morriswalters wrote:People won't do this. It is taught. The written test in my state touches all these and more.
Then, it's not taught. A written test is not a substitute for teaching what is a physical and observational skill. And the longer the written test is, the worse that is. It would be like claiming you'd taught someone karate because they'd read a book on the subject, and it had mention on page fifty - in passing - what the ideal mutual distance between two fighters was. Or claiming that because someone'd read a book on small unit tactics they'd be able to execute fire and manoeuvre tactics appropriately on the ground.
This is stuff that needs to be drilled in - just like smooth gear changing, just like fighting, just like team work, just like any of a myriad other skills where reading what the numbers are doesn't translate those numbers into a feeling of what's safe and what's not. You cannot gain a skill just
by being told something.
Where you look and when - the observations you take - that's a habit. So's how far you drive from the car in front. So's how often you check your mirrors. So's when you start braking and how fast you think it appropriate to come up to obstructions and how close you consider it appropriate to drive to other cars. Knowledge forms the basis for the formation of those habits, but without the experience of using them it's all largely pointless.
IMO, the theory test is the worst thing to happen to driving in the last fifty years. It's taken knowledge that ought to be being trained into a skill and made it something that people read and either have no idea what it turns into on the ground or then forget.
Your test should be a commentary drive, so that the examiner knows what decisions you're making and why, and can assess that in light of the theory that you should know - and the theory section can then be scrapped.
morriswalters wrote:And signage exists to warn people of hidden dangers. So many people speed in construction zones that already high fines are doubled, and they still won't stop. They put up big bright signs and flashing lights.......? As an added attraction, in the US the car has allowed development to proceed in a manner that makes taking half the fools off the road impossible.
I really don't expect people to take signs seriously when they're not feeling the dangers they're being warned about. Do people feel that road works mean that someone could just step out on them? Do they feel that they'd be able to stop in time?
I think people vastly overestimate how much knowledge influences operational concerns as compared to having something drilled into you properly.
Fix the car, cause you can't fix the fools. Almost certainly I'm beyond help.
I'm amenable to just having computers do it all for us ^_^ That'd be ideal.
stoppedcaring wrote:Draconian provisions aside, what's a reasonable consistency rate?
If someone does all of the things you demand 50% of the time they're on the road, is that enough?
How about 60%?
I guarantee there's no driver alive who does all of those things all the time.
No, everyone makes mistakes. I don't know how consistently the thing would have to be applied. And there's an additional question of how seriously you'd have to violate it. Someone who's doing 100mph through a built up area probably needs their license taken away then and there - I can't think of any conditions under which that would be responsible behaviour.
Things like turn signals though - everyone forgets them once in a while.
I think I make a mistake like maybe driving a bit close to someone before I remember and correct it about once every three months - if we were going off of that basis ... well, I drive twice a day. Say each month is 25 days for easy use - 1/75 ... something like a 1.3% screw-up rate.
But then again I may not be a good driver. Or I might be misremembering. Or I might be an excellent driver and expecting unreasonable performance off of others. I think something like 80||90% wouldn't be unreasonable to ask of people though. Roughly 6 to 2 screwups a month that were serious enough for other people to notice - assuming they drove twice a day and depending on how long the month was and so on.
(And there's the further question of what sort of consistency is reasonable to expect of people and how much time you're going to give people for improvement and so on.)