Traffic Safety Facts

Traffic Tech – Technology Transfer Series

Number 336 November 2007

U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

The	State	of	Oregon	enacted	its	Graduated	Driver’s	License	

(GDL)	 program	 in	 March	 2000.	 Oregon’s	 GDL	 program	

includes	both	a	nighttime	driving	restriction	(midnight-5	a.m.)	

for	the	first	year,	and	a	passenger	restriction	(no	passengers	

younger	than	age	20	in	the	first	6	months;	no	more	than	three	

passengers	 younger	 than	 age	 20	 in	 the	 second	 6	 months).	

The	GDL	law	also	mandates	either	50	hours	of	supervised	

driving	 and	 the	 completion	 of	 an	 Oregon	 Department	 of	

Transportation	 (ODOT)	 approved	 driver	 education	 course,	

or	100	hours	of	supervised	driving	(without	completion	of	

the	driver	education	course).

NHTSA	 contracted	 with	 the	 Center	 for	 Applied	 Research	

(CAR)	to	conduct	an	evaluation	of	Oregon’s	GDL	program.	

CAR	obtained	evaluation	data	through	two	methods:	1)	focus	

groups	and	2)	driver	performance	(i.e.,	crashes,	convictions,	

and	suspensions).

Focus Groups

CAR	conducted	14	focus	groups	in	Oregon:	5	groups	were	

composed	 of	 parents	 of	 teenage	 drivers;	 1	 group	 of	 DMV	

road	 test	 administrators,	 1	 group	 of	 driving	 instructors,	

1	 group	 of	 law	 enforcement	 officers,	 and	 1	 group	 of	 high	

school	administrators.	Additionally,	CAR	interviewed	two	

Oregon	 judges	 who	 presided	 over	 traffic	 adjudications	

involving	teenagers.

All	 of	 the	 participating	 groups	 showed	 strong	 support	 for	

GDL	 requirements	 and	 restrictions.	Although	 many	 of	 the	

teenagers	 disliked	 the	 restrictions,	 even	 they	 felt	 the	 GDL	

program	enhanced	their	safety.

The	 participants	 understood	 the	 requirements	 for	 driver	

education	 and/or	 supervised	 practice	 before	 licensure,	

as	 well	 as	 the	 restrictions	 placed	 on	 the	 first	 6	 months	 of	

licensure;	 they	 did	 not	 understand	 the	 restrictions	 placed	

on	the	second	6	months	of	licensure.	The	parents,	teens,	law	

enforcement	 officers,	 and	 driving	 instructors	 believed	 that	

teens	became	overconfident	after	approximately	6	months	of	

licensure,	and	were	therefore	prone	to	making	mistakes	after	

the	first	6	months.

All	groups	considered	parents	to	be	the	front	line	for	both	

implementation	 and	 enforcement	 of	 the	 GDL	 program.	

Educating	 the	 public	 on	 the	 importance	 of	 parental	

monitoring	 and	 enforcing	 their	 teens’	 progress	 through	

the	GDL	program	would	highlight	this	crucial	component.	

Providing	 parents	 with	 guidelines	 and	 direction	 for	 this	

monitoring	may	be	beneficial.

All	groups	cited	peer	pressure	as	a	factor	for	noncompliance.	

Participants	believed	that	strong	enforcement	would	mitigate	

the	influence	of	peers.	

Participants	 perceived	 the	 DMV	 as	 weak	 when	 enforcing	

the	 practice	 requirements	 for	 the	 GDL	 program.	 Most	

respondents	wanted	the	DMV	to	require	use	of	the	practice	

log	 and	 wanted	 the	 DMV	 to	 collect	 it.	 Additionally,	

participants	 believed	 that	 law	 enforcement	 enforced	 the	

restrictions	unevenly.	Most	parents	and	teens	were	unaware	

that	law	enforcement	officers	could	not	make	traffic	stops	

solely	 for	 GDL	 violations.	 There	 was	 strong	 support	 for	

GDL	to	become	subject	to	primary	enforcement.	Many	law	

enforcement	officers	were	supportive	of	teen	drivers	using	

special	stickers	indicating	that	they	were	not	driving	on	a	

full	license.	

Parents	 felt	 empowered	 by	 the	 GDL	 program.	 Many	 of	

the	 adult	 participants	 saw	 the	 GDL	 program	 serving	 a	

wider	 purpose	 of	 gradually	 ushering	 a	 teen	 into	 adult	

responsibilities.	 They	 expected	 the	 GDL	 program’s	

implementation	and	enforcement	to	have	long-lasting	effect	

on	individuals’	broader	attitudes	toward	the	law.

Driver Performance

CAR	 evaluated	 Oregon’s	 GDL	 program	 comparing	 teen	

drivers	before	and	after	implementation	of	the	GDL	program,	

and	to	an	adult	comparison	group	(ages	25-65).

