The article 'TEENAGE DRIVERS? BE VERY AFRAID' is written by Bruce Feiler. Bruce Feiler is an American writer and television personality. He is the author of 12 books, including six consecutive New York Times nonfiction best-sellers.
The author claims that the most dangerous time for a teenagers are between 16-17 and the reason for that is driving. He also included quote by a researcher which is 'Cars have gotten safer, roads have gotten safer, but teen drivers have not'. In his points he state that parents are not worry enough about their children and they should involve more in supervising their child in driving.
The author had strengthen his point by include the causes of teenage accidents. He stated that teenagers are easily distract by their gadgets and friends. I agree with his statements that most teenagers used their phone and gadget while driving and tend to lost their focus on driving. Even if the reason for using their gadgets for map, they still get distract by it. Other than that, I also agree when the author state that friends can increase the risk of the accidents as teenage driver get distract when their friends start talking and chit chatting with them.
The author had provides enough causes and suggestion on how to fix the problems. He suggested that parents should involve more supervising their children when driving and take precaution such as be a back-seat parents.
The tone of this article is convincing. The author provides the facts with evidence by the researchers and real life situations to support his stance.
Overall by looking at all the points presented, the article is one sided article which the author put all his blame to the teenagers. However, the author had successfully delivered his points through all the facts to strength his stance.
Tuesday, 10 May 2016
CRITIQUE ON 'TEENAGE DRIVERS? BE VERY AFRAID'
'Teenage Drivers? Be Very Afraid' is an article written regarding parents not being involved enough when it comes to teenage driving. It is written by Bruce Feiler, an American writer, television personality and author of 12 books, including six consecutive New York Times non-fiction best seller in a column of The New York Times recently (19th March 2016). The target audiences of this article is mainly parents of teenage drivers.
The author's intention is to inform to the readers on ways to reduce crash rates of teenage drivers. The author gave several rules that parents can impose on their teen driver. Some of the suggestions made by the author is to not let friends drive with them, turn off notifications on cellphones when driving, the two second rule and for parents to be a back-seat parent.
Looking at the arguments presented by the author, he had provide a multi-dimensional view to teenage driving. He wrote that cellphones are one of the main reasons that lead to accidents among teen drivers but that passengers are a greater threat than cellphones. Even so, it doesn't mean that old threats like drinking and driving at night have gone away.
I couldn't agree more with the author. Technology has helped us in many ways in our lives but it is also because of technology that the crash rate among teen drivers is increasing. Teenagers nowadays are always on their cellphones be it for texting, talking or checking facebook. Even when they are driving, once their phone beeps it's hard for them to resist checking it. As for driving with friends, when their friends are talking to them or telling them a story, these teen drivers will become distracted and will focus on their friends instead of the road. Besides that, their friends might even persuade them to drive above the speed limit.
The tone and choice of words used by the author indicates his professionalism in terms of language style. No notes of sarcasm are used throughout this article, and it has been delivered straightforward and honestly. Overall, looking at the points presented, this article is a great article on the ways to reduce the risk of crashes among teen drivers.
The author's intention is to inform to the readers on ways to reduce crash rates of teenage drivers. The author gave several rules that parents can impose on their teen driver. Some of the suggestions made by the author is to not let friends drive with them, turn off notifications on cellphones when driving, the two second rule and for parents to be a back-seat parent.
Looking at the arguments presented by the author, he had provide a multi-dimensional view to teenage driving. He wrote that cellphones are one of the main reasons that lead to accidents among teen drivers but that passengers are a greater threat than cellphones. Even so, it doesn't mean that old threats like drinking and driving at night have gone away.
I couldn't agree more with the author. Technology has helped us in many ways in our lives but it is also because of technology that the crash rate among teen drivers is increasing. Teenagers nowadays are always on their cellphones be it for texting, talking or checking facebook. Even when they are driving, once their phone beeps it's hard for them to resist checking it. As for driving with friends, when their friends are talking to them or telling them a story, these teen drivers will become distracted and will focus on their friends instead of the road. Besides that, their friends might even persuade them to drive above the speed limit.
The tone and choice of words used by the author indicates his professionalism in terms of language style. No notes of sarcasm are used throughout this article, and it has been delivered straightforward and honestly. Overall, looking at the points presented, this article is a great article on the ways to reduce the risk of crashes among teen drivers.
Monday, 9 May 2016
Critique- Teenage Drivers? Be very afraid.
'Teenage Drivers? Be very afraid' is an article by Bruce Feiler on the 19th March 2016. Bruce Feiler is an American Writer and television personality. He is the author of 12 books, including six consecutive New York Times non-fiction bestsellers.
The author claims that one of the biggest factors that is contributing to premature death of teenagers is mainly the driving reason. The range of age when a teenager's risk of involving in an accident is between 16-17 years old. The author also did mentioned that death in motor vehicle accidents among teenagers has surpassed other forms of deaths.
