MTV-48-11-00009-A Accident Prevention Course Internet and Other Technologies Pilot Program

2/8/12 N.Y. St. Reg. MTV-48-11-00009-A

NEW YORK STATE REGISTER

VOLUME XXXIV, ISSUE 6

February 08, 2012

RULE MAKING ACTIVITIES

DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES

NOTICE OF ADOPTION

 

I.D No. MTV-48-11-00009-A

Filing No. 53

Filing Date. Jan. 24, 2012

Effective Date. Feb. 08, 2012

Accident Prevention Course Internet and Other Technologies Pilot Program

PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE State Administrative Procedure Act, NOTICE is hereby given of the following action:

Action taken:

Amendment of Part 141 of Title 15 NYCRR.

Statutory authority:

Vehicle and Traffic Law, sections 215(a), 399-1 and 399-n

Subject:

Accident Prevention Course Internet and Other Technologies Pilot Program.

Purpose:

To strengthen the Accident Prevention Course Internet and Other Technologies Pilot Program.

Text or summary was published

in the November 30, 2011 issue of the Register, I.D. No. MTV-48-11-00009-P.

Final rule as compared with last published rule:

No changes.

Text of rule and any required statements and analyses may be obtained from:

Monica J Staats, NYS Department of Motor Vehicles, Legal Bureau, Room 526, 6 Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12228, [phone], email: [e-mail]

Assessment of Public Comment

Comment: The National Safety Council commented as follows:

"Biometrics: This section has been amended to allow students who fail to have their identity verified by the biometric technique after five (5) attempts shall be excluded from the course. In communications with the DMV, they confirmed that while this change is for all biometric methods used, the primary problem is with the keystroke method of validation. They indicated it was discovered during testing that this method can cause problems even for people trying to legitimately pass. They also indicated that they've had complaints about this method from the students. NSC firmly believes that if the DMV recognizes there is a problem with this biometric method, they should consider removing it as an acceptable biometric method rather than changing the regulation to accommodate the problem."

Response: The Department agrees that the value of the keystroke validation method deserves close scrutiny. However, since this is a pilot program and is intended to evaluate both the efficacy of not only the course methodology, but the controls on that methodology, we believe that this change will provide us important data without inordinately risking the integrity of the individual program. At the end of the five year pilot program, we will re-evaluate all validation techniques.

Comment: The Empire Safety Council offered the following comments, each of which are separately addressed:

(1) The proposed rule provides: The course must be approved as a classroom course pursuant to Article 12-B of the Vehicle and Traffic Law and such course must have been in existence for a minimum of one year, with at least 20 classes conducted, prior to applying for ADM course approval.

The Empire Safety Council believes that a potential 100 students is too small of a population for any studies to be proven.

Response: The course must be approved as a classroom course pursuant to Article 12-B of the Vehicle and Traffic Law. Sections 399-e(1)(a) and § 399-e(1)(f) of such law require the course to have been given for at least two years by the applicant agency or organization prior to the submission of any application, and that the application be submitted with proof of effectiveness, pursuant to section 399-f. It is only after this initial approval that the new sponsor must provide classroom courses for one year, conducting at least 20 classes, before it can then apply for ADM course approval. The Department believes that one year is a sufficient threshold for the new sponsor to establish a credible history and to demonstrate proof of its administrative abilities.

(2) The proposed rule provides: The course may not be delivered via the internet based course, but rather, must involve the use of one or more of the following: DVDs or CDs, pay-per-view television through a cable television provider, or other delivery method approved by the Commissioner.

The Empire Safety Council believes that no proof of effectiveness studies have been conducted and that these delivery methods should not be approved without demonstrated proof that these delivery methods are valid satisfactory education mediums.

Response: The ADM is a legislatively mandated five-year pilot program designed to evaluate utilizing internet and other technologies. The intent of barring new applicants from using the internet based course "is in accordance with the legislative objective of exploring various means and methods of offering the course during the pilot program" Part 147.(a) of the Commissioner's Regulations requires that each sponsor evaluate the effectiveness of their ADM course, and submit the results to the Department no less than 60 business days prior to the end of the pilot program. Additionally, the Department is required to evaluate and report the results of the pilot to the Governor, Senate and Assembly.

(3) Sponsors seeking approval for their IPIRP courses must have a minimum total of seven (7) or more points, using two or more of these techniques, provided, however, that one point must be for content questions. The content questions may be asked at random points throughout the course or at the end of each chapter or unit. Such questions do not need to be in the form of a final exam. Sponsors are free to suggest alternate techniques, although the actual points assigned will be based on a determination by DMV. Depending upon the robustness of the solution offered by the sponsor, DMV reserves the right to increase or decrease the point values above to reflect the quality of a particular sponsor's solution in meeting or exceeding the validation requirements. Participant private information, as defined in the personal identification section shall be encrypted.

The Empire Safety Council believes that it was the original legislative intent for sponsors to include a final exam as well as random (or end of session) quizzes to be included in their IPIRP courses.

Response: Content questions randomly asked throughout the course or at the end of each chapter/unit is sufficient (or a suggested alternative technique) to successfully engage students throughout the program. The intent of this amendment is to keep the student engaged in the content of the program through the use of current technologies. Basing student participation in this program on random questions or a final examination was neither the intent nor a requirement of the original legislation.

(4) Job Impact Statement. "A Job Impact Statement is not submitted with this proposal because it will not have an adverse impact on job development or job creation in the State."

The Empire Safety Council believes that there is increasing evidence that IPIRP courses take business and jobs away from classroom instructors. We believe that hundreds of instructors have seen loss of business, loss of employees or loss of facilities.

