Evaluation of the Crash Course March 2009 - De Montfort University

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Service - Evaluation of the Crash Course March 2009 Executive Summary The original brief for this research from Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Service and its partners was: - To evaluate the impact that the Crash Course has on the participants’ attitudes to safe road user behaviour; - To evaluate the effect that the Crash Course has on participants’ intention to drive safely in future; - To determine the appropriateness of the content and delivery of the programme for the primary target age group; - To evaluate the appropriateness of the content and delivery of the project to meet its stated objectives; - To outline possible courses of action for progression of the programme. The specification also included paying particular attention to gender differences in attitudes to driving and the nature of peer pressure on young people. The evidence and conclusions are summarised here in relation to this brief. Does the course have a positive impact on the participants’ knowledge of safety issues? The evidence from the study indicates that Crash Course does have a positive impact on young people’s knowledge about how to be safer on the road. There were two knowledge based questions in the survey: one concerned the causes of road crashes and the other concerned the ways in which passengers could keep themselves safer. The comparison between those who had experienced the course and those who had not shows statistically significant higher total scores on the questions designed to test knowledge of the key causes of road collisions (p=0.001). The comparisons on the matched sample of young people before they had received the course and afterwards showed improvement at a level approaching significance in respect of what they could do to keep themselves safer as passengers (p=0.068). Does the course have a positive impact on the participants’ attitudes to safe road user behaviour? The evidence shows that the course did have a consistent positive effect on attitudes towards the wearing of seat belts. At a statistically significant level, of those who completed the matched ‘before’ and ‘after’ questionnaires, more young people felt it was acceptable always to wear a seat belt after the course than before (p
In the comparison of those who received the course with those who did not, those who had seen the presentation were significantly more likely to view “Always wearing a seatbelt” as acceptable (p=0.034) and also to think that “reading a text quickly while driving” was “stupid” (p=0.001). The qualitative evidence from the focus groups confirmed that virtually all the young people felt they had gained from the course, had a greater awareness of risks on the road and an increased knowledge about how they might be able to stay safe. Does the course have a positive effect on the participants’ intentions to drive safely in future? 409 young people completed the free text question about how they now wished to behave in future. By far the greatest number of responses indicated an intention to wear a seat belt in future (253 or 62% of those responding to the question). There is little doubt that this message is absorbed by a considerable proportion of the participants. A number also indicated that they would press others to do so as well. After that the most numerous answers concerned the resolution not to distract a driver and an intention to tell other drivers to reduce their speed or to drive more slowly when they became drivers themselves. Other responses showed an intention not to drink and drive or go with an intoxicated driver with a small number of other safety issues mentioned. The young people’s comments in the focus groups confirmed the finding that the course does have a positive effect on intended behaviour, with respondents being able to illustrate how they now wanted to behave as drivers. Is there any evidence of behaviour change as a result of the course? The survey compared the self reported behaviour over the previous month for those who had attended the course and those who had not. A positive statistically significant difference was found in the self reports of those who had attended the course in respect of how frequently they had “messed” about in a car, potentially distracting the driver (p
Page 1 and 2: Staffordshire Fire & Rescue Service
Page 3: 5.6 Pastoral care for pupils 46 5.7
Page 7 and 8: oad collisions. The team requires f
Page 9 and 10: Section 1: Introduction and backgro
Page 11 and 12: Accident Prevention Trust, www.capt
Page 13 and 14: Staffordshire, the ‘severity rati
Page 15 and 16: the presenters had either personal
Page 17 and 18: Section 2: The design and methodolo
Page 19 and 20: The survey instruments constructed
Page 21 and 22: The questionnaires were piloted wit
Page 23 and 24: � If the course is perceived as b
Page 25 and 26: has also been suggested that risk-t
Page 27 and 28: (McKenna, 2006.) He also draws atte
Page 29 and 30: Section 4: Findings from the survey
Page 31 and 32: Comparing the ‘after’ responses
Page 33 and 34: (www.staffordshire.police.uk , 2009
Page 35 and 36: 4.5 Gender differences Significantl
Page 37 and 38: For self-reported behaviour on havi
Page 39 and 40: Table 4.4: Suggestions made by youn
Page 41 and 42: An illustrative selection of the co
Page 43 and 44: • There was evidence of some incr
Page 45 and 46: Practical logistics and professiona
Page 47 and 48: “My year thought it was excellent
Page 49 and 50: “No - the staff support is not su
Page 51 and 52: “When you compare what they do an
Page 53 and 54: “It’s all reality isn’t it. E
Page 55 and 56:
It was horrible. Don’t remember m
Page 57 and 58:
One. He’s just a sick driver - go
Page 59 and 60:
Most saw their response as conditio
Page 61 and 62:
Figure 6.2: Differences between mal
Page 63 and 64:
Section 7: Conclusions and recommen
Page 65 and 66:
frequently “scared about the driv
Page 67 and 68:
This may show itself in the Crash C
Page 69 and 70:
or ‘one-liners’ to use in respo
Page 71 and 72:
16. The Crash Course is currently t
Page 73 and 74:
APPENDIX B List of schools, college
Page 75 and 76:
3. Is there anything you would want
Page 77 and 78:
9. Circle the number on each scale
Page 79 and 80:
Jonah, B. A. (1990). Age difference
show all

Evaluation of the Crash Course March 2009 - De Montfort University

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?