The author strengthened his point of view by suggesting the major factor that has caused accidents which is the influence of technology and the influence of friends. Teenagers are succumb by these two are prone to accidents than those who are not. The author also did suggested that parents should play am important role by fixing essential equipment into their kids car, however, the parents do not think it is necessary by saying that they have been in the same shoe before and an eye on the road is just enough to avoid accidents. The author went against the hypothesis and argued that advanced safety features is well worth the money and peace of mind even if its expensive.
The tone of the article is convincing. The author has brought up the issue with detailed facts to support his article. For example, he proved in every way he could to convince the readers that extra eyes should be set on teenagers to avoid accidents in the future.
The author claims that one of the biggest factors that is contributing to premature death of teenagers is mainly the driving reason. The range of age when a teenager's risk of involving in an accident is between 16-17 years old. The author also did mentioned that death in motor vehicle accidents among teenagers has surpassed other forms of deaths.
The author strengthened his point of view by suggesting the major factor that has caused accidents which is the influence of technology and the influence of friends. Teenagers are succumb by these two are prone to accidents than those who are not. The author also did suggested that parents should play am important role by fixing essential equipment into their kids car, however, the parents do not think it is necessary by saying that they have been in the same shoe before and an eye on the road is just enough to avoid accidents. The author went against the hypothesis and argued that advanced safety features is well worth the money and peace of mind even if its expensive.
The tone of the article is convincing. The author has brought up the issue with detailed facts to support his article. For example, he proved in every way he could to convince the readers that extra eyes should be set on teenagers to avoid accidents in the future.
CRITIQUE
The article 'Teenage Driving Laws May Just Delay Deadly Crashes' by Arahad O'connor is about tougher licensing laws that have reduced road fatality among 16 years-olds, but unintedly increases those among 18 years-olds.
The author claims that the laws and the programs only looked at younger teen. Indeed, road fatality has been reduced among the younger teenagers but looking at the bigger picture, these laws are just delaying those deadly crashes. He also strongly believe that skipping restriction is one of the reason to increase road fatality.
Firm statistics is given by the author where there have been 1348 fewer deadly crashes among 16 years-old but 1086 more fatal crashes involving 18 years olds.
The tone of the author is unstastisfied because the results is not really what they have expected eventhough there is still a net overall saving.
The author claims that the laws and the programs only looked at younger teen. Indeed, road fatality has been reduced among the younger teenagers but looking at the bigger picture, these laws are just delaying those deadly crashes. He also strongly believe that skipping restriction is one of the reason to increase road fatality.
Firm statistics is given by the author where there have been 1348 fewer deadly crashes among 16 years-old but 1086 more fatal crashes involving 18 years olds.
The tone of the author is unstastisfied because the results is not really what they have expected eventhough there is still a net overall saving.
Critique Article- The New York Times
'TEENAGE DRIVERS? BE VERY AFRAID' by Bruce Feiler , 19 March 2016.
Spend enough time having parenting conversations, as I’ve done personally and professionally for the last dozen years, and certain patterns emerge. In nine out of 10 cases, if you’re talking about highly motivated parents, the message to Mom and Dad is: back off, chill out, park the helicopter.Whether you want your children to be independent, resilient, creative; whether you’re talking to teachers, psychologists, grandparents; whether you’re discussing homework, food, sports; the recommendation, time and again, is relax.
Recently, I stumbled onto a topic in which the advice was the exact opposite. Among the people who know what they are talking about, the unanimous message to parents is: You’re not worried nearly enough. Get much more involved. Your child’s life may be in danger.What’s the topic? Teenage driving.“If you’re going to have an early, untimely death,” said Nichole Morris, a principal researcher at the HumanFIRST Laboratory at the University of Minnesota, “the most dangerous two years of your life are between 16 and 17, and the reason for that is driving.”
Among this age group, death in motor vehicle accidents outstrips suicide,cancer and other types of accidents, Dr. Morris said. “Cars have gotten safer, roads have gotten safer, but teen drivers have not,” she said.In 2013, just under a million teenage drivers were involved in police-reported crashes, according to AAA. These accidents resulted in 373,645 injuries and 2,927 deaths, AAA said. An average of six teenagers a day die from motor vehicle injuries, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.Charlie Klauer, a research scientist at the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, said her research suggested the numbers were even higher because many teenage accidents go unreported.
“We believe one in four teens is going to be in a crash in their first six months of driving,” Dr. Klauer said. How to address this problem is not as simple as it seems, especially as technology has taken over teenagers’ lives.One father I know bought his son a manual-transmission car because it required him to use two hands, to eliminate the option of using a cellphone. I recently overheard a conversation between my sister and her 16-year-old son in which she reminded him not to text while driving, and he replied, “But I’m using Google Maps, and the text pops up automatically on the screen.”So what’s a parent to do, especially one who knows teenagers are always one step ahead of any rules they try to impose?
