If there is a concern, it is the lack of reinforcement of newly learned skills in the traditional workplace. Failure to reinforce skills on board ship is a contributing cause in the failure to transfer knowledge from simulators to real life. An early study conducted at the Computer Aided Operations Research Facility CAORF , Kings Point, New York, reported that on entering a particular harbor, students who had received simulator training significantly outperformed students with the same background and experience, but with no simulator training Miller et al.
However, the methodology employed was elementary, and the results are not conclusive. Appendix F includes a committee-developed case study of the U. The case study strongly indicates that watchstanding knowledge, skills, and abilities can be significantly improved using marine simulation, and that this training carries over to watchstanding aboard ship.
Simulators are used in a growing number of training programs. In addition to their long-standing use at some maritime academies, 2 and a number of private and union facilities, simulators have been widely used in the commercial air carrier industry, are increasingly used in the nuclear power industry, and are used in medical training and a variety of other areas.
Since objective evaluation of training effectiveness for any specific use is the exception rather than the rule, the committee believes that widespread use of simulators for training and the accompanying belief in their effectiveness constitutes anecdotal evidence of training effectiveness. Indeed, one reason offered for the steady improvement in airline safety since the s has been use of advanced simulators to train pilots for situations too dangerous to try in the air.
Ship-bridge simulators have been used for cadet training at the U. Merchant Marine Academy since the early s.
Ship-bridge simulators have only recently been installed at the state maritime academies in the United States. This belief is bolstered by the observation that airline pilots who transition into a new role in the cockpit via simulator-based training with no formal in-the-air training for that role are competent. The general opinion of mariners who have taken simulator-based courses and the shipping companies who sponsored them is that those courses are effective, if not optimal.
Shipping companies are using simulators more frequently. In the absence of requirements, they would not be doing so if they thought the training was not cost effective. Some of the lessons in these training courses, however, may not completely or uniformly be applied in the real-world. Learning transfer may fall short because shipboard organization and operating practices have not, in many instances, been restructured to facilitate the introduction and use of these concepts.
Anecdotal evidence can, however, be suspect, and apparent effectiveness based on usage patterns and opinions can be misleading. Successful on-the-job performance of those who have undergone simulator-based training could be due to factors unrelated to the training itself. One element of the instructional design process is continual analysis and improvement of the training program.
There is always a concern about the effectiveness of a new or even existing training program. Essentially, the issue is whether trainees learn what is necessary for on-the-job performance. Belief in the training effectiveness is generally based on whether trainees pass the course and perform successfully on the job. There are, however, a number of uncertainties in this sort of evaluation.
There is, for example, the question of short-term versus long-term effects, an issue of particular concern for intensive courses of short duration. In cases where evaluations are conducted within the structure of a training program, the course material may be only marginally relevant. Recent evidence suggests that many technical training programs teach marginally relevant skills, and graduates of those courses have to be retrained when they are placed in an operational environment Lave and Wenger, It is not uncommon to hear complaints that new graduates from a training course do not have the necessary operational skills and must be retrained on the job Lave and Wenger, ; Hutchins, Thus, even when graduates are successful, it is possible that they acquired essential skills on the job, as is typically the case in marine operations.
Satisfactory performance on an examination within a course structure does not ensure that the training was effective. Tests are invariably oriented toward. In addition, formal testing may fail to capture subtle but critical aspects of operational skills. Typically, formal tests examine those aspects that are easy to frame and evaluate by standard grading methods.
In complex and diverse tasks, formal testing rarely succeeds in evaluating the depth of knowledge and skill needed for operational performance of a multiplicity of tasks while under stress. Training program effectiveness should be evaluated as a part of the instructional design process. There are systems for evaluating programs, but many of these are flawed or are not properly applied. The committee developed the following procedures to guide training program evaluation.
A strategy to evaluate the effectiveness of training programs should be relevant, comprehensive, and consistent. To be relevant, the strategy should assess skills that are central to the job, especially those that are difficult to teach and difficult to acquire. To be comprehensive , the strategy must permit evaluation of the quality of all essential skills and detection of critical omissions. One method is to evaluate the performance of individuals who have completed the course.
