With the aim of creating a skill trainer of conceptual knowledge, what is the development process for ensuring the correct set of objectives are determined, matched to appropriate technology, and implemented? Months and years prior to the first instance of trainer use, the initial steps of the developer determine the end product s success. Computer based trainers fielded for use by the military are rife with poorly matched tasks to technology, often the product of contracts that begin with a list of high-level objectives imitating a detailed requirements document. In those cases, software developers are forced to make best guesses about how to meet those objectives. Is there a better method? We embarked on a project to create a trainer for the military aviation mission of Forward Air Control (Airborne) using a development process that first identified critical tasks, then matched technology to facilitate training those tasks, and finally allowed expert evaluation of positive transfer. We do not assume that our methodology which foregoes a comprehensive transfer study is the preferred approach; rather, in cases where such a study is not feasible, we assert that a good development process, reinforced with subsequent expert evaluation, is a comparable alternative.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:nps.edu/oai:calhoun.nps.edu:10945/2643 |
| Date | 09 1900 |
| Creators | Lakey, Charles. |
| Contributors | Sullivan, Joseph, Darken, Rudolph, Naval Postgraduate School, Modeling, Virtual Environments, and Simulation (MOVES) and Computer Science |
| Publisher | Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School |
| Source Sets | Naval Postgraduate School |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
| Format | xvi, 211 p. : ill. ;, application/pdf |
| Rights | Approved for public release, distribution unlimited |
Page generated in 0.0019 seconds