FRIENDS DON’T LET FRIENDS DRIVE WITH THEM When I asked Dr. Morris what parents should be most worried about, she answered definitively, “Other passengers.” Adding one nonfamily passenger to a teenager’s car increases the rate of crashes by 44 percent, she said. That risk doubles with a second passenger and quadruples with three or more.Most states have what are called “graduated driver’s licenses,” meaning some combination of learner’s permit, followed by a six-month or so intermediate phase, followed by a full permit. Restricting the number of passengers who are not family members is among the most common regulations in the early phases, but Dr. Morris said most parents disregard the rule once that time expires.That’s a huge mistake, she said. “Even if your state drops the non-familiar-passenger restriction after six months, parents should make it their own rule,” Dr. Morris said.Distraction is highest when boys ride with other boys, she said, whereas boys actually drive safer when girls are in the car. Altogether, passengers are a greater threat than cellphones, she believes. “Your cellphone isn’t encouraging your teen to go 80 in a 50, or 100 in a 70,” she said.
TURN OFF NOTIFICATIONS Phones are still a huge problem, though.Dr. Klauer has done three studies, in which she places video cameras in cars and monitors drivers for a year. Even when teenagers know they’re being monitored, they still use their telephones for texting, talking or checking Facebook at least once every trip, including ones only a few blocks.“Teens’ prevalence for engaging their devices is higher than other age groups,” she said, “and their risk for being involved in a crash when they do is higher.”Even if the phone is tucked away in a pocket or backpack, enticing beeps or ringtones make it hard to resist. Dr. Klauer recommends blocking all notifications before even getting in the car. “You’re more likely to do it if you’re sitting calmly at home,” she said. “In the moment, it’s really hard not to look at the screen.”
THE TWO-SECOND RULE If your child insists on using the phone for navigation or listening to music, the research suggests there’s only one safe place for it to be: in a dock, at eye level, on the dashboard. The worst places? The cup holder, the driver’s lap, the passenger’s seat.“The real enemy is taking your eyes off the forward roadway,” Dr. Klauer said. “Anything more than two seconds is extremely dangerous. The longer you look away, the worse it gets.”Though she’s skeptical young drivers actually need navigation for most trips, Dr. Klauer said audible turn-by-turn directions are preferable to paper maps, because there’s less rustling in your lap. Similarly, streaming music has advantages over flipping radio channels, as long as the driver is not selecting each individual song.
EVERY TIME IS A DANGEROUS TIME Just because technology has introduced threats doesn’t mean the old threats like drinking or driving at night have gone away. In 2013, almost a third of teenage drivers killed in crashes had been drinking, the Transportation Department found. Also, safety experts say, driving late at night is much more dangerous than during the day.Jennifer Ryan, the director of state relations at AAA, told me the organization recommends that teenagers not be allowed to drive between 9 p.m. and 5 a.m. for the first six months of having their license. “We encourage parents should go beyond that if they don’t feel their teen is ready,” she said.To help navigate these issues, AAA has a sample contract parents and young drivers can sign, with consequences agreed in advance.
BELLS AND WHISTLES ARE A PARENT’S BEST FRIEND Over all, teenage driving deaths have been declining in recent years, though specialists agree it’s because of improved safety features on roads, such as more impact-resistant median barriers and smarter technology in cars. These include automated brakes, airbags, forward collision warning systems and lane departure warning systems.Dr. Morris encouraged parents to adopt as many of the safety features as possible. “I did not grow up in a wealthy family,” she said. “I drove a $3,000 car when I was in high school. But if the idea is that these bells and whistles aren’t necessary for teens, I would argue against that. I know it’s expensive for parents, but any advanced safety feature is well worth the money and peace of mind.”
BE A BACK-SEAT PARENT The most surprising thing I learned is how passionately researchers believe that parents are not doing nearly enough to supervise their children. “Our studies show that the more the parent is involved when a teen is learning, the lower their chances are for a crash,” Dr. Morris said. “That means asking questions, supervising them, giving them opportunities on different types of roads under different conditions.” The mistake parents often make, she said, is thinking, “Finally I don’t have to car-pool you everywhere!”Dr. Klauer said that in her studies she would send video snippets to parents when their children violated the law. When parents looked at the results and discussed them with their teenagers, results improved. The only problem: Half the parents never even looked at the warnings. “I know you trust your child,” Dr. Klauer said. “But if you’re not paying attention, chances are they’re not driving as safely as you think they are.”The bottom line:
Teenage driving may be that rare outlier when it comes to parenting. As soon as you give your children the keys to the car, it may be time to pull the helicopter out of the hangar for a spell and follow them down the road.
Spend enough time having parenting conversations, as I’ve done personally and professionally for the last dozen years, and certain patterns emerge. In nine out of 10 cases, if you’re talking about highly motivated parents, the message to Mom and Dad is: back off, chill out, park the helicopter.Whether you want your children to be independent, resilient, creative; whether you’re talking to teachers, psychologists, grandparents; whether you’re discussing homework, food, sports; the recommendation, time and again, is relax.