The aim would be to ensure that ongoing programs realize essential goals and to evaluate whether modifying the training would result in desired enhancements for on-the-job performance both immediately following training and in the long term NRC, These goals might best be met by assigning experienced practitioners to evaluate bridge performance. These evaluators should be carefully selected and trained, remain independent of the conduct of training to avoid ''ownership" in the training product or interpersonal relationships that could influence their evaluations , and be experienced enough to qualitatively judge the effectiveness of operational performance.
In addition, they must remain familiar with current practice and, ideally, should periodically cycle through line operations, as is required by most commercial air carrier operators. It is probably not desirable for the evaluators to be totally independent from organizational goals and policy. They must perform their duties according to shared goals and values established by management.
They would also, however, have higher-level goals, such as safety and production. The assumption is that experienced practitioners can recognize how well such goals are being satisfied and are sensitive to tradeoffs that are sometimes essential in the pursuit of diverse goals. Nevertheless, evaluators need to be advised of organizational goals so they will consistently evaluate and logically communicate deficiencies to management and the training department.
The evaluation process would need to be minimally intrusive; it should not markedly change behavior from what it would be in the absence of the ongoing evaluation.
Although most individuals perform more conscientiously under. A poorly trained crew is, however, unlikely to be able to perform at a high standard only while they are being evaluated. The training program evaluation strategy outlined above corresponds in some respects to procedures currently in use at some simulator facilities. Nevertheless, it should be emphasized that his strategy incorporates several key features, the omission of any one of which will jeopardize the process.
Evaluation within a course lacks the required independence. Positive but unsolicited testimony about the quality of training from those who supervise graduates or from graduates themselves are not sufficiently systematic and may not be very reliable. Although statutory authorities sometimes have an on-the-job evaluation process, their evaluators are rarely as experienced with the actual job as is desirable, are rarely current in practice, and are not necessarily sensitive to all competing work goals.
The difficulty of achieving comprehensive and operationally relevant evaluation of those who have graduated from training programs should not be minimized. However, these features are essential if training programs are to be evaluated effectively.
The results of training program evaluations should be used to make periodic program improvements. The role and qualification of marine simulator instructors evokes considerable discussion and debate.
Some people in the marine simulator field believe the instructor is the most important training element; others believe the trainee is the most important part of the simulation because beneficial changes in trainee behavior and performance are the desired product.
A third view is that the simulator and the simulation produced are particularly important. The view taken in this report is that although all design components are important to an effective course of instruction, the relative quality of simulator-based training depends more on the instructor's capabilities than those of the simulator or the role of the trainee.
The instructor is of primary importance because it is the instructor's role to ensure that all of the instructional objectives are met. In developing a training program, the instructional design process requires consideration of the following factors:. As a practical matter, the instructor's subject-matter expertise is essential to instructional design.
The instructor's tasks, however, are multifaceted. Many of the instructor's tasks Box are in addition to and lie outside of the mariner's nautical expertise. There are limited opportunities for mariners to undertake instructional roles aboard modern ships. One possible exception is in piloting, where apprentices are developed under the supervision of marine pilots as a normal practice NRC, 3. Although some mariners develop good instructional capabilities during their seagoing service, effective application of the instructional design process requires specialized skills that must be developed or refined separately through specialized programs.
The need for specialized skills is even more important in the use of ship-bridge simulators. As an instructional tool, simulation has evolved to a level of technical and instructional sophistication that often requires multidisciplinary expertise and technical support.
In such cases, the instructor needs to be capable of working as a member or leader of an instruction team. In conducting training, the instructor lectures, role-plays, and facilitates. He or she is the intermediary for:. Although watchkeeping courses have not been mandatory for certification of officers in charge of a navigation watch, some national agencies including the USCG grant remission of sea time after completion of such courses.
In these cases, the instructor, by virtue of the instructional role and student evaluations, is involved in the award of a completion certificate. The instructor has either moral or official responsibility, or both, for ensuring that each trainee's performance has been satisfactory. At the same time, care must be exercised to ensure that interpersonal relationships do not influence performance evaluations and that the.
On-the-job training is also used in the professional development of docking masters and operators of uninspected towing vessels who pilot tug and barge flotillas on inland rivers and waterways. The pool of docking masters has not been a source of simulator instructors because simulation has not been used in training for their profession. There are only a few instructors with professional towing backgrounds because simulation has to date been used only to a limited extent in the coastwise towing industry only one instructor as of The instructor must be capable of adjusting to trainees' different professional experiences.
