final training program version 1
Post on 15-Feb-2017
54 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
DWH Weather Support
2012
Preparing for instruction Training William Hennix
© William Hennix Page 2
Implementation Plan
Contents
Implementation Plan ................................................................................................................................ 2
Module Overview and Description: ......................................................................................................... 3
Learner Analysis: .............................................................................................................................. 3
Instructional Context: .......................................................................................................................... 3
Summary of modifications: .................................................................................................................. 4
Course Syllabus ....................................................................................................................................... 5
Course title: Collaboration ................................................................................................................ 5
Lesson Plan ............................................................................................................................................. 7
Instruction ........................................................................................................................................... 7
Performance Objective: ....................................................................................................................... 7
Materials: ............................................................................................................................................ 7
Performance Evaluation: ...................................................................................................................... 8
Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 8
Detailed Task Analysis Part 1 .................................................................................................................. 9
Detailed Task Analysis Part 2 ................................................................................................................ 10
Detailed Task Analysis Part 3 ................................................................................................................ 11
Evaluation Process ................................................................................................................................ 12
Alignment to the Five Levels of Evaluation ....................................................................................... 13
Alignment of Unit Goals to the evaluation process ............................................................................. 14
Evaluation Tools and Materials .......................................................................................................... 14
Summary of modifications: ................................................................................................................ 15
Implementation and Evaluation Report .................................................................................................. 16
Module Overview and Description:.................................................................................................... 16
Description of Implementation ........................................................................................................... 16
Attachments 1 Training Module ............................................................................................................ 18
Reference .............................................................................................................................................. 54
© William Hennix Page 3
Module Overview and Description:
Create an instruction designed to improve working relationship between the subject matter expert
(SME) and the instructional designer (ID) The responsibility of the SMEs is to provide IDs with
the information required for the course. The SMEs assist with identifying learning objectives,
and reviewing instructional design for accuracy. It is critical for the ID to effectively
communicate and collaborate with SMEs to ensure the information provided is accurate and
satisfy the stated objectives for the program. The stated purpose of this course is to provide the
tools to enable IDs to facilitate training projects with SMEs.
Learner Analysis:
The general characteristics of the target audience for the training are retired military personal.
The target group is over the age of 40 years. Members have been in their respective field for over
20 years. Two of the four members have a bachelor’s degree; all the members have attended
training the trainer course offered by the United States Air Force. All four members have
functioned as supervisors and managers of operational weather units throughout the Department
of Defense (DoD). Each member has been responsible for developing and delivering training
programs to DoD personal. Each member has developed and implemented training in the last 10
years.
Instructional Context:
The instruction will be created using Adobe Captivate 6. The Captivate presentation will
include short quizzes dispersed throughout the presentation to assess the learners understanding
of the information provided. The use quizzes will provide the learner with a formative
assessment for the learner to determine if they understand the content prior to advancing to the
next level of instructions. The program will upload to an organizational share drive for easy
access at the work center.
© William Hennix Page 4
Summary of modifications:
The location of the information will be controlled an access only from the work site. The logic
behind the control environment some of the material is sensitive to emulate real world situations.
The program will be tailor for aviation weather support; the current training is generic in nature.
An additional objective is preparing the SME to work with the ID. The training program will be
dual training were the SME and ID reverse roles to improve on communication and the training
process.
© William Hennix Page 5
Course Syllabus
Course title: Collaboration
Course description: The purpose of the course is to increase collaboration efforts between
Instructional Designers, Subject Matter Experts, and Training Facilitators through
communication and team building. The course will increase the awareness of the job attributes of
each of the team members to increase understanding of the roles each group plays in the
development of a training program.
Prerequisite: Instructional Designers, Subject Matter Experts, and Training Facilitators
Course objectives. Improve collaboration among team members involved in the development of
training programs for the department of defense. The course will enlighten each member of all
three areas of interest in the development process. The course focuses on improving
communication, providing insight to the duties of each position and relating the responsibilities
between team members.