Recently, I stumbled onto a topic in which the advice was the exact opposite. Among the people who know what they are talking about, the unanimous message to parents is: You’re not worried nearly enough. Get much more involved. Your child’s life may be in danger.What’s the topic? Teenage driving.“If you’re going to have an early, untimely death,” said Nichole Morris, a principal researcher at the HumanFIRST Laboratory at the University of Minnesota, “the most dangerous two years of your life are between 16 and 17, and the reason for that is driving.”
Among this age group, death in motor vehicle accidents outstrips suicide,cancer and other types of accidents, Dr. Morris said. “Cars have gotten safer, roads have gotten safer, but teen drivers have not,” she said.In 2013, just under a million teenage drivers were involved in police-reported crashes, according to AAA. These accidents resulted in 373,645 injuries and 2,927 deaths, AAA said. An average of six teenagers a day die from motor vehicle injuries, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.Charlie Klauer, a research scientist at the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, said her research suggested the numbers were even higher because many teenage accidents go unreported.
“We believe one in four teens is going to be in a crash in their first six months of driving,” Dr. Klauer said. How to address this problem is not as simple as it seems, especially as technology has taken over teenagers’ lives.One father I know bought his son a manual-transmission car because it required him to use two hands, to eliminate the option of using a cellphone. I recently overheard a conversation between my sister and her 16-year-old son in which she reminded him not to text while driving, and he replied, “But I’m using Google Maps, and the text pops up automatically on the screen.”So what’s a parent to do, especially one who knows teenagers are always one step ahead of any rules they try to impose?
FRIENDS DON’T LET FRIENDS DRIVE WITH THEM When I asked Dr. Morris what parents should be most worried about, she answered definitively, “Other passengers.” Adding one nonfamily passenger to a teenager’s car increases the rate of crashes by 44 percent, she said. That risk doubles with a second passenger and quadruples with three or more.Most states have what are called “graduated driver’s licenses,” meaning some combination of learner’s permit, followed by a six-month or so intermediate phase, followed by a full permit. Restricting the number of passengers who are not family members is among the most common regulations in the early phases, but Dr. Morris said most parents disregard the rule once that time expires.That’s a huge mistake, she said. “Even if your state drops the non-familiar-passenger restriction after six months, parents should make it their own rule,” Dr. Morris said.Distraction is highest when boys ride with other boys, she said, whereas boys actually drive safer when girls are in the car. Altogether, passengers are a greater threat than cellphones, she believes. “Your cellphone isn’t encouraging your teen to go 80 in a 50, or 100 in a 70,” she said.
TURN OFF NOTIFICATIONS Phones are still a huge problem, though.Dr. Klauer has done three studies, in which she places video cameras in cars and monitors drivers for a year. Even when teenagers know they’re being monitored, they still use their telephones for texting, talking or checking Facebook at least once every trip, including ones only a few blocks.“Teens’ prevalence for engaging their devices is higher than other age groups,” she said, “and their risk for being involved in a crash when they do is higher.”Even if the phone is tucked away in a pocket or backpack, enticing beeps or ringtones make it hard to resist. Dr. Klauer recommends blocking all notifications before even getting in the car. “You’re more likely to do it if you’re sitting calmly at home,” she said. “In the moment, it’s really hard not to look at the screen.”
THE TWO-SECOND RULE If your child insists on using the phone for navigation or listening to music, the research suggests there’s only one safe place for it to be: in a dock, at eye level, on the dashboard. The worst places? The cup holder, the driver’s lap, the passenger’s seat.“The real enemy is taking your eyes off the forward roadway,” Dr. Klauer said. “Anything more than two seconds is extremely dangerous. The longer you look away, the worse it gets.”Though she’s skeptical young drivers actually need navigation for most trips, Dr. Klauer said audible turn-by-turn directions are preferable to paper maps, because there’s less rustling in your lap. Similarly, streaming music has advantages over flipping radio channels, as long as the driver is not selecting each individual song.
EVERY TIME IS A DANGEROUS TIME Just because technology has introduced threats doesn’t mean the old threats like drinking or driving at night have gone away. In 2013, almost a third of teenage drivers killed in crashes had been drinking, the Transportation Department found. Also, safety experts say, driving late at night is much more dangerous than during the day.Jennifer Ryan, the director of state relations at AAA, told me the organization recommends that teenagers not be allowed to drive between 9 p.m. and 5 a.m. for the first six months of having their license. “We encourage parents should go beyond that if they don’t feel their teen is ready,” she said.To help navigate these issues, AAA has a sample contract parents and young drivers can sign, with consequences agreed in advance.
