Virtual Training Simulations

1
Virtual Training Simulations Game-Based
Systems Large-Scale Adoption IssuesAmela
Sadagic, PhDNaval Postgraduate School, MOVES
Instituteasadagic_at_nps.edu
2
Outline

• Starting Assumptions Domain
• Diffusion of Innovation Basics
• Factors Influencing Adoption Rate
• Increasing Adoption Rate
• QA

3
Current Training Needs

• Situation that military community deals with
• changes of doctrinal teachings mission
  objectives,
• operational tempo changes dramatically,
• unsatisfactory retention rate for the serviceman
• and no performance drop-off!
• Training needs
• train large number of skills,
• train large number of people,
• train in novel ways, motivate learners,
• train in novel places under novel conditions,
• acquire new skills,
• learn do novel tasks,
• and achieve all that in a short period of time!

4
Assumption Recognized Potential in Training
Domain

• Can Sims and Game-based training systems be a
  solution?
• They will not provide a complete (only) solution,
• but most likely they will be a good part of
  that solution.
• A paradigm shift - truly and successfully
  enabling novel training practices, and achieving
  significant results, happens only when
• large majority (ideally everyone) uses those
  solutions,
• they do it methodically and consistently,
• they have those solutions available 24 / 7.

5
Caveats

• Sims and game-based systems (technology) are only
  the tools - not a goal and not a full package,
  just a segment of it.
• They are not the ultimate replacement for current
  training approaches.
• They should be employed when it is a better
  solution for a given objective - need to match
  training approaches and tools with training
  objectives.
• Efforts should be directed towards coupling of
  learning/ training objectives and goals with
  right approaches, right tools, having in mind the
  audience we deal with.

6
Definition of Problem

• Affordable solutions, substantial and continuing
  investments, fairly well recognized and
  acknowledged potential
• yet still no evidence of large scale adoption
  of technology-based solutions and their effective
  and systematic use for learning and training
  purposes.
• Large scale gt 80 users

7
Domain Talk is Not About

• Costs financial aspects
• Connectivity to the network server needs
• Acquisition procurement
• Maintenance administrative management

8
Domain Talk is About

• The phase AFTER the training system is acquired.
• Users and their community dissemination,
  adoption, deployment and use of those systems
  among intended users (both instructors and
  trainees).
• Factors influencing large scale adoption.

9
Diffusion of Innovation

• It is a technical issue AND social process.
• Innovations do NOT sell themselves.
• 5 categories of adopters
• Innovators
• Early adopters
• Early majority
• Late majority
• Laggards
• Opinion leaders - change agents - change agent
  aide

Everett M. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovation
10
Diffusion of Innovation cont.
Cummulative diffusion

• time

Everett M. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovation
11
Can We Influence This Process?
Cummulative diffusion

• time

12
Diffusion of Innovation cont.

• Mass-media channels vs interpersonal channels.
• Majority form their opinion on the basis of
  subjective evaluation of information received
  from their peers (similar socioeconomic status
  education and other values).
• Interpersonal channels most effective for
  majority adopters.
• Fastest adoption decision coming from the
  authority.
• An innovation should not be considered in
  isolation from other innovations.

Everett M. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovation
13
Factors Influencing Adoption Rate

• Relative advantage benefits over current
  solution.
• Compatibility degree of being consistent with
  current system of values.
• Complexity simpler to understand simpler to
  use.
• Trialability adoption in an incremental
  fashion.
• Observability results being visible to other
  adopters.

Everett M. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovation
14
Relative Advantage Issues

• (perceived benefits over current solution)
• Absence of full package solutions
• Black-box solution just a wishful thinking
• Lack of formal training for people who deliver
  instruction
• One time exposure only short exposure
• Timing not appropriate
• Wrong order of skill mastery
• Disconnect between the systems and (right) users
• No syllabus, no high-quality scenarios
• Not matching system capabilities and levels with
  users
• Training or fun?
• Missing training relevance (need for continuous
  updates)
• Lack of evaluation of training effectiveness
• Lack of accountability for achieved training
  results
• Motivation Checking the technology box

15
Compatibility Issues

• (degree of being consistent with current system
  of values)
• Lack of system support for After Action Review
  (AAR)
• ? Record your session, appoint the observers
  evaluators
• Do I need to forget everything I knew and did so
  far?
• ? Explore a synergy of old (known, tested)
  technologies/ methods and simulations - that mix
  may well be the best solution for given training
  objective!

16
Complexity Issues

• (simpler to understand simpler to use -gt
  adopted more rapidly)
• Do I need to be a technology expert?
• One possible solution trainees acting as
  (occasional) technical support.
• active involvement vs. being served approach
• great opportunity to learn more about technology
  - they may need those skills in very near future,
• recognition of their skills,
• instills a sense of ownership over the process,
• higher appreciation for instructors efforts,
• more forgiving when technical difficulties are
  experienced.