Experienced trainees are already a professional in their field and should be treated accordingly. In these cases, the instructor's role as a facilitator takes on more importance than it does with less-experienced deck officers or cadets. The main demand on the instructor who teaches professional courses is one of stimulating the trainee to rethink his or her own performance objectively and. The instructor must not only know the subject-matter thoroughly, but be up to date on recent events, such as marine accidents and their proximate and underlying causes and developments in equipment and operating practices worldwide.
There is a strongly held position among maritime instructors that all simulation instructors should possess the highest seagoing qualification awarded by a flag state, which is commonly understood to mean a master's license with no restrictions or an unlimited master's license. In principle, the marine license ensures subject-matter expertise and the institutional consideration of nautical credibility. Some people believe that knowledge of the course content and proficiency in instructional skills are paramount, and that possession of a senior marine license alone guarantees neither relevant nor recent content knowledge nor instructional skills.
Instructors without formal instructional skills training are most likely applying instructional knowledge rooted in informal on-the-job and apprenticeship approaches to professional development. Although the insights that accompany this background are important for discerning and conveying the marine operations subtleties, practical experience does not by itself prepare an individual to apply modern learning concepts.
Instructor qualification must consider both instructional and institutional factors. From an instructional perspective, the instructor must possess the right content knowledge as well as instructional skills.
From an institutional perspective, the instructor must be credible to trainees and sponsors. In addition, if marine licensing is involved, the appropriate form and level of instructor qualification is also important to the licensing authorities. The rapid evolution of simulator capabilities, from desktop computer-aided instruction and presentations to full-mission ship-bridge simulator, suggests that there should be more formal standards for qualification of simulator instructors.
With a few notable exceptions discussed below there are no professional, industry, or national guidelines, standards, or requirements for certifying instructors, either through professional organizations, marine industry, education, training programs, or government agencies. Nor is there a specific professional code of ethics for instructors involved in mariner training.
Generally, the instructional capabilities of instructors is determined by employers through job interviews and review of professional credentials. In pursuit of one of its goals as a committee, MASC has been working to develop standards for simulator instructors.
MASC considers it mandatory that all simulator instructors be required to attend a course that covers the following subjects:. Boxes , , and summarize the focus of three different "train-the-trainer" programs.
Box summarizes an effort by the Maritime Academy Simulator Committee to develop a training program for simulator instructors at U. Box gives samples of extensive courses at the Southampton Institute, Warsash Maritime Centre in the United Kingdom, for training instructors who teach on a full-mission ship-bridge simulator. Box summarizes a government-required training program in the Netherlands.
In the United States, a de facto certification of instructors occurs through the USCG's administration of course approvals for training programs used, in part or in whole, to satisfy certain federal marine licensing requirements.
The agency has established criteria regarding instructor qualifications that must be met to receive course approvals. Evidence of training in instructional techniques is required, and a simulator facility must notify the agency of any changes in instructors, including the credentials of the individual who will be teaching the course in cases where some sea-time equivalency or licenses are awarded.
In December , the USCG began examining an internal proposal to establish a formal certification requirement that it would administer. The proposal envisioned three categories of certification: certified maritime instructor, designated simulator examiner, and designated practical examiner. The proposal also featured a requirement to use licensed mariners or individuals with comparable experience as instructors.
The USCG tasked its Merchant Personnel Advisory Committee to review this proposal as an initial step in determining whether to seek implementation authority and resources. The agency's interest in formal. The instructor needs a wide range of maritime skills.
Realistically, it is difficult to find all these skills and qualifications in one individual. Additional training can overcome deficiencies, and spreading of instructional skills over the entire staff can enable a training establishment to focus the required specialization to a particular training need.
A full instructional team would consist of subject-matter experts supplemented by individuals with specialized instructional and technical capabilities in. Duration 5 days. Duration 20 days. Understudy senior lecturer. Duration 15 days.