Crash	rates	for	16-year-old	drivers	were	significantly	lower	

after	implementation	of	the	GDL	program,	particularly	in	the	

first	6	months	of	licensure.

The	 17-year-olds	 also	 demonstrated	 lower	 post-GDL	 crash	

rates;	 though	 significant	 differences	 did	 not	 surface	 until	

the	second	year	after	the	GDL	program	took	effect	and	all	

17-year-olds	had	been	licensed	under	the	GDL	program.	

Evaluation of Oregon’s Graduated Driver 

Licensing Program
TRAFFIC TECH	 is	 a	 publication	 to	 disseminate	 information	

about	 traffic	 safety	 programs,	 including	 evaluations,	 innovative	

programs,	and	new	publications.	Feel	free	to	copy	it	as	you	wish.	

If	you	would	like	to	receive	a	copy,	contact	Patricia	Ellison-Potter,	

Ph.D.,	Editor,	fax	202-366-7096,	e-mail:	traffic.tech@dot.gov.

After	GDL	implementation,	traffic	conviction	(a	judgment	of	

guilt	against	a	traffic	offender)	and	license	suspension	(when	

the	 State	 takes	 an	 offender’s	 license	 for	 a	 predetermined	

amount	 of	 time)	 rates	 were	 lower	 for	 all	 age	 groups,	 even	

among	the	unrestricted	18-	and	19-year-old	novice	drivers.	

Older	novice	teens	exhibited	higher	conviction	and	suspension	

rates	than	younger	teens,	perhaps	due	to	greater	exposure.

In	 every	 age	 group,	 in	 every	 time	 period,	 for	 either	 GDL	

status,	 males	 had	 significantly	 higher	 conviction	 and	

suspension	rates	than	females.	After	GDL	implementation,	

however,	 male	 crash	 rates	 generally	 dropped	 closer	 to	 the	

female	crash	rates.

In	 Oregon,	 teens	 can	 take	 an	 approved	 ODOT	 driver	

education	 course	 plus	 50	 hours	 of	 supervised	 driving,	 or	

they	could	waive	the	course	in	lieu	of	100	hours	of	supervised	

driving.	Teen	drivers	who	opted	to	take	an	approved	ODOT	

driver	education	course	had	fewer	crashes,	traffic	convictions,	

and	suspensions	than	those	who	chose	the	100	supervised	

driving	hours	option.	It	is	important	to	determine	whether	

better	 outcomes	 are	 associated	 directly	 with	 the	 ODOTapproved	training	courses,	or	if	they	are	an	artifact	of	another	

variable	 such	 as	 selection	 bias.	 It	 is	 important	 to	 note	 that	

there	was	no	way	to	verify	that	the	teen	drivers	who	opted	

for	100	hours	of	supervised	practice	actually	completed	100	

hours	 of	 practice.	 Focus	 group	 participants	 reported	 that	

many	 parents	 might	 have	 simply	 signed	 the	 ODOT	 form	

verifying	the	100	hours	of	practice	regardless	of	how	many,	

or	how	few,	hours	their	teen	driver	actually	completed.

The	 analysis	 of	 convictions,	 suspensions,	 and	 crashes	

offers	strong	support	for	GDL	programs.	It	seems	clear	that	

Oregon’s	GDL	program	is	associated	with	improved	safety.	

Particularly	for	16-year-old	drivers,	suspensions	and	crashes	

dropped	by	the	second	year	of	GDL	implementation,	even	

when	 controlled	 for	 adult	 suspension	 and	 crash	 rates.	 In	

combination	with	the	support	shown	by	all	participants	in	

the	focus	groups,	it	appears	that	GDL	is	a	strong	and	feasible	

legislative	 countermeasure	 that	 States	 can	 implement	 to	

reduce	teen	novice	driver	crashes.

How to Order

To	 order	 Evaluation of Oregon’s Graduated Driver Licensing 

Program (66	pages	plus	appendices),	prepared	by	the	Center	

for	Applied	Research,	write	to	the	Office	of	Behavioral	Safety	

Research,	 NHTSA,	 NTI-130,	 1200	 New	 Jersey	Avenue	 SE.,	

Washington,	DC	20590,	fax	202-366-7096,	or	download	from	

www.nhtsa.dot.gov.	Patty	Ellison-Potter,	Ph.D.	was	the	Task	

Order	Manager	for	this	project.

1200	New	Jersey	Avenue	SE.,	NTI-130

Washington,	DC	20590

Crash Rates of Drivers Licensed at 17

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Months 1-6 Months 7-12 Months 13-24

Months after Licensure

Mean Monthly Crashes per

1000 Drivers

Pre-GDL

Post-GDL

Crash Rates of Drivers Licensed at 16

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Months 1-6 Months 7-12 Months 13-24

Months after Licensure

Mean Monthly Crashes per

1000 Drivers

Pre-GDL

Post-GDL