The Future of Education

Victor Nyberg, Linköping University (Sweden) [email protected]

In the Swedish driver education system, there is a strong emphasis on self-assessment, motivational factors, and individual goals, alongside the traditional skills of mastering traffic situations and vehicle handling. This approach aligns with the best practices outlined in the Goals for Driver Education (GDE) model[1]. However, a recent report by Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute [2] indicates that the higher levels of the GDE model are insufficiently trained and tested.

Driving simulators have proven to be effective tools for providing a safe and consistent environment for both training and testing [3]. A recent study demonstrated that a simulator-based test could identify drivers with inadequate risk awareness. The authors also recommended that traffic situations in simulator-based tests should complement on-road driving tests by incorporating uncommon situations and focusing on GDE levels beyond the second [4].

This study evaluates an updated version of such a simulator-based test, aiming to assess the suitability of the traffic situations as a complement to traditional on-road tests. A web-based questionnaire was distributed to over 60 driver education experts, who rated 15 traffic situations across seven items regarding GDE level, difficulty, probability, and importance.

The findings reveal that situations receive the highest rating on the second GDE level in all but one case. Nevertheless, all levels were represented to some extent, with one situation rated highest for the third level. Interestingly, this particular situation was also considered the most difficult, least probable, and among the least important. Similar patterns observed in other situations suggest valuable insights for assessing the suitability of simulator-based tests as complements to the on-road test. Furthermore, these findings have significant implications for the design of traffic situations for driver training.

Keywords: Driver training, Goals for Driver Education, Driving Simulator, Driver testing

[1] Hatakka, M., Keskinen, E., Gregersen, N. P., Glad, A., & Hernetkoski, K. (2002). From control of the vehicle to personal self-control; broadening the perspectives to driver education. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 5(3), 201–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-8478(02)00018-9

[2] Forward, S., Nyberg, J., Gustafsson, S., Gregersen, N. P., & Henriksson, P. (2017). Den svenska förarutbildningen: dagsläge och framtidsutsikter. [Novice driver training in Sweden- present and future prospects]

[3]  de Winter, J. C. F., van Leeuwen, P. M., & Happee, R. (2012). Advantages and Disadvantages of Driving Simulators: A Discussion. Proceedings of the Measuring Behavior Conference, Utrecht, The Netherlands, August 28-31.

[4] Thorslund, B., Thellman, S., Nyberg, V., & Selander, H. (2024). Simulator-based driving test prescreening as a complement to driver testing – Toward safer and more risk-aware drivers. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 194, 107335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2023.107335