Continue to understudy senior lecturer. Duration ongoing through first year. Under supervision 1 complete presentation of all lectures for the BTM course, 2 understand all aspects of the BTM course in all its versions, 3 undertake familiarization with the emergency procedures course conducted on the simulator, 4 undertake familiarization with pilot training courses on the simulator, 5 undertake familiarization with all special courses conducted on the simulator, 6 develop new exercises, and 7 assist in development of new databases.
Duration ongoing updating. All full-mission ship simulator lecturers are expected to conduct at least one week's updating at sea each year. The Institute educational system allows five weeks "research and scholarly activity" per year for industrial updating, the presentation of papers at conferences, and other allied activities. In addition, all new staff members are required to complete a one-year course at the rate of one day per week on training techniques and the educational systems.
In practice, the members of a simulator facility's staff are routinely called on at appropriate times during the course of instruction to support simulations through role playing, to observe student performance, and to provide specialized instruction or technical support.
This practice satisfies multidisciplinary needs within the limits of the staffs' resident expertise. Sometimes specialized support is obtained from parties external to the simulator facility. For example, few facilities maintain a hydrodynamicist on staff unless the facility is also involved with channel design.
There may be occasions when an expert in a nonmaritime field may have to be brought in to assist on a simulator-based course. The best example is that of bridge resource management training, where psychologists and specialist in human factors and stress and fatigue can contribute greatly to course content and presentation.
The importance of highly qualified, trained, and motivated senior mariners as instructors cannot be overstated. The Netherlands government requires instructors to complete a formal course of instruction to prepare them for service at the new MarineSafety International Rotterdam simulator facility. Originally developed by FlightSafety International for commercial air carrier simulator instructors, the course was adapted to the marine simulator field.
The one-week course was developed by the facility and was based on the parent company's earlier development of flight simulator instructor training. The course consists of 17 hours of classroom instruction in varying formats plus 2 days of training in the use of the facility's simulators. The classroom segment of the course includes lessons on:. Use of Lead Instructors. Use of lead instructors has been possible because of small class sizes and the individual lesson content.
As a practical matter, the content of each exercise or drill that can be effectively overseen by a single instructor more or less coincides with the level of detail and interaction that trainees can accommodate.
On the other hand, the use of a single instructor rather than a dedicated, multidisciplinary instructional team is often influenced by cost. If a facility can afford only a single instructor or a small instructional staff, then the emphasis will be on nautical credibility rather than on staff instructional skills and proficiency. These factors may or may not result in optimization of either instruction or learning, depending on all factors present in a given simulation. Criteria for Ideal Instructor.
The committee believes that the ideal lead instructor should have the following skills and qualifications:. Many trainees attending simulator courses are either serving masters in command or senior officers. It is desirable for nautical credibility that the lead instructor's professional qualification be at least the same as the highest qualification for which the trainees are being trained or examined. Perhaps more important, however, the instructor should possess appropriate subject-matter expertise i.
Command experience would be an advantage and is desirable, but is not absolutely necessary. Many U. For example, some facilities provide training for coastwise tug and barge operations, and one provides training for operators of inland tug and barge flotillas. In these cases, the highest relevant mariner qualification is important. In addition to establishing credibility, the instructor and trainees must be able to comfortably relate to each other.
The current approaches to training and professional development in the marine industry are based on a tradition of "modeling-the-expert" and on-the-job training. Many courses that currently use simulation in their curricula have followed the approach of "inserting" the simulation into the training program rather than following a more structured approach to course development.
Systematic application of the instructional design process offers a strong model for structuring new courses and continuously improving existing ones. The primary elements of the instructional design process include:. Instructional design is an evolving concept.
Application of the process should include periodic evaluation of the success or failure of course elements, periodic assessment of the program's overall effectiveness, and regular innovative modifications, as appropriate. Another issue of concern in the mariner training process is transfer and retention of the training. Use of simulators in training is based on subjective observation and anecdotal evidence that the training system is effective. Very little recent quantitative research has been conducted to determine whether or how effectively simulator training transfers to the work environment.
One of the most critical elements in the application of instructional design is the effectiveness of the instructor. It is the instructor's responsibility to ensure that all training objectives are met.
The instructor must possess both content knowledge and instructional skills, especially if he or she is responsible for teaching in a simulator environment. Standards or guidelines defining instructor qualifications are necessary to ensure instructional effectiveness. In the course of its investigation of the uses of simulators in training and the instructional design process, the committee identified a number of areas where existing research and analysis did not provide sufficient information for the committee to extend its own analysis.