BELLS AND WHISTLES ARE A PARENT’S BEST FRIEND Over all, teenage driving deaths have been declining in recent years, though specialists agree it’s because of improved safety features on roads, such as more impact-resistant median barriers and smarter technology in cars. These include automated brakes, airbags, forward collision warning systems and lane departure warning systems.Dr. Morris encouraged parents to adopt as many of the safety features as possible. “I did not grow up in a wealthy family,” she said. “I drove a $3,000 car when I was in high school. But if the idea is that these bells and whistles aren’t necessary for teens, I would argue against that. I know it’s expensive for parents, but any advanced safety feature is well worth the money and peace of mind.”
BE A BACK-SEAT PARENT The most surprising thing I learned is how passionately researchers believe that parents are not doing nearly enough to supervise their children. “Our studies show that the more the parent is involved when a teen is learning, the lower their chances are for a crash,” Dr. Morris said. “That means asking questions, supervising them, giving them opportunities on different types of roads under different conditions.” The mistake parents often make, she said, is thinking, “Finally I don’t have to car-pool you everywhere!”Dr. Klauer said that in her studies she would send video snippets to parents when their children violated the law. When parents looked at the results and discussed them with their teenagers, results improved. The only problem: Half the parents never even looked at the warnings. “I know you trust your child,” Dr. Klauer said. “But if you’re not paying attention, chances are they’re not driving as safely as you think they are.”The bottom line:
Teenage driving may be that rare outlier when it comes to parenting. As soon as you give your children the keys to the car, it may be time to pull the helicopter out of the hangar for a spell and follow them down the road.
CRITIQUE ON 'TEENAGE DRIVING LAWS MAY JUST DELAY DEADLY CRASHES'
'Teenage Driving Laws May Just Delay Deadly Crashes' is an article written regarding teenage driving laws that unintentionally increases the rate of accidents among older teens. It is written by Anahad O'Connor, a reporter for the New York Times in a column of New York Times (14th September 2011). The target audiences of this article is diversified and not confined to a scoop age, social status or a specific group.
The author's intention is to establish to the readers that teenage driving laws are indeed unintentionally increasing the rate of accidents among older teens, seen through the choice of content for this article. The author stated that most studies on graduated driver licensing have only looked on 16 year olds and seems like the tougher licensing laws for teenage drivers have reduced deadly accidents among teenagers but on looking at the bigger picture across 18 and 19 year olds, it looks like the tougher laws are just delaying those deadly crashes.
Looking at the arguments presented by the author, he had provide multi-dimensional evidences. The reasons given are that teenagers are simply waiting to get a license until they've reached the minimum driving age instead of dealing with the extra restrictions. Another hypothesis that was given is that teenagers are not getting much practical driving experience when they have 'co-drivers'. Crashes among teenagers are not because they are reckless but that they make simple mistakes.
Well, I agree with some of the things said by the author. Most teenagers nowadays are just waiting to get a drivers license so that they can drive around and go out with their friends. They've not thought of dealing with the extra restrictions that is put upon the tougher laws. This is one of the reasons there's a lot of inexperienced drivers on the road. On the other hand, I think that by saying ''not getting as much practical driving experience when they have co-workers'' is an unacceptable excuse. The adult supervision is to protect these teenage drivers as they are inexperienced. After they have gotten enough experience and the adult feels that these teenage drivers are capable of driving alone then only can they drive unsupervised.
The tone and choice of words used by the author indicated his professionalism, with no biasness in terms of language style. No notes of sarcasm are used throughout this article, and it has been delivered straightforward and honestly.
The author's intention is to establish to the readers that teenage driving laws are indeed unintentionally increasing the rate of accidents among older teens, seen through the choice of content for this article. The author stated that most studies on graduated driver licensing have only looked on 16 year olds and seems like the tougher licensing laws for teenage drivers have reduced deadly accidents among teenagers but on looking at the bigger picture across 18 and 19 year olds, it looks like the tougher laws are just delaying those deadly crashes.
Looking at the arguments presented by the author, he had provide multi-dimensional evidences. The reasons given are that teenagers are simply waiting to get a license until they've reached the minimum driving age instead of dealing with the extra restrictions. Another hypothesis that was given is that teenagers are not getting much practical driving experience when they have 'co-drivers'. Crashes among teenagers are not because they are reckless but that they make simple mistakes.
Well, I agree with some of the things said by the author. Most teenagers nowadays are just waiting to get a drivers license so that they can drive around and go out with their friends. They've not thought of dealing with the extra restrictions that is put upon the tougher laws. This is one of the reasons there's a lot of inexperienced drivers on the road. On the other hand, I think that by saying ''not getting as much practical driving experience when they have co-workers'' is an unacceptable excuse. The adult supervision is to protect these teenage drivers as they are inexperienced. After they have gotten enough experience and the adult feels that these teenage drivers are capable of driving alone then only can they drive unsupervised.
The tone and choice of words used by the author indicated his professionalism, with no biasness in terms of language style. No notes of sarcasm are used throughout this article, and it has been delivered straightforward and honestly.
