I made this petition to make sure that nobody is discriminated against unfairly in Ohio's driving tests. This issue affects any adult in Ohio who doesn't yet have their driving license but wants to get one, and we need change now! Please sign and share with others!

Ohio's driving exam leaves much to be desired with the new system. In 2017, they passed a law stating that any adult who failed the test one time would be required to take a driving class before they could attempt it a second time. The idea here was to prevent people who didn't know the traffic laws from earning a license without at least learning them. However, in practice, this hurts many more than just them.

Estimates say as many as 4 out of 10 people fail the test at least once, and this includes people who took a driving course. Many of these people never even know why they failed. Partly, this is because the test is scored in a rather subjective manner. Some of the points that may lead to an automatic failure are not mentioned as such in the only book provided before the test. Hard braking, growing confused at an intersection, not stopping where the driving examiner can see the tires of the car in front of you on the pavement, turning on your turn signal too early, and even not looking at your mirrors regularly enough for the examiner's liking can lead to an automatic fail. Their book only says how late is too late to use a turn signal, not how soon is too soon; and the fact that they expect the driver to know where to stop for the examiner to be able to see is absurd. Good luck getting the BMV to tell you anything about the test, even just what they expect you to do on it. They won't answer any questions about it, simply saying to look in the book, even though it doesn't cover everything.

Not everyone fails because of the road test, however. Many people only fail maneuverability. Regardless, if someone fails any part of the test, they have to take a driving course before they can retest. This seems useless if all the individual failed was maneuverability because knowing the traffic laws doesn't help one pass maneuverability. It takes maybe 20 minutes to discuss the details of a maneuverability course, and the rest is practice. Sitting in a class for several hours learning traffic laws when all that needs to be retaken is the maneuverability portion is a waste of time and money.

The cones used for maneuverability can also be a problem. In most cases, a maneuverability test is set up with five orange cones, which have white poles sticking out the top to make them visible. However, on a cloudy day, those poles can be very difficult for someone with vision problems to see. Beyond that, the cones are much wider than these poles. Even if a person isn't close to the pole, they could still find themselves running over the cone. Since cones come in different sizes, there's also the chance that someone would get so used to the cones they practiced with that they run over the cones in the test because they thought they had room.

One specific group that is affected disproportionately by this law, of course, is low-income individuals. Failing the test means shelling out hundreds of dollars for a driving course, which is out of reach for many people in such situations. While this may seem like a small problem because they wouldn't be able to afford a car if they can't afford a driving course, there are plenty of options available for obtaining a car that wouldn't cost as much, and affordable insurance is becoming more common.

Those who suffer from moderate to severe test anxiety are also hurt by this law. Test anxiety can cause a person to fail, even if they know everything that they need to do and could otherwise succeed without difficulty. There are no accommodations made for those with test anxiety, and the high-stakes nature of the Ohio driving test now increases test anxiety for those who already suffer from it. Studies have shown that high stakes testing leads to more severe test anxiety, and the possibility of spending hundreds of dollars to ever get your license after failing a test one time seems pretty high stakes.

The idea is great, but the execution is lacking. Yes, there needs to be accountability that forces people to learn how to drive rather than just force their way through, but there are always special circumstances. I'm not calling for the law to be abolished. I'm calling for it to be fairer.

To start with, if a person only fails the maneuverability portion of the test, they shouldn't have to take an entire driving course. There should be an abbreviated version that focuses solely on how to pass maneuverability. This would lessen the cost for those who only fail that part of the test, which would make it lower stakes. In this way, people with test anxiety would have less to worry about.

The cones used in the test could do with some modifications, too. There are some markers they could use that are taller and wouldn't require the narrow, white poles. Those would be a good option. If this isn't feasible, just change the color of the poles. Red poles would likely stand out better, for example, and it's a simple enough fix. Simply paint them or wrap colored duct tape around the visible parts. This would make them easier to see, making it possible for people to truly gauge the distance. It might also be a good idea to allow individuals to adjust the mirrors before taking this portion of the test.

In regards to test anxiety, the best way to address this problem would be to offer a second chance to take the test before requiring a driving course. Many people experience test anxiety, and giving them only one chance to pass doesn't help with this at all. If they were given a second chance, that would lower the stakes, making it easier for them to concentrate and pass, but it would still allow for Ohio to require people to take a driving course if they fail it too often.

The subjective test itself needs adjustments. Either the testing stations should be willing to tell those taking the test exactly what they will be looking for, or there needs to be more objective criteria that is clearly communicated through some written medium. For example, simply saying that one should stop where they can see the tires of the car in front of them touching the pavement is too subjective and makes it easy to fail if the driving examiner is shorter than the driver. Instead, there needs to be a more objective way to judge stopping distance.

For low-income individuals, it would be beneficial for driving schools to offer payment plans. Rather than having to shell it out all at once, a payment plan makes it possible to pay a bit at a time until the bill has been paid off. This would make it easier for those with low income to get their license, and it could also help to reduce the stress on those with test anxiety by making the cost appear lower, even though they would ultimately be paying the same amount.

If these suggestions aren't feasible, then I propose the Ohio government should come up with its own solutions to these problems. As it is, this law discriminates against those of lower socioeconomic statuses, those with vision impairments, and those with test anxiety. Regardless of how these problems are addressed, they need to be addressed. They aren't just going to go away on their own.