A research program is presented in which computer assisted instructional (CAI) based delivery systems were compared with other training media to determine the extent to which instruction delivered via these methods affects performance on electromechanical maintenance tasks. Summaries of two preliminary studies are presented and a third study is discussed in greater detail. In the latter study opportunity for hands-on practice, access to job aids, and instructional delivery system parameters were manipulated. Performance was measured immediately following training and again after a one-week interval. Both handson practice of the maintenance activity and access to job aids during training were found to significantly improve maintenance performance. However, no differences in performance of procedural maintenance tasks were found among students who were trained using CAI-based as opposed to other lower technology-based instructional delivery systems.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allen, J., Hays, R. T., and Buffardi, L. C. (1986). Maintenance training simulator fidelity and individual differences in transfer of training. Human Factors, 28, 497–509.
2.
Ayers, A., Hays, R. T., Singer, M. J., and Heinicke, M. (1984). An annotated bibliography of abstracts on the use of simulators in technical training (ARI Research Product 84–21). Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute.
3.
Bok, D. (1985, May–June). Looking into education's hightech future. Harvard Magazine, 29–38.
4.
Clark, R. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53, 445–459.
5.
Clark, R., and Salomon, G. (1986). Media in teaching. In Mc. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 464–478). New York: Macmillan.
6.
Eberts, R., and Brock, J. (1987). Computer-assisted and computer-managed instruction. In G. Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook of human factors (pp. 976–1011). New York: Wiley.
7.
Elliott, T. K., and Joyce, R. P. (1971). An experimental evaluation of a method for simplifying electronic maintenance. Human Factors, 13, 217–227.
8.
Gagné, R. M., and Dick, W. (1983). Instructional psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 34, 261–295.
9.
Goldstein, I. L. (1986). Training in organizations: Needs assessment, development and evaluation.Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cale.
10.
Hall, E. R., and Freda, J. S. (1982). A comparison of individualized and conventional instruction in Navy technical training (Tech. Report 117). Orlando, FL: Training Analysis Evaluation Group.
11.
Holmgren, J., Hilligoss, R., Swezey, R., and Eakins, R. (1979). Training effectiveness and retention of training extension course (TEC) instruction in the Combat Arms (Research Report 1208). Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute.
12.
Johnson, W., and Rouse, W. (1982). Training maintenance technicians for troubleshooting: Two experiments with computer simulations. Human Factors, 24, 271–276.
13.
Kopstein, F., and Seidel, R. J. (1967). Comment on Schurdak's “An approach to the use of computers in the instructional process and an evaluation.”American Education Research Journal, 4, 415–416.
14.
Kulick, J. A., Kulick, C. L., and Cohen, P. A. (1980). Effectiveness of computer-based college teaching: A meta analysis of findings. Review of Educational Research, 50, 525–544.
Mirabella, A., and Wheaton, G. R. (1974). Effects of task index variations on transfer of training criteria (Tech. Report 72-C-0126-1). Orlando, FL: Naval Training Equipment Center.
17.
Montague, W. E., and Wulfeck, W. H. (1984). Computerbased instruction: Will it improve instructional quality?Training Technology Journal, 1, 4–19.
18.
Montague, W. D., Wulfeck, W. H., and Ellis, J. A. (1983). Quality CBI depends on quality instructional design and quality implementation. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 10, 90–93.
19.
Morris, N., and Rouse, W. B. (1985). Review and evaluation of empirical research in troubleshooting. Human Factors, 27, 503–530.
20.
Orlansky, J., and String, J. (1977). Cost effectiveness of computer-based instruction in military training (IDA Paper P-1375). Arlington, VA: Institute for Defense Analysis.
21.
Orlansky, J., and String, J. (1981). Cost effectiveness of maintenance simulators for military training (IDA Paper P-1568). Arlington. VA: Institute for Defense Analysis.
22.
Pieper, W. S., Swezey, R. W., and Valverde, H. (1970). Leamer-centered instruction (LC1): Volume VII. Evaluation of the LCI approach (Tech. Report AFHRL-TR-70-1). Wright-Patterson AFB, OH: Air Force Human Resources Laboratory.
23.
Pintrich, P. R., Cross, D. R., Kozman, R. B., and McKeachie, W. J. (1986). Instructional psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 37, 611–651.
24.
Rifkin, K., and Everhart, M. C. (1971). Position performance and development.Valencia, PA: Applied Science Associates.
25.
Salomon, G., and Clark, R. E. (1977). Reexamining the methodology of research on media and technology in education. Review of Educational Research, 47, 99–120.
26.
Schlecter, T. M. (1986). An examination of the research evidence for computer-based instrUction in military training (Tech. Report 722). Ft. Knox, KY: U.S. Army Research Institute.
27.
Smillie, R. J. (1985). Design strategies for job performance aids. In T. M. Duffy and R. Waller (Eds.), Designing usable text (pp. 969–977). New York: Academic Press.
28.
Streufert, S., and Swezey, R. W. (1986). Complexity, managers and organizations. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
29.
Swezey, R. W. (1978). Comparative evaluation of an advanced Naval engineering maintenance training program (Tech. Report NAVTRAEQUIPCEN 77-C-0150). Orlando, FL: Naval Training Equipment Center.
30.
Swezey, R. W. (1986). Issues in transfer of training research. In American Psychological Assn., Issues in psychological research and application in transfer of training (pp. 63–68). Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute.
31.
Swezey, R. W. (1987). Design of job aids and procedure writing. In G. Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook of human factors (pp. 1039–1057). New York: Wiley.
32.
Swezey, R. W., Criswell, E., Huggins, R. S., Hays, R., and Allen, J. (1985). Training effects of hands-on practice and three instrUctional methods on a simple procedural task (Tech. Report SAIC-85-01-178). McLean, VA: Science Applications International.
33.
Swezey, R. W., Huggins, R. S., Allen, J. A., and Perez, R. (1986). Interactive effects of job aids, instructional delivery system and hands-on practice on a procedural maintenance task (Tech. Report SAIC-86-01-178). McLean, VA: Science Applications International.
34.
Swezey, R. W., Huggins, R. S., and Perez, R. (1985). Effects of three instructional delivery methods and hands-on practice On a procedural maintenance task (Tech. Report SAIC-85-03-178). McLean, VA: Science Applications International.
35.
Unger, K., Swezey, R. W., Hays, R., and Mirabella, A. (1984a). Army maintenance training and evaluation simulation system (AMTESS) device evaluation: Volume 1. Overview of the study effort (Tech. Report 642). Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute.
36.
Unger, K., Swezey, R. W., Hays, R., and Mirabella, A. (1984b). Army maintenance training and evaluation simulation system (AMTESS) device evaluation: Volume II. Transfer of training assessment of two prototype devices (Tech. Report 643). Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute.
37.
Unger, K., Swezey, R. W., Hays, R., and Mirabella, A. (1984c). Army maintenance training and evaluation simulation system (AMTESS) device evaluation: Volume III. Qualitative evaluation of two prototype devices (Tech. Report 644). Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute.