Course Modules:
1. Instructional Designer
2. Subject Matter Expert
3. Facilitator
Course location
Weather Station
Class size
Four
Course length
One hour per module
© William Hennix Page 6
Course schedule
Flexible
Attendance Policy
Mandatory for all ID, trainers and SME
Grading policy
Pass 80% accuracy
Test
Multiple choices, Fill in the blank and mix and match question
Name of Instructor
Mr. William Hennix
Instructional Methods
Virtual interactive training
Tools, Equipment and Supplies
Adobe Reader, Laptop, desktop computer and sound system
© William Hennix Page 7
Lesson Plan
Instructional Designer
Virtual Class Date 10/18/2012
Instructor William Hennix
Course Title: Collaboration
Lesson Title: Communication
Instruction
Review the videos and the handouts discussing the communication process for developing
training programs. Each member will review and complete all three modules. Each module is
designed to provide insight to the responsibility of key stakeholder associated with a training
project. You will understand the responsibility of an Instructional Designer, a Subject Matter
Expert and a Facilitator. Learn how to collaborate with each team member by understand their
role and responsibility
Performance Objective:
Improve collaboration among team members involved in the development of training programs
for the department of defense. The course will enlighten each member of all three areas of
interest in the development process. The course focuses on improving communication, providing
insight to the duties of each position and relating the responsibilities between team members.
Each member will understand and perform the duties in each position. The primary objective is
to foster teamwork among the primary members responsible for a training project.
Materials:
Air Force Instruction 36-2201
Air Force Handbook 36-2235v3
© William Hennix Page 8
Air Force Handbook 36-2235v6
Air Force Handbook 36-2235v11
Presentation: PowerPoint presentation and video clips
Participation: Mandatory for members of the training development project
Performance Evaluation:
Completion of all three modules with a passing score of 80%
Summary
An important concept in developing effective training programs in putting together a team of
individuals who are committed to achieving the same goals. Part of the process of developing
collaboration is having a group that works well together and is moving in the same direction.
The viewpoint of SME is a key component in the selection process; they have a direct effect on
the development of training projects (Truxillo, Paronto, Collins, & Sulzer, 2004).
The important aspect of the training program is to enlighten all parties on their difference and
similarities on training development on a particular subject. Those that perform the job versus
those that supervise and those serve as trainers each position views a task different and as a result
will affect the final training product (Truxillo, Paronto, Collins, & Sulzer, 2004). This training
program is designed to minimize the differences and enhance the similarities (Truxillo, Paronto,
Collins, & Sulzer, 2004).
© William Hennix Page 9
Detailed Task Analysis Part 1
Job Frequency Annual
Task Importance Very
Sub task
Learning Domain
Cognitive Application
Psychomotor Mechanism
Affective Valuing
Conditions Criterion Standards
Pass the assessment
test with 80% accuracy
Instructional Design Process
Project Management
Communication
Given access to a
computer a copy of
Air Force Instruction
36-2201 Air Force
Handbook 36-2235v3
Air Force Handbook
36-2235v6 Air Force
Handbook 36-2235v11
Understand the
responsibility of an ID
and how to collaborate
with team members
© William Hennix Page 10
Detailed Task Analysis Part 2
Job Frequency Annual
Task Importance Very
Sub task
Learning Domain
Cognitive Application
Psychomotor Mechanism
Affective Valuing
Conditions Criterion Standards
Pass the assessment
test with 80% accuracy
Given access to a
computer a copy of
Air Force Instruction
36-2201 Air Force
Handbook 36-2235v3
Air Force Handbook
36-2235v6 Air Force
Handbook 36-2235v11
Subject Matter Expert
Project Management
Communication
Understand the
responsibility of the
SME and how to
collaborate with team
members
© William Hennix Page 11
Detailed Task Analysis Part 3
Job Frequency Annual
Task Importance Very
Sub task
Learning Domain
Cognitive Application
Psychomotor Mechanism
Affective Valuing
Conditions Criterion Standards
Pass the assessment
test with 80% accuracy
Facilitator
Project Management
Communication
Given access to a
computer a copy of
Air Force Instruction
36-2201 Air Force
Handbook 36-2235v3
Air Force Handbook
36-2235v6 Air Force
Handbook 36-2235v11
Understand the
responsibility of the
Facilitator and how to
collaborate with team
members
© William Hennix Page 12
Evaluation Process
According to Rothwell and Kazanas (1998), instruction is not finalized until the students
have demonstrated they have increased their knowledge level from the information provided by
the instructor and the materials included in the course. Rothwell and Kazanas (1998) also stated
evaluations are not completely empirical objective. A large part of the process relies on human
judgment and decisions. The process is based on the data collected and analyzed to determine if
the methods and materials used achieve the stated objectives (Rothwell & Kazanas, 1998).
