As someone with 51 years of experience driving trucks, I just could not believe Overdrive's November 3 article concerning ELDT Nation. The school's owner, Gabriel Ruimy, claims that students can complete the federally required Class A CDL Theory Training curriculum in as little as two hours.
I ain't buying what you are selling, Mr. Ruimy.
I have held a Class A driver's license since 1975. (Long before CDLs ever came around, Minnesota licensed me to drive any vehicle or combination.)
For 28 years, I owned and operated Interstate Truck Driving School, where we trained more than 10,000 CDL students. During those years, I personally instructed students in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, including the requirements that govern the safe operation of commercial motor vehicles.
I recently began developing a comprehensive online Class A ELDT Theory Training program based on the curriculum established in 49 CFR Part 380, Appendix A.
After carefully reviewing all 30 required instructional units, I determined that approximately 45 hours of instruction, demonstrations, practical examples, and assessments would be appropriate to provide students with a meaningful understanding of the required material.
Forty-five hours, not two hours.
The author of this opinion, Bill Collins, today runs True North CDL Training.
Consider what just one subject, the hours of service, entails.
A driver must understand the driving limits, duty limits, required rest periods, exceptions, electronic logging devices, and the consequences of violating Part 395. I would expect to devote approximately three hours to that subject alone.
That's just one of 30 required instructional units.
Mr. Ruimy reportedly claims that some students complete his Class A Theory course in approximately two hours, while the average completion time is three to four hours.
Are we really expected to believe that a student can develop meaningful proficiency in all 30 required subjects in less time than it takes to thoroughly teach the hours of service?
The problem is not simply one training provider. The problem is a federal regulatory framework that permits training providers to self-certify compliance without establishing a minimum instructional time for theory training.
[Related: FMCSA seeks emergency action to block 'chameleon' CDL schools]
FMCSA requires providers to cover the prescribed curriculum and assess students at a minimum overall proficiency of 80%. But without meaningful oversight of instructional content, delivery, and assessment integrity, that requirement can become little more than a box-checking exercise.
Indeed for hundreds of carriers, that was the case. In late August, FMCSA revealed that 160 schools had inadequate facilities or lessons, and another 110 had to be shut down immediately.
A provider can offer an extremely abbreviated course, administer an assessment, report completion to the Training Provider Registry, and potentially satisfy the procedural requirements while delivering very little meaningful education.
I am not suggesting that every student requires exactly 45 hours of theory instruction. Some students have substantial prior experience, and individuals learn at different rates. Nor am I suggesting that online training is inherently inferior to classroom instruction.
In fact, I believe properly developed online training can be extremely effective.
But there is a substantial difference between using technology to improve education and using technology to minimize the amount of education being delivered.
The article also raises troubling questions about student identity verification, English-language proficiency, and whether the person completing the online course is actually the individual receiving the certification.
Those concerns deserve serious attention.
I recognize that FMCSA has issued ELDT Nation a Notice of Proposed Removal from the Training Provider Registry. The notice itself is not a final determination of wrongdoing, and the agency has not publicly established the grounds for that action.
But we're still allowing the marketplace to reward the lowest price and shortest training time instead of the quality of instruction.
When a provider advertises Class A Theory Training for $23 and promotes completion in as little as two hours, what message does that send to prospective professional drivers?
For 28 years, I operated a truck driving school with a fleet of 24 trucks. We passed our DOT audits, maintained a record of zero reportable collisions, and never experienced an insurance claim. I believe those results reflected a commitment to doing things correctly, including providing meaningful instruction rather than simply preparing students to pass a test.
I applaud FMCSA Administrator Derek Barrs and the agency's efforts to identify and remove training providers that fail to meet federal requirements.
But removing individual providers will not solve the underlying problem if the regulations continue to allow the appearance of compliance to substitute for meaningful education. FMCSA should consider stronger standards for instructional content, verification of student participation, assessment integrity, and independent evaluation of training quality.
A minimum instructional-hour requirement also deserves serious consideration, although instructional time alone is no guarantee of proficiency.
Mr. Ruimy, I respect innovation. I respect technology. And I respect businesses that find ways to deliver services efficiently.
But when it comes to training the people who will operate commercial motor vehicles on our highways, efficiency cannot come at the expense of education.
Two hours to complete the entire Class A Theory curriculum?
I ain't buying it.
And I hope FMCSA isn't buying it either.
[Related: 2-hour CDL course? ELDT Nation's rapid rise after 'sham' CDL school shutdowns]