Response: The Legislature mandated the development of the five year pilot program to assess the IPIRP course as an alternative delivery method. It was not intended to replace the traditional classroom delivery method, but rather, to expand the types of alternative delivery methods for students and provide greater delivery options and technologies. In addition, this proposed rule makes minor amendments to the existing IPIRP course and, consequently, does not have a negative or positive impact on job creation.

Comment: The New York Safety Program, Inc., the National Traffic Safety Institute, the National Point and Insurance Reduction Course, Inc., and the American Safety, Inc. expressed concern as follows:

"We are writing in opposition to the proposed regulatory change of Part 141.14 Appendix A. Specifically, we are opposed to the addition of the language "provided, however, that one point must be for content questions. The content questions may be asked at random points throughout the course or at the end of each chapter or unit. Such questions do not need to be in the form of a final exam."

We are requesting that the language be modified to read "Unless the biometric sample is positively authenticated one point must be for content questions. The content questions may be asked at random points throughout the course or at the end of each chapter or unit. Such questions do not need to be in the form of a final exam."

REASONING

The Spirit of Part 141

The spirit of part 141 is to provide the public with an alternative delivery method (ADM) as similar to a classroom course as possible.

By positively authenticating the biometric sample an ADM course can ensure that the actual course taker is in fact the true registered student. In addition, by using techniques identical to the ones used in classrooms an ADM course can also ensure student participation.

To illustrate, these are the steps involved in registering for and successfully completing the classroom PIRP course:

1. Begin Registration: Student signs up for the course either in-person, via telephone or over the Internet. He begins the registration process by providing his personal information (name, address, driver's license number) and payment information. He may get a unique confirmation number to prove enrollment and to present to the instructor.

2. Complete Registration by Positively Authenticating Identity: When the student arrives for class he completes registration by checking in with the instructor and authenticating his identity prior to starting the class. He does this by presenting his driver's license to the instructor who uses it to positively authenticate the student's identity.

3. Validate Identity: During class the instructor looks at each student to ensure that the same person is still in attendance. If a student leaves to go to the restroom, for example, the instructor will look at the student to confirm that the same person has returned to the class.

4. Validate Participation/Engagement: During class the instructor attempts to engage students by requesting their input on certain topics (e.g. How do you feel when a driver cuts you off?). The instructor also scans the classroom to ensure students are paying attention.

In comparison, the following are the steps involved in an ADM course that positively authenticates the biometric sample and uses techniques identical to ones used in classrooms to ensure participation. You will notice it duplicates the classroom model and presents it over the Internet as the IPIRP course:

1. Begin Registration: The IPIRP student will first sign up for the course by providing his personal information (name, address, driver's license number) and payment information either in-person, over the phone or on the Internet. He will then receive an email providing him with a password and another email with his user name. He must use this information to log into the course.

2. Complete Registration by Positively Authenticating Identity: Before starting the course the student submits and positively authenticates his biometric sample. He does this by providing a valid driver's license while submitting the sample to ensure the sample belongs to the registered course taker.

3. Validate Identity: While taking the course the student is prompted to validate his identity against his original biometric sample. Since his original biometric sample has already been positively authenticated, this step confirms that it is, in fact, the registered person who is participating.

4. Validate Participation/Engagement: The student's course participation and engagement is ensured using several methods:

Biometric validation: These will occur at several points throughout the course. This ensures that only the registered student is participating in the course.

Validation response time: When prompted for ID verification, the student must respond within the required time or will be automatically logged out and receive one failure of a validation point. This ensures that the student is actively participating in the course.

Interactive questionnaires: These questionnaires mimic the kinds of questions that an instructor asks in a classroom course. They ask about the student's personal experiences, opinions and point of view in order to help him apply the course lessons to his own life. They must be completed in full before the student is allowed to continue.

Page timers: Timers on each page force the student to stay on a given page for the predetermined amount of time before proceeding. The student must click on Continue at the end of each page, and is therefore actively participating.

Logged out for inactivity: The student is automatically logged out after a period of inactivity. This ensures that the student is actively participating in the course.

SUMMARY

By positively authenticating the biometric sample and using participation techniques identical to ones used in classrooms an ADM course becomes equivalent to a classroom. Interactive questionnaires, timers on each page, being logged out due to inactivity, and random ID validation points prevent the student from leaving and mandate participation.

Ultimately neither classroom nor ADM can guarantee that every single student is paying attention. However, the fact is, since the student has to be present in both modalities, the vast majority (if not all) will engage and learn.

In closing, a classroom does not have any more ability than an ADM to force student participation. And since classrooms don't have content questions it is unfair to require them of an ADM course that is identical to a classroom."

Response: The original intent of Part 141 is to provide the public with alternate delivery methods (ADM) as a way of disseminating information about traffic safety to a wider audience. It was not meant to replace or replicate classroom training. While we agree that positively authenticating a biometric sample is a portion of validation, we believe it's in the realm of identity validation, not participation validation.

While the items set forth by the commentators (interactive questions, timers on each page, being logged out due to inactivity, etc.) are ways to determine if a person is in front of the computer, we believe that asking content questions is a better measure of participation. In a classroom setting, students are in front of the instructor and the instructor can and should be visually scanning the class to determine student focus. If a student is not engaged, the instructor can refocus the student by various means, including asking questions, walking near the student, etc.

With an I-PIRP course, the student is alone and possibly not paying attention to the information presented on the screen. By having all ADM courses ask content questions, there is a better chance that the student will pay attention, thereby absorbing the traffic safety information presented.

It is important to remember that this is a pilot program. In 2014, a report of the effectiveness of ADMs and the validation methods will be studied. A report on the program will be written and presented to the legislature. At that time, changes can be requested for the permanent program.