OVERVIEW OF TOTAL DRIVER EDUCATION PROGRAM ' Please complete the questions below in an open and frank manner as a self- evaluation. As mentioned earlier, neither personshor institutions will be individ- ually identified in the completed research study, Should your answers become too lengthy for the space provided, kindly use the reverse side of the page. 1. What aspects about the basic course in driver education, as offered at your institution, do you believe are most in need of change and improvement? 2. What aspects of the basic driver education course, as offered at your in- stitution, do you find most noteworthy and satisfying? 3. Please indicate on the scale below your estimate of the degree to which the administration encourages, assists, and promotes the improvement and ex- pansion of a driver education teacher preparation program on your campus: None _- -------- fifETE -------------- Some _ _— 'MuEh 4. Pleaseindicate below and on the reverse side of this page, your personal concept of the role that a high school driver education teacher should play. 280 Please note: A subsequent questionnaire concerned with the total program in driver education is planned for distribution to selected colleges and universities. Information requested below will assist in the determination of several aspects of this subsequent study. Does your college or university award a teaching major or minor in driver and/or safety education? D Yes [2380 If "yes", check appropriate square(s) below: :1 undergraduate minor D graduate minor D undergraduate major :3 graduate major Pleme list below all of the courses in the field of driver and/or safety education that are offered by your institution which could be applied toward certification or toward a major or minor in this field. Course Title Credit Hours Your cooperation in completing this questionnaire is greatly appre- ciated. A final request - will you kindly forward to the writer a capy of the course outline utilized in the basic driver education course at your college or university? [:3 Capy enclosed. [:21 Copy sent under separate cover. CZ] Copy will not be forwarded. Please mail completed questionnaire and any additional materials to: Charles H. Hartman, Illinois State Normal University, Normal, Illinois. Questionnaire completed by: Title: ‘ College or University: Thank You! APPENDIX D Colleges and Universities Participating in the Questionnaire Survey APPENDIX D Colleges and Universities Participating in the Questionnaire Survey States for which no institutions were reported as offering an introductory teacher preparation course in driver education (for credit) are reported as "none listed.“ Asterisks mark those colleges and universities that provided data both on the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education (i.e., on the second questionnaire) and on their total program in driver education (i.e., on the third questionnaire). .ALABAMA None listed ALASKA None listed ARIZONA Arizona State College at Flagstaff Arizona State University University of Arizona ARKANSAS Arkansas State College Arkansas State Teachers College 282 283 CALIFORNIA Chapman.College *Chico State College *College of the Pacific *Long Beach State College *Los Angeles State College of Applied Arts and Sciences Pacific Union College Sacramento State College San Diego State College *San Francisco State College *San Jose State College University of California (Berkeley) University of Southern California COLORADO Adams State College University of Denver CONNECTICUT Central Connecticut State College Southern Connecticut State College University of Bridgeport University of Connecticut DELAWARE None listed DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA None FLORIDA Florida Agricultural and mechanical University Florida State University University of Florida University of Miami University of Tampa 28h GEORGIA University of Georgia HAWAII None Listed IDAHO *Idaho State College ILLINOIS *Bradley'University aEastern Illinois University *Illinois State Normal University Millikin University *Northern Illinois University *Southern