The following appeared in a letter to the school board in the town of Centerville.
“All students should be required to take the driver’s education course at Centerville High School. In the past two years, several accidents in and around Centerville have involved teenage drivers. Since a number of parents in Centerville have complained that they are too busy to teach their teenagers to drive, some other instruction is necessary to ensure that these teenagers are safe drivers. Although there are two driving schools in Centerville, parents on a tight budget cannot afford to pay for driving instruction. Therefore an effective and mandatory program sponsored by the high school is the only solution to this serious problem.”
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The speaker makes a convincing argument for mandatory driver’s education, but there are a few additional factors that would weaken the argument.
In the letter, the anonymous writer argues that since several accidents have involved teenage drivers, drivers’ education should be mandatory in Centerville. However, there may be a number of reasons for this. First, teenagers have greater difficulty learning to drive than other age groups. Second, teenagers often drive for shorter distances and in less populated areas than adults, which significantly reduces the odds of an accident. Third, it is not uncommon for teenagers to drive with passengers who may not be sober, inexperienced, or cautious drivers, which may also contribute to accidents. Therefore, it is arguable that mandatory driver’s education is not the best solution for preventing accidents in Centerville.
From the first point, it can be argued that since teenagers have more difficulty learning to drive, they would not be as quick to learn the rules of the road. This is partly due to the fact that teenagers have shorter attention spans, which makes it harder for them to focus on driving. In addition to this, teenage drivers may have developed more risky driving habits due to their limited driving experience. For example, it is common for teenagers to text while driving, which may lead to fatal accidents, and teenagers may also speed or drive aggressively, both of which are dangerous. Thus, it may be that mandatory driver’s education would actually result in more accidents in Centerville.
Second, it can be argued that since teenagers often drive for shorter distances and in less populated areas than adults, they are less likely to have accidents. This may be due to the reason that teenagers tend to drive less in high traffic areas, and may therefore have more time to react in the event of an accident. Additionally, since teenagers may drive less frequently, they are more likely to drive more carefully, making it less likely that they will have an accident. Thus, mandatory driver’s education seems less beneficial in this regard.
Third, it is arguable that mandatory driver’s education may not actually prevent accidents in Centerville. It is true that there are many driving schools in Centerville, and since many parents are unable to afford these driving schools, it is understandable that some parents do not teach their teenagers to drive. However, it is also arguable that even if all parents could afford to enroll in a driving class, they would not be able to effectively teach their teenagers the rules of the road. This is because teenagers generally do not have the same attention span as adults, and it is likely that they would not be able to learn to drive effectively if they were forced to do so. Thus, mandatory driver’s education may not actually prevent accidents in Centerville. In conclusion, although mandatory driver’s education seems like a reasonable solution to the problem of accidents in Centerville, there are other factors that may influence accidents. Therefore, additional research should be done to determine the most effective solution.