The first part of the evaluation process will include a pre-course questionnaire. The
questions are designed to measure the students increase understanding of responsibility (IUR) by
developing a baseline for the training program. The questions will focus on what the students
currently understand about the responsibilities of team members involved in developing or
upgrading training programs. They will be ask to rate their understanding of three specific job
positions and the responsibilities associated with those positions. At the end of the module, the
students will be asked the same questions to determine if their IUR has increased or decreased.
Another aspect of the evaluation process will be the formative stage. Using Gronlund
(1998) Assessment of student achievement as a guided there will be several multiple-choice
questions written at the application level. The question will be designed to measure a higher level
of learning. The process includes asking question that requires the student to apply what they
have learned in order to answer the questions. The significance of the application level response
on multiple-choice questions is the answers are not available verbatim from the instructions. The
final level of evaluation question will be true false with the understanding the question will be
based on the understanding of the information present from peer-reviewed articles and the
textbooks and government regulations associated with the program.
© William Hennix Page 13
Another level of question that would be part of the evaluation process is matching
question. The question will focus on basic definitions within the learning domains. The question
for the learning domains will serve as guided responses to help the students understand the basic
concept of designing training programs at certain levels. The program and the question for the
learning domain are not intended to make all members designers but to relate the differences in
the levels.
Alignment to the Five Levels of Evaluation
When evaluating and comparing the program to Dr. Kirkpatrick’s five levels we have to
review the process as individual elements and as a group to understand the complete package.
We will begin with level five, return on investment. The pre-course and post-course
questionnaires are designed to increase the value of any training program by fostering
cooperation between key stakeholders. The questionnaires purpose to bring awareness of what
each team member is responsible for and how that plays a part of the overall picture. Level four
sets the groundwork for level five. The training program and evaluation process for the program
is based on one main factor understanding of responsibility of team members. The program was
not designed to make each member an expert in all areas but to reduce the stress of working in
teams. We reduce the stress level through enlightening all members on how their part of the
puzzle relates to the whole project. Educating all team members on what each members job
consist brings an understanding to the process. When all members understand the roles and
responsibilities of key, stakeholders they spend more time completing their area to match the
core objectives to training personnel at the appropriate level.
Level three and two are addressed within the evaluation process using multiple choice
and true and false questions. The questions are not written on the lower level of the learning
© William Hennix Page 14
domain, requiring memorization. The question are deigned to challenge the students ability to
apply the information given within the context of the question. No response in the multiple-
choice question would be directly located within the lesson. The student would have to apply
what was learned to determine the appropriate response. The final area related to two and three
are the matching questions for the learning domains. This area is design to measure basic
understanding of the learning domains.
The final and most important area with Dr. Kirkpatrick evaluation level one. This level
will also be measure within the pre and post questionnaires. The question will be written to ask
questions related to working environments and group projects along with current stress levels
related directly to past training projects.
Alignment of Unit Goals to the evaluation process
1. Improve collaboration among team members.
a. Pre and Post module questionnaire
b. Multiple choice questions
2. The course will enlighten each member of all three areas of interest in the development
process.
a. Multiple choice questions
b. True and false questions
3. The course focuses on improving communication,
a. Matching questions
b. Multiple choice questions
4. Providing insight to the duties of each position
a. Pre and Post questionnaire
b. True and False questions
5. The responsibilities between team members.
a. Pre and Post questionnaires
Evaluation Tools and Materials
The evaluation tools used was Adobe Captive 6. Each question was assigned a point
value based on the level of difficultly of the question. The information for the questions was
based on peer-reviewed articles, handouts, information and material provided to the students.
© William Hennix Page 15
Attachments:
1. http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/shared/media/epubs/AFH36-2235V1.pdf
2. http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/shared/media/epubs/AFH36-2235V11.pdf
3. http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/shared/media/epubs/AFH36-2235V12.pdf
4. http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/shared/media/epubs/AFH36-2235V2.pdf
5. http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/shared/media/epubs/AFH36-2235V3.pdf
Summary of modifications:
The main modification to the original training program was an expansion to include the
facilitators as part of the process. The facilitators were add because they are the ones who have to
communicate what was created to the students in a style and format the student can comprehend.
