Senate committee weighs bill to allow online classroom for driver education; teachers and students urge safeguards

The Senate Education Committee on Thursday took testimony on S.259, a bill that would allow the classroom portion of high‑school driver education to be delivered online as an option for schools and students. Witnesses from the Department of Motor Vehicles, the Agency of Education, AAA, classroom teachers and multiple students described competing goals: expand access for teens who can’t reach in‑person classes, but preserve the concurrent, supervised behind‑the‑wheel practice that instructors say is essential for safety.

Agency of Education director Andrew Krautten told the committee existing flexible‑pathways statute (committee materials cited Title 16 VSA §948) already permits virtual classroom content and noted Vermont pilots with the Vermont Virtual Learning Cooperative that paired online classroom modules with supervised in‑car practice. Krautten and driver‑education consultant Tammy warned that if students complete classroom work long before they can arrange in‑car lessons they risk aging out of the program and having to repeat training: “If people do that online and they’re waiting for the in‑car, they pass the time commitment that we have set, then they'd have to take the class again,” Krautten said.

Pat McManaman of the Motor Vehicles Enforcement Safety Division disputed claims that White Mountain Community College’s instructor training is inadequate, saying the eight core courses required to license instructors are the same across providers and reporting current instructor counts and enrollment: 16 Vermonters enrolled this semester at White Mountain with another 11 in process, and the for‑hire instructor pool rose from 56 (2022) to 78 after recent hires and a retirement.

AAA’s presenter, Dan Goodness, described the private provider experience in other states and in Maine’s hybrid model. He said AAA’s Maine program uses a 24‑hour minimum online classroom component paired with 6 hours of in‑person classroom and concurrent behind‑the‑wheel practice. “It is an option for schools and for students because we know some students thrive in the classroom; some students may thrive working behind their computer,” Goodness said, adding states that adopted online classroom options have not reversed course.

Students and classroom teachers urged caution. Gage, a high‑school student, told senators his primary concern was safety and said online modules reduce attention without live instructor interaction. Ellie Hayes, a Willington sophomore, told the committee she opposed making driver education “entirely video instructed,” linking remote‑learning experience during the pandemic to lost instructional support. Driver‑education teachers including Joe Barch and Kevin Massey argued that asynchronous, self‑paced-only instruction risks gaps in hands‑on and community‑based learning (simulator exercises, guest speakers, in‑car coaching) and that Vermont teachers need training and resources to deliver high‑quality online offerings.

Committee members pressed witnesses on two practical questions: (1) whether an online classroom raises or lowers students’ cost and (2) whether online delivery actually improves access where students currently face delays for in‑car lessons. Witnesses said cost implications vary by state and contractual model; AAA said schools typically pay vendors and do not increase per‑student costs, while teachers emphasized that behind‑the‑wheel capacity — instructor availability and time in cars — remains the limiting factor.

No formal vote was taken. Committee members asked for follow‑up data on how many teens forgo driver education until age 18, how many students currently experience long waits for in‑car lessons, and clearer cost estimates for Vermont schools. The committee set time to reconvene and requested additional testimony from DMV, AOE and stakeholders before advancing the bill.