“The National Curriculum: Solution or Illusion in the Driving School Industry?”

In an ideal world, a driving school acknowledges the importance of the driving test

— but does not allow itself to be fully governed by it.

You prepare students for the exam and for the traffic they will face afterward.

A national curriculum, in that sense, can at best be seen as a didactic tool —not a holy grail, not a final solution.

And that is exactly where the tension lies.

Because in reality, two visions collide head-on.

Two visions, one practice

Vision A — Exam-driven

• Focus on the exam area

• Training in recognisable situations

• Efficient → higher pass rates

Vision B — “Lifelong driver.”

• Broad traffic exposure

• High variation

• Sometimes less exam-focused

➡️ Without a national curriculum, each driving school chooses its own route —

and that freedom should remain

➡️ Inevitably, this leads to significant differences in approach and quality

I struggle with driving schools that loudly claim they deliver “lifelong drivers.”

Let’s be honest.

With today’s market prices per lesson hour — roughly 40 to 50 hours of training —it is simply unrealistic to fully prepare someone for all traffic situations.

I have taught in Amsterdam.

A student who passes there is exposed to a completely different traffic reality than someone who passes in Maastricht or Groningen.

Purely from a geographical standpoint, the idea of “broad traffic experience ”cannot be equalised — let alone within a limited number of lesson hours.

Real traffic experience begins after the driving licence.

With kilometres.With mistakes.With time.

The idea that a driving course automatically produces lifelong safe drivers is not only misleading — it is potentially dangerous.

A national curriculum will not solve this problem.

Observation structure, conscious decision-making, and early hazard recognition —excellent principles.

But in the end, there is only one party that determines what is “sufficient”:

The CBR.

The CBR determines:

• the assessment criteria

• the exam requirements

• the benchmark everyone is measured against

In my view, the core does not lie in systems, plans, or procedures, but in the student as an individual.

The human factor determines:

• How someone learns

• How much time is needed

• What pace is realistic

Just like traffic itself, a driving education is:

• dynamic

• never finished

• continuously evolving

A national curriculum or fixed procedure may support learning —but it should never be presented as an unquestionable truth.

That is reality.

Reality, summarised

• No official national curriculum in the Dutch driving school industry

• A national examination framework (CBR)

• In practice, the exam functions as the de facto curriculum

• Lesson content is free — assessment is not

Fortunately, driving schools in the Netherlands remain free to design their lessons.

And no one in this country earns a driving licence through “tricks” alone.

In closing

You do not become a lifelong driver because a driving school promises it.

You become one by consciously choosing — every single time —responsibility, insight, and reflection when you sit behind the wheel.

That choice is personal. It is organic.