'Teenage Driving Laws May Just Delay Deadly Crashes' is an article by Anahad O'Connor who is a reporter for The New York Times, covering health,fitness,nutrition and epidemiology. He writes for the Science Times Section as well as the paper's Health and Wellness blog. This article is about how the newbie drivers with an average age of 16 who are prone to the risk of accidents than those who are elder than them.
The author claims that extra restrictions should be imposed to teenagers who are as young as 16 years old and that they should think twice before indulging in the thought of having license at a younger age because of its fatal crash rate consequences. I have to agree with the author because the rate of accidents have increased especially in the age circle of 16-18 years old. These teenagers are embedded with an adrenaline rush to try almost everything they could without thinking of what might happen to them if they do something without proper practice and without any expose to the 'real world' out there.
He also strengthened his point of view by providing statistics based on his research on teenage drivers. He even provided data to prove 16-18 years old teenagers are supposed to deal with extra restrictions when they are driving. However, he contradicted himself at the same time by suggesting another hypothesis which is that the teenagers become dependent on parents when they are under adult supervisions because they'll miss learning about the risk on road and to be an independent driver.
The tone of the article is therefore contradictory. The author himself doubts his first statement which is teenagers should not be left independent on the road. He said it is good to give them some space to get used with the road and the risks.
The author claims that extra restrictions should be imposed to teenagers who are as young as 16 years old and that they should think twice before indulging in the thought of having license at a younger age because of its fatal crash rate consequences. I have to agree with the author because the rate of accidents have increased especially in the age circle of 16-18 years old. These teenagers are embedded with an adrenaline rush to try almost everything they could without thinking of what might happen to them if they do something without proper practice and without any expose to the 'real world' out there.
He also strengthened his point of view by providing statistics based on his research on teenage drivers. He even provided data to prove 16-18 years old teenagers are supposed to deal with extra restrictions when they are driving. However, he contradicted himself at the same time by suggesting another hypothesis which is that the teenagers become dependent on parents when they are under adult supervisions because they'll miss learning about the risk on road and to be an independent driver.
The tone of the article is therefore contradictory. The author himself doubts his first statement which is teenagers should not be left independent on the road. He said it is good to give them some space to get used with the road and the risks.
Sunday, 8 May 2016
Critique
'Teenage Driving Laws May Just Delay Deadly Crashes' is an article written by Anahad O’Connor who is a reporter for The New York Times, covering health, fitness, nutrition and epidemiology. He writes for the Science Times section as well as the paper’s Health and Wellness blog. This article is about the law that only focusing on 16 years old teenage driver but at the same time still cannot solve the accident problems.
The author intention is to affirm that even if they tougher the licensing laws for teenage drivers can reduced deadly accidents among 16-year-olds, but with an unintended consequence, increasing the fatal crash rate among 18-year-olds.Facts and arguments put forward by the author are inclined on the law are saving teen drivers over all, but it’s not nearly what we thought it would be.
I agree with the author which he claimed that, 16-17 years old teenagers that suppose to deal with extra restriction while waiting to get a license at 18 results in a greater chance of inexperienced drivers. He also claims that teenagers don't get much practical experience when they have co-driver. He strengthen his point by saying that the teenagers should learn what it means to be fully responsible for a vehicle and knowing how to “self-regulate.”
The author provides the research that have been made which is the teenage driver not only drive recklessly but make simple mistake. Teenagers tend to easily get distract while driving which can cause accidents. It is proven that even if they tougher licensing laws they still cannot solve the problems.
The tone used by the author is incredulous which the author doubtful with the programs that have been introduced. He claimed that the problem still have not been solved and the program does not working.
Monday, 25 April 2016
The purpose of this articles is to show how tougher laws could be the key to lower the percentage of highway fatality among teenagers. However, in this article, they are only focusing on 16 years old teenage drivers and in consequences they have to face with the increase of 18-19 years olds fatality.
The author claims that, 16-17 years old teenagers that suppose to deal with extra restriction while waiting to get a license at 18 results in a greater chance of inexperienced drivers. He also claims that teenagers don't get much practical experience when they have co-driver. It is good to have someone supervising you but it is a completely different experience to drive alone and to get the feeling of responsibility of the vehicle.
The tone of the author is unstatisfied and shocked. From all the programs, there is still a net overall saving but it is not what they thought it would be because there was an increase in number of fatality in the 18-19 years olds.
The author claims that, 16-17 years old teenagers that suppose to deal with extra restriction while waiting to get a license at 18 results in a greater chance of inexperienced drivers. He also claims that teenagers don't get much practical experience when they have co-driver. It is good to have someone supervising you but it is a completely different experience to drive alone and to get the feeling of responsibility of the vehicle.
The tone of the author is unstatisfied and shocked. From all the programs, there is still a net overall saving but it is not what they thought it would be because there was an increase in number of fatality in the 18-19 years olds.