Illinois University *University of Illinois «Western Illinois University INDIANA Ball State Teachers College Evansville College Hanover College Indiana Central College Indiana State Teachers College slndiana University «Manchester College Purdue University IOWA Iowa State Teachers College *Iowa State University of Science and Technology Westmar College 285 KANSAS Bethany College Fort Hays Kansas State College Kansas State College of Pittsburg *Kansas State Teachers College McPherson College Sterling College University of Kansas KENTUCKY University of Kentucky Western Kentucky State College LOUISIANA Grambling College Louisiana College Louisiana Polytechnic Institute Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Southern'University and Agricultura1.and Mechanical College Southwestern Louisiana Institute Xavier University of Louisiana MAINE University of Maine ‘MARYLAND «University of Maryland MASSACHUSETTS Springfield College University of Massachusetts MICHIGAN Central Michigan.University Eastern Michigan University 286 MICHIGAN--(Continued) Ferris Institute sMichigan.State'University of Agricultural and Applied Science Northern.Michigan College Siena Heights College University of Michigan Wayne State University ‘Western.Michigan.University MINNESOTA Concordia College Mankato State College Moorhead State College St. Cloud State College University of Minnesota MISSISSIPPI Mississippi College Mississippi Southern College Mississippi State University MISSOURI Central Missouri State College Northwest Missouri State College Southwest Missouri State College MONTANA Montana State College Mentana State University Northern Montana College Rocky MOuntain College NEBRASKA Nebraska State Teachers College (Chadron) Nebraska State Teachers College (Kearney) Nebraska State Teachers College (Peru) 0:73 .r . ..tf.’,g '\"~’ outlining ‘ . ‘1. ’11., Il('U .dm LL: 3 ~13"! ‘ 5.79.5109 aatlaifl 17 ZUOI“. *0 “1 77:73.11" 03“. ,t i (maiden ' e: sIIoO I 7_ niejfgtl' 91.939. ' 2.? fineff"3 9’2’8 : «"00 93:38 5810 i 2‘0' 54.111.“ 30 ‘9 : 1,7. ., g, ... W 3P1": H" OROIIJU I. A gagiin'd n'mziaaofi til: \ J i; 1&an 93838 “LC‘SEXLA (gel 02) 93:53 8 11mm caelirfi sum I‘JIOM? 1y ef's". ”Biz MUG!“ 9‘: AKA ‘3')! OR eaeIIoa es raiszevmu 0M e'eTIeO mt“ menial!) I_ ' ' K341118531 mane!) mule»! saute!) «and! eaenea 287 NEBRASKA--(Continued) *Nebraska State Teachers College (Wayne) University of Nebraska OKLAHOMA Central State College East Central State College Northeastern State College Oklahoma State University fiSoutheastern State College «Southwestern State College University of Oklahoma OREGON Oregon State College University of Oregon PENNSYLVANIA Clarion State College East Stroudsburg State College Geneva College Indiana State College) Kntztoun State College Lock Haven State College Mansfield State College Millersville State College Pennsylvania State University Shippensburg State College Slippery Rock State College Temple University ‘University of Pittsburg West Chester State College RHODE ISLAND Rhode Island College SOUTH CAROLINA South Carolina State College A 288 SOUTH DAKOTA Black Hills Teachers College Northern State Teachers College State University of South.Dakota Southern State Teachers College NEVADA University of Nevada NEW HAMPSHIRE Keene Teachers College NEW JERSEY Glassboro State College Montclair State College Trenton State College NEW MEXICO New Mexico Highlands University New'Mexico‘wOstern.College NEW'YORK Brooklyn College «Columbia,University Ithaca College *New'YOrk'University State University, College of‘Education (Cortland) State University, College of Education (New Paltz) State University, College of Education (Oswego) NORTH CAROLINA Agricultural and Technical College of North Carolina Appalachian State Teachers College Catawba College ‘East Carolina College 289 NORTH CAROLINA-~(Continued) Fayetteville State Teachers College High Point College Johnson C. Smith University Lenoir Rhyne College University of North Carolina (Chapel Hill) Western Carolina College NORTH DAKOTA Mayville State Teachers College North Dakota Agricultural College State