Among the most significant areas identified was the need to update and expand relevant task and subtask analyses for application to the mariner's training needs. For the instructional design process to be effective, the course design should include the definition of training needs based on the steps required to complete identified tasks and subtasks for specific functions. This analysis should include dimensions that have been missing with respect to behavioral elements and specific steps needed to execute each subtask.
This analysis is important for several reasons. First, not all tasks contribute in the same way to overall performance of functions and duties of the job.
Second, task analysis is necessary in training course design and performance evaluation. Third, a clear understanding of the skills and abilities required for job performance is necessary for effective performance evaluation Chapter 5. Fourth, task descriptions and related performance criteria are necessary to design an effective licensing program Chapter 5. D'Amico, A. Miller, and C. Report No.
CAORF Douwsma, D. Using frameworks to produce cost-effective simulator training. Johns, Newfoundland, Canada, September 26—October 2. Drown, D. Applying marine simulation to improve mariner professional development. Edmonds, D. Weighing the pros and cons of simulator training, computer-based training, and computer testing and assessment. Flexman, R. Has PDF. Publication Type. More Filters. However, as the … Expand.
Deep learning-based visual control assistant for assembly in Industry 4. Engineering, Computer Science. The challenges of software engineering education. ICSE Principles of instructional design, 5th edition. View 1 excerpt, references methods. The Instructional Design Pro course, also from Udemy, focuses on producing educational programs and materials for businesses. It covers the stages of instructional design, strategies for creating successful lessons and curriculum production.
This course is a good choice for training managers, business owners or instructional designers who create training materials for employees. The class includes 18 core modules, 54 video lessons and a page instructional design workbook.
Students complete a quiz after each module to evaluate their understanding of the concepts and earn a certificate of completion at the end of the course. The Learning Design Basics course from OpenLearning provides instruction on learning design principles, including educational philosophies, program structures and measurable learning outcomes.
The course includes five modules that cover the process of designing a learning program. Students learn how to identify program parameters, design programs, develop content and activities and review programs.
At the end of the course, students complete their own instructional design project for evaluation. OpenLearning offers the class online so participants can complete it at their own pace.
Students who finish the modules and their final project can pay an additional fee to receive a completion certificate. This class from Coursera helps students gain an understanding of online teaching strategies.
It's designed for educators and instructional designers who want to integrate technology into their lessons. The four-week course includes lessons on online learning activities, assessment strategies and technical tools that educators can use to enhance their instruction.
Each week, participants watch course videos, complete reading assignments and take a quiz to assess their knowledge. Many of the modules include case studies, which can help students see how the concepts apply to real-life scenarios. While it's a free course, participants can pay to receive a certificate of completion.
Introduction to Instructional Design is an online graduate course from the Harvard Extension School that teaches students methods for using media and technology to produce learning experiences. Participants also complete six instructional design projects. There are no prerequisites for the course, though the school recommends the course for professionals who want to integrate technologies to support their learning.
Students who complete the course also earn four degree credits. A certification validates that a professional has skills and knowledge of instructional design processes. You can earn an instructional design certification through a recognized organization after meeting their requirements, such as educational prerequisites or academic assessments. Here are six certifications that can help you highlight your competency in instructional design:.
This certificate from Oregon State University's College of Education helps professionals learn skills to enter the field of instructional design or advance their careers. Professionals complete five component courses, including a learning practicum, to earn the certificate. The component courses offer insight into effective e-learning strategies, instructional technology and design theories.
Each course takes six weeks to complete, and professionals receive their certificate after completing all five courses. There are no prerequisites for the courses, though the college encourages professionals without instructional design experience to take the courses sequentially. This certificate from the Online Learning Consortium can help professionals grow their skills in instructional design and course development. Professionals earn the certificate by completing four classes over 16 weeks.
The classes cover a variety of instructional design topics, including new course development, curating resources, professional foundations and course quality review. The organization requires professionals to have at least one year of experience in online course design and development to be eligible for the certificate. This certificate from the International Society for Educational Technology helps professionals learn instructional design models and design approaches to create online learning experiences.
0コメント