Image retrieved from: https://www.jbsa.mil/News/News/Article/463488/training-with-a-bang/ labeled for non-commercial reuse
LRNT 526 Activity 3 | Individual Blog Post Specific Issue Exploration
A Critical Academic Reflection of the Validity of Simulated Technology
My critical inquiry into the educational value of simulation originates from an LRNT 526 team experience to participate in a Virtual Healthcare Experience. The simulation contained scenario-based video clips, along with guiding questions and feedback, promoting opportunities to reflect after completing the simulation. This Activity prompted questions on how to evaluate the effectiveness of simulations. Where are simulators successful in promoting learning, and why are some ineffective?
In my former military career, there were instances where simplistic procedural training was required. Like Health disciplines, there are time-sensitive scenarios where strict procedural responses are necessary. One key example of the military’s use of simulation in training is weapons handling. Starting from simple novice level emulation in a classroom and later with increasing complexity building to real-life situations and reproduce a battle setting. In my previous experience of training personnel, I instructed the use, care, and handling of service grenades. The pedagogy was one of reduced task complexity in procedural skills training for novices which would correlate to later superior task performance. I can now reflect on using simple tools and tiered methodology to reduce cognitive load. Training progressed from tennis balls in a classroom to carry out the procedural commands, then a move to the range environment to practice with nonlethal simulated munitions. Finally, accomplishing the learning objective in a realistic simulated setting with live munitions on the range. This experience is an example of graduated or reduced complexity in procedural skills training. The complexity of simulation is a two-dimensional measurement in terms of (1) the physical characteristics, for example, visual, spatial, kinesthetic, etc.; and (2) the functional characteristics, for example, the informational, stimulus, and response options of the training situation. (Hays & Singer, 1989, p. 50)
Pedagogy approaches and claims of their usefulness:
Simulators strive for realistic reproduction to safely develop procedural and or cognitive skills. Two divergent simulator pedagogies based on the procedural and cognitive domains emerge.
- Simplicity results in superior procedural task performance via lower cognitive loads, albeit with mixed results in the transfer of learning. The simplistic or sophisticated attributes of simulated tasks are dependant on the nature of the desired learning outcome. Simplistic when there is no desire to alter a procedural job-based skill acquisition. Learning Task Complexity with increased cognitive load is useful in generating challenges to imitate the uncertainty of real-life conditions.
- Learning task complexity can be used to emphasize early exposure to a realistic simulated environment. Task complexity, as defined by cognitive load theory, is mainly determined by the degree to which its elements interact. (Tremblay et al., 2019). As the complexity increases, either intrinsic or extraneous to the learning task, it influences simulation-based learning outcomes.
Assessing the validity of either of these attributes of a simulation experience can be roughly understood in terms of two fundamental dimensions. 1. The developmental system represents issues regarding the actual development of a simulation, and 2. the educational system represents issues involving the learning process when technology is applied to a teaching environment.
I would like to invite comments on simplistic or complex design to validate simulated technology and am interested in hearing from those wishing to relate any expertise in their use of simulation in educational practice.
References:
Feinstein, A. H., & Cannon, H. M. (2002). Constructs of simulation evaluation. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878102238606
Hays, R. T., & Singer, M. J. (1989). Simulation fidelity in training system design: Bridging the gap between reality and training. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Tremblay, M., Leppink, J., Leclerc, G., Rethans, J., & Dolmans, D. H. J. M. (2019). Simulation-based education for novices: complex learning tasks promote reflective practice. Medical Education, 53(4), 380–389. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13748
May 19, 2020 at 2:56 pm
Lorne, this makes sense in describing the systems and structures necessary to ensure instructionally sound simulations for complex tasks. The next step will be to clarify how you work these ideas into your critical inquiry – what questions arise for you in this? Do you see a discrepancy between your experience of the team’s chosen simulation and what you view as a better process for developing the simulation and designing its pedagogical features? That will be your next challenge.