Teachers College (Minot) State Teachers College (Valley City) OHIO BaldwinéWallace College Bowling Green State University Kent State University Miami University Ohio Northern University The Ohio State University Ohio‘University University of Cincinnatti Wilmington College ‘Wittenberg University TENNESSEE East Tennessee State College Knoxville College Memphis State University Middle Tennessee State College TEXAS Abilene Christian College Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas East Texas State College Hardin-Simmons University Iamar State College of Technology North Texas State College 290 TEXAS-~(Continned) Pan American College *Prairie View Agricultural and Mechanical College Sam.Houston State Teachers College Stephen F. Austin State College Sul Ross State College Texas College of Arts and Industries Texas Technical College Texas Woman's University *University of Houston University of Texas West Texas State College UTAH *Brigham YOung‘University University of Utah *Utah State University VERMONT None VIRGINIA Bridgewater College College of William.and Mary College of William.and Mary (Norfolk Division) Lynchburg College Madison College University of Virginia ‘WASHINGTON Central Washington College of Education Eastern Washington College of Education 'Washington State University . WEST VIRGINIA Bluefield State College Marshall College 291 WEST VIRGINIA-~(Continued) West Virginia State College *West Virginia University ‘WISCONSIN Stout State College “University of Wisconsin Wisconsin State College (Eau Claire) Wisconsin State College (La Crosse) Wisconsin State College (Oshkosh) aWisconsin State College (River Falls) Wisconsin State College (Stevens Point) Wisconsin State College and Institute of Technology (Platteville) WYOMING None listed Ll APPENDIX E Tables Relating to the Administrative and Instructional Aspects of the Introductory Driver Education Course . 1'1] "II APPENDIX E Tables Relating to the Administrative and Instructional Aspects of the Introductory Driver Education Course TABLE 21.--Distribution of enrollment by sex in the intro- ductory teacher preparation course in driver education - :- Percentage of Colleges and Percentage of Male Students Universities Female Students 100-91 103 0-10 90-81 63 11-20 80-71 12 21-30 70-61. 13 31-h0 60 ~51 6 [5.1-50 SO-Ln. 0 51-60 hD-Bl 2 61-70 30-21 2 71980 20-11 0 81-90 10-0 3 91-100 NA 6 NA Total 210 293 29h TABLE 22.-~Distribution of enrollment by vocational intent in the introductory teacher preparation course in driver A education W Percentage of Stu- Colleges and Percentage of Stu- dents Planning a Universities dents Planning a Teaching Career Non-Teaching Career loo-91 138 0-10 90-81 33 11920 80-71 18 21-30 70-61 1. 3l-h0 60-51 3 hl-So 5044-1. 5 51-60 hO-Bl 0 61-70 30-21 I. 71-80 20-11 0 81-90 10-0' I. 91-100 NA 10 NA Total 210 295 TABLE 23.-4Distribution of enrollment by teaching service in the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education Percentage of Pro? Colleges and Percentage of In- Service Teachers Universities Service Teachers loo-91. 5h. 0-10- 90-81 19 11-20 80-71. 21 21-30 70-61 17 31-h0 60-51 15 hl-So So-hl. 10 51-60 lt0-3l 7 61-70 30-21 11 71-80 20-11 22 81-90 lO-O 217 91-100 NA 13 NA Total 210 296 TABLE 2h.--College and university typical enrollment fig- ures for the introductory teacher preparation course in driver education during the entire regular school year Number of Number of In- Students stitutions 180-171 . . . . . . . . . . . . 170-161 . . . . . . . . . . . . 160-151 . . . . . . . . . . . . lSO-lhl . . . . . . . . . . . . Inc-131 . . . . . . . . . . . . 130-121 . . . . . . . . . . . . 120-111 . . . . . . . . . . . . 110-101 . . . . . . . . . . . . 100-91 . . . . . . . . . . . . 90-81 . . . . . . . . . . . . 80-71. . . . . . . . . . . . . 70-61 . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-51 . . . . . . . . . . . . SO-hl . . . . . . . . . . . . hO-3l . . . . . . . . . . . . 30-21 . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-11 . . . . . . . . . . . . lO-l . . . . . . . . . . . . NA . . . . . . . . . . . . non- o~53