Teenage Driving Laws May Just Delay Deadly Crashes
By ANAHAD O'CONNOR SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 6:22 PM September 14, 2011 6:22 pm
Raising the age a teenager can begin driving may also increase the rate of accident's among these older teens.Raising the age at which a teenager can begin driving may also increase the rate of accidents among these older teens.
A nationwide study shows that tougher licensing laws for teenage drivers have reduced deadly accidents among 16-year-olds, but with an unintended consequence: increasing the fatal crash rate among 18-year-olds.
Over the last two decades, many states have put in place strict teenage driving laws, with graduated driver’s license programs that require young drivers to meet certain restrictions before they obtain a full license. While the rules vary by state, they generally set a minimum age for earning a driver’s permit or license and require a set number of supervised hours behind the wheel, and some prohibit driving with fellow teenagers, ban night driving or require at least six months of instruction before a driver’s test. Over all, the tougher laws — which most states began adopting in the mid-1990s — have been credited with a 30 percent drop in highway fatalities among teenagers.
But “most of the prior studies on graduated driver licensing have only looked at 16-year-olds,” said Scott Masten, a researcher with California’s Department of Motor Vehicles and the lead author of the current study. “When you do that you go, ‘Wow, these programs are saving lives,’” he said.
To get a broader perspective, Dr. Masten and his colleagues looked at data on fatal crashes involving 16- to 19-year-olds that occurred over a 21-year period, beginning in 1986. “When you look at the bigger picture across 18- and 19-year-olds, it looks like we’re offsetting those saved crashes,” he said. “In fact, 75 percent of the fatal crashes we thought we were saving actually just occurred two years later. It’s shocking.”
The study, published Wednesday in The Journal of the American Medical Association, found that since the first graduated driver programs were instituted, there have been 1,348 fewer deadly crashes involving 16-year-old drivers. But at the same time, there have been 1,086 more fatal crashes that involved 18-year-olds. The net difference is still an improvement, Dr. Masten said, but not quite the effect that many had assumed.
“The bottom line is there is still a net overall savings from introducing all these programs,” he said. “So we are saving teen drivers over all, but it’s not nearly what we thought it would be.”
Dr. Masten strongly suspects that the reason for the increase in deadly crashes among 18-year-olds is that many teenagers, rather than deal with the extra restrictions for 16- and 17-year-olds, are simply waiting to get a license until they turn 18, and skipping the restrictions altogether. As a result, a greater proportion of inexperienced drivers hit the road at 18. He pointed out that when California instituted its tougher driving laws for teenagers, the proportion of 16- and 17-year-olds getting licenses to drive dropped while the numbers at 18 and 19 did not.
But the authors also suggested another hypothesis: that teenagers going through graduated driver license programs are not getting as much practical driving experience when they have “co-drivers.” In other words, while having adult supervision in the car reduces risk, it also protects teenage drivers so much that they miss out on learning experiences that can be gleaned only by driving alone, like knowing what it means to be fully responsible for a vehicle and knowing how to “self-regulate.”
“Even though we want you to learn by driving with your parents, it’s really different from the sorts of things you learn when you’re driving on your own,” Dr. Masten said. “The whole thing about learning to drive is you need to expose yourself to crash risk to get experience.”
In an editorial that accompanied the study, researchers with the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a nonprofit group financed by insurance companies, said the findings raised a “serious issue” that policy makers should take note of. They pointed out that one of the states with the toughest programs for teenage drivers is New Jersey, where all first-time drivers under 21 have to adhere to graduated driver restrictions.
“New Jersey’s approach has been associated with significant reductions in the crash rates for 17- and 18-year-olds and virtually eliminates crashes among 16-year-olds, without adversely affecting crash rates for 19-year-old drivers,” the authors wrote.
But in a twist, New Jersey’s tough laws may have just shifted the effect to 21-year-olds, similar to the way tough restrictions on 16- and 17-year-olds were followed by a spike in deadly crashes among 18-year-olds in other states, Dr. Masten said. In New Jersey, a study of deadly crashes did not look specifically at 21-year-olds; they were mixed into a larger group of 20- to 24-year-olds. But the research still found a 10 percent increase in deadly crashes in that group after New Jersey’s tougher graduated driver licensing program was instituted, suggesting that 18-, 19- and 20-year-olds may be waiting out the tough restrictions there as well.
Other researchers have also found that the reason the rate of crashes among teenagers is so high — they account for 10 times as many crashes as middle-aged drivers — is not that they are reckless, but that they make simple mistakes, like failing to scan the road, misjudging driving conditions and becoming distracted. Some of these problems can be addressed through what experts call narrative driving: having adult drivers point out to teenage passengers examples of unsafe driving and explain to them how they are dealing with distractions on the road.
Lack of sleep can also be a major factor in teenage crashes. A study in The Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine this year found that teenagers who started school earlier in the morning had higher crash rates.
