Ah, but you're quick to forget that most cyclists are, or were at some point, also motorists, and yet there's a sizable cross-section of cyclists who don't follow the rules of the road. If anything, this speaks volumes about the lack of material regarding vehicles that aren't automobiles included in driver training courses.

As has been discussed previously, there needs to be a push to transition the driver's exam away from being a mere "memorize this info temporarily and we reward you with license to drive a car" and more towards a real evaluation of one's competency and understanding of laws relevant to all road users. As it stands presently, the driver's license exam in this state is a joke. Any call to push a similar licensing program with similar requirements on to cyclists is a call to replicate a nearly-meaningless process which states nothing about competency, skill in operating a vehicle of one's choice, or comprehension of why the majority of our traffic laws exist. Serious revision of the entire process must occur before anything such as what you're suggesting here is put under even remote consideration.

There are also other avenues to educate all road users on how to share infrastructure. Driver, cyclist, pedestrian - ALL could stand to do much better in terms of safe practices, good habits, and following the letter of the law. And it need not simply be held off as some arbitrary requirement for operating a vehicle once one hits a government-selected age - these practices can be instilled into people from an early age. Pedestrian and bicycle safety offerings in our public schools would go a long way towards putting the right ideas into the heads of younger citizens from an early age, and ebb away at the long-standing notion that our public streets are a disorderly, chaotic mess which are only subject to law in order under the watchful eye of a police officer.