17
Trialability Issues

• (adoption in an incremental fashion -gt adopted
  more rapidly)
• Rigid definition of what it means to use the
  technology 100, 50 or 3 of training time?
• Should all trainees use computers or not?
• ? Consider different combinations and
  arrangements with some people using the system
  and some not using it.

18
Observability Issues

• (results being visible to other adopters -gt
  adopted more rapidly)
• Mandatory use of simulations (e.g. aviation
  ship, submarine tank navigation missile
  engagements)
• Results were substantial, tangible, clearly
  visible, with high relative advantage and
  immediate
• Optional use of simulations (e.g. tactical
  decision-making skills)
• Relative advantage visible only after a long term
  use
• ? Advertise the successes of peers in their
  community

19
Influencing Users Attitude

• This will help us reduce the number of
  instructors - hope for BIG savings,
• This system is all you will ever need,
• These systems will (should) sell themselves,
• It will be a pull process only, no need for
  push strategies,
• We will start preparing for tech. deployment
  once the training system is acquired.
• Unrealistic expectations on learning results and
  timing
• more complex more expensive solution -gt higher
  the expectations
• time to get acquainted with the system - it is a
  process
• Accountability for the skill transfer (field
  performance).

20
Increasing Adoption Rate

• Knowing the characteristics of military as a
  social system
• Introduction of mandatory deployment and use of
  simulations
• If you do, make sure there is a strong and valid
  rationale for such decision. Also, make sure it
  is accepted on ALL levels.
• Increase the number of agents of change
• Create new billets dedicated to dissemination and
  use of simulations make simulation focus be the
  main focus
• More active and changed role for simulation
  centers
• Introduce challenge programs and competitions.

21
So What?

• It is not enough (although it all matters)
• To conduct best task analysis suggest most
  effective training intervention,
• To develop training system,
• To buy such system ensure connectivity equip
  great lab/sim center.
• Yet another significant challenge starts once you
  have all that.

21
22
References

• Malcolm Gladwell (2000), The Tipping Point,
  Little, Brown and Company, 2000.
• Joseph M. Nolan and Jason M. Jones (2005), Games
  For Training Leveraging Commercial Off The Shelf
  Multiplayer Gaming Software For Infantry Squad
  Collective Training, Master Thesis , NPS.
• Baxter, Holly C., Ross, Karol G., Phillips,
  Jennifer, Shafer, Jennifer, Fowlkes, Jennifer.
  (2004). Leveraging Commercial Video Game
  Technology to Improve Military Decision Skills.
  Inter-service/Industry Training, Simulation, and
  Education Conference (I/ITSEC) 2004.
• Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Game Based Training.
  New York McGraw-Hill, 2001.
• Everett M. Rogers (1995), Diffusion of
  Innovation, The Free Press 1995.
• Amela Sadagic (2007), The Deployment and Use of
  Virtual Training Simulations What Does it Take
  to Serve the Needs of Majority Of Its Users?, New
  Learning Technologies Orlando 2007 SALT
  Conference, Orlando, FL, Jan 31 - Feb 2, 2007.

22
23
References cont.

• Amela Sadagic, Rudy Darken (2006), Combined Arms
  Training Methods and Measures for a Changing
  World, NATO workshop Virtual Media for Military
  Applications, US Military Academy, West Point,
  NY, 13-15 June 2006.
• Robert Sibley and Amela Sadagic (2003), Emerging
  Technologies as Enablers of Advanced Teaching and
  Learning Practice, National Educational Computing
  Conference - NECC 2003, Seattle WA, July 2003.
• Wayne Zachary, Robert R. Hoffman, Kelly Neville,
  Jennifer Fowlkes (2007), Human Total Cost of
  Ownership The Penny Foolish Principle at Work,
  IEEE Intelligent Systems, March/April 2007.

24
Q A
25
More on Why Use Game-Based Training Systems

• Provide rich visual and spatial representations
• Simulate rich environment with multiple sensory
  information coupled together in an organized way
  - video, audio and other stimuli in a sync
• Provide immediate feedback to learners actions
• Include the elements of storytelling and
  narration
• Enable role-playing and experimentation
• Engage user in active learning process
• Can be fun and motivate users for learning
  (training)
• Adaptable for different skill levels and learning
  styles
• Enable high level of presence (this may influence
  performance)
• Immerse users in problem-solving activities
• Enhance experiential learning
• Easy to play out a number of different situations
  (scenarios) - perfecting skills
• Exploring a number of what-ifs
• Self-selection of the level of difficulty
  ownership over the learning process