FAMILY, PARENTING, DRIVING, TEEN DRIVING
By ANAHAD O'CONNOR SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 6:22 PM September 14, 2011 6:22 pm
Raising the age a teenager can begin driving may also increase the rate of accident's among these older teens.Raising the age at which a teenager can begin driving may also increase the rate of accidents among these older teens.
A nationwide study shows that tougher licensing laws for teenage drivers have reduced deadly accidents among 16-year-olds, but with an unintended consequence: increasing the fatal crash rate among 18-year-olds.
Over the last two decades, many states have put in place strict teenage driving laws, with graduated driver’s license programs that require young drivers to meet certain restrictions before they obtain a full license. While the rules vary by state, they generally set a minimum age for earning a driver’s permit or license and require a set number of supervised hours behind the wheel, and some prohibit driving with fellow teenagers, ban night driving or require at least six months of instruction before a driver’s test. Over all, the tougher laws — which most states began adopting in the mid-1990s — have been credited with a 30 percent drop in highway fatalities among teenagers.
But “most of the prior studies on graduated driver licensing have only looked at 16-year-olds,” said Scott Masten, a researcher with California’s Department of Motor Vehicles and the lead author of the current study. “When you do that you go, ‘Wow, these programs are saving lives,’” he said.
To get a broader perspective, Dr. Masten and his colleagues looked at data on fatal crashes involving 16- to 19-year-olds that occurred over a 21-year period, beginning in 1986. “When you look at the bigger picture across 18- and 19-year-olds, it looks like we’re offsetting those saved crashes,” he said. “In fact, 75 percent of the fatal crashes we thought we were saving actually just occurred two years later. It’s shocking.”
The study, published Wednesday in The Journal of the American Medical Association, found that since the first graduated driver programs were instituted, there have been 1,348 fewer deadly crashes involving 16-year-old drivers. But at the same time, there have been 1,086 more fatal crashes that involved 18-year-olds. The net difference is still an improvement, Dr. Masten said, but not quite the effect that many had assumed.
“The bottom line is there is still a net overall savings from introducing all these programs,” he said. “So we are saving teen drivers over all, but it’s not nearly what we thought it would be.”
Dr. Masten strongly suspects that the reason for the increase in deadly crashes among 18-year-olds is that many teenagers, rather than deal with the extra restrictions for 16- and 17-year-olds, are simply waiting to get a license until they turn 18, and skipping the restrictions altogether. As a result, a greater proportion of inexperienced drivers hit the road at 18. He pointed out that when California instituted its tougher driving laws for teenagers, the proportion of 16- and 17-year-olds getting licenses to drive dropped while the numbers at 18 and 19 did not.
But the authors also suggested another hypothesis: that teenagers going through graduated driver license programs are not getting as much practical driving experience when they have “co-drivers.” In other words, while having adult supervision in the car reduces risk, it also protects teenage drivers so much that they miss out on learning experiences that can be gleaned only by driving alone, like knowing what it means to be fully responsible for a vehicle and knowing how to “self-regulate.”
“Even though we want you to learn by driving with your parents, it’s really different from the sorts of things you learn when you’re driving on your own,” Dr. Masten said. “The whole thing about learning to drive is you need to expose yourself to crash risk to get experience.”
In an editorial that accompanied the study, researchers with the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a nonprofit group financed by insurance companies, said the findings raised a “serious issue” that policy makers should take note of. They pointed out that one of the states with the toughest programs for teenage drivers is New Jersey, where all first-time drivers under 21 have to adhere to graduated driver restrictions.
“New Jersey’s approach has been associated with significant reductions in the crash rates for 17- and 18-year-olds and virtually eliminates crashes among 16-year-olds, without adversely affecting crash rates for 19-year-old drivers,” the authors wrote.
But in a twist, New Jersey’s tough laws may have just shifted the effect to 21-year-olds, similar to the way tough restrictions on 16- and 17-year-olds were followed by a spike in deadly crashes among 18-year-olds in other states, Dr. Masten said. In New Jersey, a study of deadly crashes did not look specifically at 21-year-olds; they were mixed into a larger group of 20- to 24-year-olds. But the research still found a 10 percent increase in deadly crashes in that group after New Jersey’s tougher graduated driver licensing program was instituted, suggesting that 18-, 19- and 20-year-olds may be waiting out the tough restrictions there as well.
Other researchers have also found that the reason the rate of crashes among teenagers is so high — they account for 10 times as many crashes as middle-aged drivers — is not that they are reckless, but that they make simple mistakes, like failing to scan the road, misjudging driving conditions and becoming distracted. Some of these problems can be addressed through what experts call narrative driving: having adult drivers point out to teenage passengers examples of unsafe driving and explain to them how they are dealing with distractions on the road.
Lack of sleep can also be a major factor in teenage crashes. A study in The Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine this year found that teenagers who started school earlier in the morning had higher crash rates.
FAMILY, PARENTING, DRIVING, TEEN DRIVING
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)