My current topic I am pursuing is the feasibility of online assessment in high stress learning environments: An air traffic control perspective. This topic is unique to my vocation, the Chief Terminal Air Traffic Controller at 19 Wing Comox, and difficult to pursue with the lack of current literature on air traffic control training. Within these research entry log-posts, my goal is to give a snapshot into my critical inquiry sojourn into this topic whilst supplying insights from particular references I am using. It is my hope through these log entries I also get help from you, the reader, to add comments to further aid me in my critical inquiry sojourn.
One of the constructive criticisms I received in Part 1 of the assignment was my overall explanation of critical inquiry. Although, I am confident in my understanding of critical inquiry, my own military ‘way of thinking’ was getting in the way. In this case, my striving to always demonstrate effective outcomes – thus, missing the importance of the process. In my Part 1 paper, I referred to my critical inquiry as a reasonable way to ‘demonstrate’ potential effectiveness, when in actuality, critical inquiry seeks to ‘interrogate’ potential effectiveness. At first glance, the diction of these particular word choices seems inconsequential; however, ‘demonstration’ often will define an outcome whereas ‘interrogation’ often will define a process. The process may in-turn lead to an outcome, but the process, hence interrogation, lends itself to the term critical inquiry more appropriately than demonstration.
It is through this interrogative lens which I must pursue my topic – with the hope to demonstrate or perhaps suggest even, an outcome to my paper’s problem being addressed. One unique reference I am currently reading is “Ghosts of the Machine,” by Owen (2017). Owen (2017) elaborates that “the title ‘Ghosts in the machine’ is used here to draw attention to how organisations comprise people who in turn shape – and are shaped by – their ways of organizing” (p. 2). As I seek to find the feasibility of online assessments within air traffic control learning environments, I must bear in mind the ‘ghosts of the machine.’ Individuals and organizations are complex and interconnected in many ways. Perhaps part of my sojourn needs to address the underlying presuppositions and/or culture within the air traffic control community in order to better understand the feasibility of online assessments?
Reference
Owen, C. (2017). Ghosts in the machine: Rethinking learning, work and culture in air traffic control. (2017). New York, NY: CRC Press. Retrieved from: https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.royalroads.ca/lib/royalroads-ebooks/reader.action?docID=4938445
May 1, 2020
Hi Mark,
I don’t have experience in ATC (Although I applied to become an ATC before attending university, then changed my mind 🙂 ) and I also don’t have experience in working in a high-risk environment. However, there should be similarities between working as an ATC and working in any position in a high-risk environment. My advice would be: try to look for literature that addresses online assessment in a high-risk environment and see if there are common threads with ATC. When I started my critical inquiry, I couldn’t;t find literature that addresses both UDL and simulation-based learning, so I started to read literature which addressed ULD in online courses, I started understating concepts that could be applied in simulations and accordingly changed my search methodology which worked for me!
I found the below resource that is not 100% relevant but I thought it might help guide your thoughts since it addresses an online component in an educational context in ATC; Assessment of the validity and intrusiveness of online-probe questions for situation awareness in a simulated air-traffic-management task with student air-traffic controllers. Again, I have no clue if this actually helps, but I thought its worth a try!
Good luck!
Reference
Bacon, L. P., & Strybel, T. Z. (2013). Assessment of the validity and intrusiveness of online-probe questions for situation awareness in a simulated air-traffic-management task with student air-traffic controllers. Safety science, 56, 89-95. Retrieved from https://www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.royalroads.ca/science/article/pii/S0925753512001762
May 1, 2020
Thanks Tala for this reference. I was very intrigued reading it, mostly due to the fact that it is very relevant in my work right now. The paper is not directly linked to my topic, however, I may even amend my topic to allow for its incorporation into my critical inquiry. The “online component” you speak about in this paper is speaking to instructors asking ‘probing inquiries’ or ‘questions’ whilst the student air traffic controller is conducting air traffic control duties in a live setting or live simulation (i.e. the simulation never stops running). The converse to this approach is ‘offline probing’ where the simulation is paused…at which time the instructor asks queries or questions. I may be speaking to the choir, but I am very excited about this paper. I even read some of the reference papers associated with its research. Thanks!
May 2, 2020
Thanks for the clarification! I’m glad it helped.
My critical inquiry is addressing debriefing in simulation-based learning while incorporating UDL into its design. Here is a resource that talks about the use of Socratic questioning in the reflection part which is a critical aspect of simulation debriefings to uncover thinking associated with actions.
Dreifuerst, K. T. (2015, May). Getting started with debriefing for meaningful learning. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 11(5), 268-275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2015.01.005.
Looking forward to seeing what conclusions you draw from your critical inquiry!
Cheers,
Tala