|
Roadwise Review is not a driving test per se. Rather, it is a
"driving health" test with eight sections. These eight evaluate what are
basically three areas of physical and mental function.
One is vision and one's capacity to react. One is memory, and the third is
strength and upper body flexibility. Measuring these requires the test taker to
perform certain actions, which are noted and recorded in the computer.
To measure leg strength, for instance, the assistant marks a spot 10 feet from
where the test taker is sitting. The test taker gets up, walks 10 feet, then
returns to the chair. The assistant punches a computer key when the test taker
gets up and when he or she sits back down. The faster the testee carries out the
task, the more strength is indicated.
The test process takes from a half-hour to 45 minutes. The computer times some
of the responses, but not others.
Even though a computer is used, the test taker need only be able to use a
computer mouse, a skill that, if not already possessed, is easily learned
onsite.
At test's end, the computer displays the results, which can be printed out.
Any personal deficiencies pointed out by test results are addressed by
computer-offered suggestions about measures the older driver can take to offset
those deficiencies.
Test results are private, meaning people who score poorly won't lose their
licenses. But if they ever have to take the Virginia driver's test again,
they'll run the risk of failing. It's entirely up to the test-taker to take
Roadwise Review's results to heart--or not.
Having now taken Roadwise Review twice, I believe that the test is at least as
challenging as the Virginia written and road tests for a driver's license. I
also believe that were Roadwise Review compulsory; many now licensed
drivers--both old and not-so-old--would find their driving abilities officially
called into question.
But the test is not likely to be compulsory at any time in the foreseeable
future. This nation's large and ever-increasing bloc of voting senior citizens
will not readily tolerate having their driving privileges revoked in significant
numbers.
I suspect that some older drivers will be put off by having to use a computer,
and by fear of learning from an independent source that their driving abilities
are poor.
Easy but sophisticated test
Though relatively easy to take, Roadwise Review is a fairly sophisticated test.
It consists of a series of tasks to be performed. Most of them are carried out
on screen by using the mouse, but a few are physical and mental.
Before beginning, the test taker gets to perform a practice exercise or two so
the process becomes clear in advance. A talking image explains everything.
The person being tested watches the computer monitor while each test section is
presented in succession.
Helen McKeel, an executive assistant at the Rappahannock Area Agency on Aging,
describes herself as a senior citizen. She told me she believes some older
drivers might be intimidated by the test process. Yet she said she enjoyed her
own test experience.
"I didn't expect to do as well on it as I did," McKeel said.
Windy VanCuren, public relations specialist and spokesperson for AAA
Mid-Atlantic, said she agrees that some seniors might be reluctant to take the
test, mostly because their generation tends to have less familiarity with
computers.
But she said the test is easy to take, and that seniors might be comforted to
know it's private, and strictly for self-evaluation.
I asked VanCuren if AAA had gotten any feedback from test takers. She said it
had, and that the test takers say they appreciate the exam's confidentiality.
Some say the test was harder than they expected, but that, like McKeel, they
scored better than they had expected.
VanCuren also said that some adult children, worried about their parents'
driving ability, have bought the test and gently encouraged their parents to
take it, as a way to make known their worry.
It occurred to me that I had no qualms about taking Roadwise Review. I believe
this was because I was certain that my strength, sight and memory were good at
74.
But this confidence on my part begs the question: How many of us have the same
amount of self-confidence but are mistaken?
Indeed I was mistaken, even if only slightly, about which I'll write more later.
Human error
In the weeks between my tests, I thought about an ever-increasing driving hazard
visible mainly among the younger age groups. I refer here to the use of cell
phones while driving.
A 2004 study, set out in a publication called Human Factors reviewed this year
in WebMD Medical News, reports that a 20-year-old driver using a cellular
telephone has the same reaction time as a 70-year-old nonphone-user.
As a practical matter, I drive a lot. And I rarely if ever see an older driver
using a cell phone. As a two-time Roadwise Review test taker, I have little
doubt that a young, alert, sharp-witted but telephone-using test taker will
score lower on Roadwise Review than most licensed seniors giving their full
attention to the test.
We are all humans who err regardless of age. And ours is an automobile-dependent
society. This combination guarantees that people will die in road accidents no
matter how many precautions we take. Our society routinely accepts 40,000 road
fatalities per year.
Merely to live is to be exposed to risk. I just read a Wall Street Journal story
about an 80-year-old Japanese-American who journeyed alone across the Pacific to
Japan in a sailboat. What is more, he expects to make the return trip, solo.
I liked and agreed with the expressed wisdom of the sailor, Sakae Hatashita, in
speaking of the risks involved. He is quoted as saying, "Life is a gambleif
people think too much, they won't move a single step."
So, what is a society to do?
From the standpoint of highway safety, we probably already have and use the most
reasonable means available to curtail driving by the unfit of all ages.
When voluntary abstinence from driving and high insurance rates don't work, we
have the law, the police and the courts to see that the worst drivers of all
ages are kept away from their cars.
A deficiency
Now, going back to my testing, you might want to know how I fared on the AAA
Roadwise Review test. My results both times were nearly the same.
I was impairment-free in seven of the eight test sections. Five of those eight
deal with vision in one way or another. One of those five twice showed that I
have a mild deficiency in my ability to make a visual search while driving. In
effect, the test says that I don't need to surrender my license. Therefore, I
won't.
I am glad to know about my deficiency and have begun to take remedial action. In
urban settings, I have slowed down my driving and have become extra-careful in
high-density situations.
Nevertheless, even with my good health and reasonably good driving skills, at 74
I have had my fill of driving. If I could live in places such as England or Key
West, Fla., where distances are short and getting around without a car is easy,
I would cheerfully give up automobile driving. To me, owning a car and driving
it are both expensive and bothersome.
But as of the moment, it looks like I'll persevere with driving for some time to
come.
|