Many courses developed for on-line can be adapted for short seminars or workshops. It is
important that everyone be consulted on a training project to increase the opportunity for
success.
© William Hennix Page 16
Implementation and Evaluation Report
Module Overview and Description:
The purpose of the module was to create an instructional project designed to improve working
relationship between the instructional designers, the subject matter experts and the facilitators.
The project provides a brief overview of the responsibilities of each of the main three
participants responsible for the design and implementation of a training program. It also
addressed the major models associated with training. The module provided a link between each
of the participants to increase the level of collaboration through understanding. It is critical for
the instructional designers to communicate and collaborate with subject matter experts to ensure
the information provided is accurate and it satisfies the stated objectives for the program.
Description of Implementation
The program was implemented through several methods. Using Adobe Captivate 6.0 the training
program was designed and distributed several ways. There was a computer-generated version of
the training program. The computer version was self-pace using Adobe reader as the platform of
choice. The software had built in evaluations designed to be administer after the module was
completed providing an instead response to the student. A second method was a video version
using MP4 video as the preferred platform supported by a test generated on Adobe PDF. The
final back version was a hard copy of the program including the test that was sent electronically
to all of the students in Microsoft Word.
Analysis of Evaluation Data
Prior to the module, the learners had a basic understanding of the process of developing training
programs from the subject matter experts’ position and from the facilitators’ position and each
© William Hennix Page 17
member have develop training programs based on the two previous position. The students’
attention focused on the program but from novice level and not from an advance student level.
The course task analysis will need to be adjusted to reflect the change. The course achieved it
overall objective. The objective was to increase collaboration among team members through
knowledge awareness of each team member’s job. The information was fine but I have to fine-
tune it to insure everyone who participates understands the basic concept of training from a
trainers view. I have discovered that many SME have limited understanding of the training
process. For future projects, I need to insure the SME understands or help the SME understand
the basics of training from an ID perspective.
Increase expansion of the ADDIE principles
Explain the difference between a facilitator and an instructor
© William Hennix Page 18
Attachments 1 Training Module
Slide 1
© William Hennix Page 19
Slide 2
© William Hennix Page 20
Slide 3
© William Hennix Page 21
Slide 4
© William Hennix Page 22
Slide 5
© William Hennix Page 23
Slide 6
© William Hennix Page 24
Slide 7
© William Hennix Page 25
Slide 8
© William Hennix Page 26
Slide 9
© William Hennix Page 27
Slide 10
© William Hennix Page 28
Slide 11
© William Hennix Page 29
Slide 12
© William Hennix Page 30
Slide 13
© William Hennix Page 31
Slide 14
© William Hennix Page 32
Slide 15
© William Hennix Page 33
Slide 16
© William Hennix Page 34
Slide 17
© William Hennix Page 35
Slide 18
© William Hennix Page 36
Slide 19
© William Hennix Page 37
Attachments 1 Training Module Question
Slide 1 Text Captions: True/False Acting without assistance is part of the Cognitive Learning Domain A) True B) False
© William Hennix Page 38
Slide 2 Text Captions: Sequence Arrange in sequence A) Subject Matter Expert B) Facilitator C) Instructional Designer
© William Hennix Page 39
Slide 3 Text Captions: True/False Analysis is part of the Affective Learning Domain A) True B) False
© William Hennix Page 40
Slide 4 - FIST Text Captions: True/False Knowledge building is based on the availability of new information and technology. A) True B) False
© William Hennix Page 41
Slide 5 Text Captions: True/False The negative side of the instructional design process is focusing on achieving measurable goals that increase knowledge and awareness A) True B) False
© William Hennix Page 42
Slide 6 Text Captions: Fill-In-The-Blank Complete the sentence below by filling in the blanks. There are three main parts to the training program SME, ID and Facilitators. phrase
© William Hennix Page 43
Slide 7 Text Captions: True/False If a student’s knowledge is not increased, ID can use the task analysis to determine if any steps where missed in the training program A) True B) False
© William Hennix Page 44
Slide 8 Text Captions: True/False Each detail associated with the training program is written in a format designed to increase the knowledge level of the student and meet all the objectives set forth in the training plan A) True B) False
© William Hennix Page 45
Slide 9 Text Captions: Multiple Choice The instructional development focus as two models within its area A) Instructional Design Method B) Training for Impact C) Systematic Design of Instruction D) Systematic Training Model
© William Hennix Page 46
Slide 10 Text Captions: Fill-In-The-Blank Complete the sentence below by filling in the blanks. The level of knowledge and skill of management and workers play a direct role in the effectiveness and acceptability of any training program.
