With respect to team training, traditional instructional design (ID) guidelines, mainly aimed at training at the individual level, seem to be insufficient given the different nature and characteristics of teams and team performance. In order to provide adequate support, guidelines have been developed supporting the analysis of team tasks. The aim of this quasi-experiment was to measure the effect of two versions of guidelines on the quality of the ID process. This was achieved by combining several methods of data collection and qualitative analysis. This paper discusses an approach to the empirical validation of the ID guidelines and the implications for further research on ID for team training.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ChaseW.G.SimonH. A. (1983). The mind's eye in dress. In ChaseW.G. (Ed.), Visual Information Processing (pp. 215–218). New York: Academic Press.
2.
ElenJ. (1995). Blocks on the Road to Instructional Design Prescriptions: A Methodology for I.D.-Research Exemplified. Studia Paedagogica. Leuven University Press.
3.
GoelV.PirolliP. (1992). The structure of design problem spaces. Cognitive Science, 16, 395–429.
4.
GreenoJ.G.KorpiM.K.JacksonD.N.IIIMichalchikV.S. (1990). Processes and Knowledge in Designing Instruction. Internal report. Stanford University.
5.
Le MaistreC. (1998). What is an expert instructional designer? Evidence of expert performance during formative evaluation. ETR&D, 46(3), 21–36.
6.
MerkelbachE.J.H.M.SchraagenJ.M.C. (1994). A Framework for the Analysis of Cognitive Tasks (Report TM-94-B013). Soesterberg, The Netherlands: TNO Human Factors.
7.
NATO RSG 14 (1992). Panel 8 on the Defence Applications of Human and Bio-Medical Sciences. RSG 14 on Analysis Techniques for Man-Machine Systems Design. Technical Report AC/243 (Panel 8) TR/7, Vol. 2.
8.
PerezR.S.JohnsonFleming J.EmeryCD. (1995). Instructional Design Expertise: A Cognitive Model of Design. Instructional Science, 23, 321–349.
9.
RaskerP.C., (2002). Communication and Performance in Teams (Thesis). Wageningen, The Netherlands: Ponsen & Looijen BV.
10.
RowlandG. (1992). What Do Instructional Designers Actually Do? An Initial Investigation of Expert Practice. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 5(2), 65–86.
11.
SalasE.Cannon-BowersJ. A. (1997). Methods, Tools, and Strategies for Team Training. In QuinonesM.A.EheensteinA. (Eds.), Training for a rapidly changing workplace: Applications of Psychological Research. Washington, DC: APA Press.
12.
SchraagenJ.M.C. (1994). The generality and specificity of expertise. Thesis. University of Amsterdam.
13.
Van BerloM.P.W. (1999). Guidelines Supporting the Analysis of Team Tasks and the Design of Team Training Scenarios (Report TM-99-B002). Soesterberg, The Netherlands: TNO Human Factors.
14.
WeaverJ.L.MorganB.B.JrHallJ. (1993). Team Decision Making in the Command Information Center: Development of a Low-Fidelity Team Decision Making Task for Assessing the Effects of Teamwork Stressors (Draft technical Report). Orlando: University of Central Florida.
