Another way of teaching our kids about road signs and such, was to get them to say what every sign and road marking meant, while they were in the car with you. I did that with my 2 daughters when they got to that age where they wanted to drive.
(that was back in the days when they were speaking to me that is?)
Yes, I do think that a better knowledge of the Highway Code will lend itself to reducing accidents involving novice drivers. Forget the cost and whoever receives that money. Think of the safety, that's what this is all about. The existing Theory Test could be re-vamped so as to be more hazard awareness based. One step at a time though. Get them to take a Theory Test before being let loose on our roads. Not everyone learns with a professional instructor who is better able to cope with the errors that new drivers make. Lots of novice learn with their friends or relatives supervising them . They learn in cars without dual controls and with supervisory drivers who are not sufficiently qualified to teach safely. The whole system for teaching driving needs looking at in detail, but that's a matter for another thread / topic.
Originally Posted by TheoryTestNovel
I don't think anybody would deny that better knowledge would help to reduce RTC's among the young and seasoned alike, not least me as an author on the topic and a driving safety rep for a footsie company. What I question is the idea of making people sit two theory tests. Without trying to put you on the defensive i would say you are looking at it with an 'I'm alright Jack' attitude because your proposal would not affect you, indeed perhaps, like me, you never had to sit even one theory test before gaining your licence. I am agreeing that there is clear merit in the idea of legislating for the theory test to be studied for, and passed, before a person could advance to a provisional licence and actual driving lessons but what i am saying is that making people sit an additional theory test could only be financial exploitation, the benefactor, incidentally, was raised by yourself. Upon further consideration i would again expand on your idea and advocate an expiry date of one year for the first driving/theory test thus making it the law to sit the tests again after a year which would catch all novice drivers whom had allowed themselves to fall into poor practices.
I also am an ADI. Most of my pupils have passed their theory test before starting lessons, but in my experience the majority of them have very little understanding of the subject. The recent changes to the test may improve things, but I very much doubt it. I cannot therefore see any value in introducing a second test.
Originally Posted by Route.1
What might improve matters is to replace the current multiple choice quiz with a proper written exam, but the cost would no doubt make it a non-starter.
In any event, a second test shouldn't be an extra source of revenue for the governmnet, since the DSA is self-funding and non-profit making.