© William Hennix Page 47
Slide 11 Text Captions: Multiple Choice The performance focus has three models associated with its core A) Training for Performance System B) Systematic Training Model C) Training for Impact D) Instructional Design Method E) Performance Based Instruction
© William Hennix Page 48
Slide 12 Text Captions: True/False The disadvantage positive aspects of IDM and SDI are the programs are designed and maintained by instructional system designers A) True B) False
© William Hennix Page 49
Slide 13 Text Captions: True/False The intrinsic rewards for motivate students can empower students to achieve better results A) True B) False
© William Hennix Page 50
Slide 14 Text Captions: Matching Match the following Column 1 Training for Performance System Performance Based Instruction Training for Impact Instructional Design Method Systematic Design of Instruction Column 2 A) TPS B) PBI C) TP D) IDM E) SDI
© William Hennix Page 51
Slide 15 Text Captions: True/False The facilitators of the information do not share their knowledge A) True B) False
© William Hennix Page 52
Slide 16 Text Captions: Fill-In-The-Blank Complete the sentence below by filling in the blanks. People who are motivated to learn and are self- directed are will do well in an on-line environment
© William Hennix Page 53
Slide 17 Text Captions: True/False The philosophy with using the learning domains enables the designer to develop assessments that reflect the level of understanding associated with a particular level within the domain. A) True B) False
© William Hennix Page 54
Reference
Banta, T. W., & Palomba, C. A. (1999). Assesment essentials. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons,
inc.
Chang, I., & Chang, W. (2012). The effect of student learning motivation on learning
satisfaction. International Journal of Organizational Innovation (Online), 4(3), 281-305.
http://search.proquest.com/docview/921995037?accountid=35812
Conrad, C., & Poole, M. S. (2005). Strategic Organzational Communication (6th ed.). Belmont,
CA: Wadsworth.
Cowell, C., Hopkins, P.C., McWhorter, R., & Jorden, D.L (2006, November). Alternative
training models. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 8(4).
Gray, C. F., & Larson, E. W. (2006). Project management:The managerial process (3rd ed.).
New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Grounlund, N. E. (1998). Assessment of student achievement (6th ed.). Needham Heights, MA,
USA: A Viacom Company.
Grupe, F. H., & Connolly, F. W. (1995). Grownups are different: Computer training for adult
learners. Journal of Systems Management, 46(1), 58-58.
http://search.proquest.com/docview/199820054?accountid=35812
Miner, J.E. (2010). Air Force Instruction 36-2201. USAF
Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., Kalman, H. K., & Kemp, J. E. (2011). Designing effective
instruction (6th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc
Musial, D., Thomas, J., & Nieminen, G. (2008). Foundations of meaningful educational
assessment. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Patricia, C.P. (2002). Air Force Handbook 36-2235v3. USAF
Patricia, C.P. (2002). Air Force Handbook 36-2235v6. USAF
© William Hennix Page 55
Patricia, C.P. (2002). Air Force Handbook 36-2235v11. USAF
Stiggs, R., & Chappuis, J. (2012). An Introduction to student-involved assessment for learning
Thornton, B., “Chris” Mattocks, ,T.C., & Thornton, L. (2001). Empowerment: A method of
motivating adult learners. Journal of Adult Education, 29(1), 1-10.
http://search.proquest.com/docview/204582814?accountid=35812
(6th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Truxillo, D. M., Paronto, M. E., Collins, M., & Sulzer, J. L. (2004). Effects of subject matter
expert viewpoint on job analysis results. Public Personnel Management , 33 .
Washington, DC, United States of America.
United States Air Force. (2010). Air Force Instruction 36-2201. USAF.
top related