CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITYMONTEREY BAY

Military Language Instructor Trainer

CAPSTONE PROPOSAL

Submitted in partial satisfaction of requirements of the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE in

Instructional Science and Technology

Joel Christopher Simmons

September 22, 2015

Capstone Approvals: (At least one advisor and capstone instructor should approve)

___________________________ ___________________________ _____________Advisor Name Signature Date

___________________________ ___________________________ _____________Capstone Instructor Name Signature Date

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...........................................................................................................3

INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................4

Background..................................................................................................................................4

Problem Description....................................................................................................................4

Target Audience...........................................................................................................................4

Literature Review........................................................................................................................5

SOLUTION DESCRIPTION.......................................................................................................6

Goals............................................................................................................................................6

Objectives....................................................................................................................................6

Proposed Solution........................................................................................................................7

Learning Theories and Instructional Strategies...........................................................................7

Media...........................................................................................................................................9

Challenges and Constraints..........................................................................................................9

METHOD AND PROCEDURES...............................................................................................10

Preliminary Steps.......................................................................................................................10

Design and Deliverables............................................................................................................10

RESOURCES...............................................................................................................................11

TIMELINE...................................................................................................................................12

EVALUATION............................................................................................................................13

Formative Evaluation.................................................................................................................13

Summative Evaluation...............................................................................................................13

References.....................................................................................................................................14

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThere are many types of training environments in the US military, from the formal

classroom to the online eLearning course. However, due to time and financial constraints,

training is often carried out in an OJT environment. Newly assigned personnel are expected to

work side-by-side with a more experienced mentor, while learning how to perform their duties.

Occasionally, new personnel may even find themselves without a mentor when reporting to a

new job, and have to learn from job aids, training manuals, and other workplace documentation.

The trainee will likely learn how to do the job at some point due to extrinsic and intrinsic

motivations, however in both of these circumstances, the training is not standardized and rarely

efficient in terms of time and effort.

The Defense Language Institute’s (DLI) language schoolhouses encounter these same

issue in training newly assigned military staff instructors, called Military Language Instructors

(MLI). The current training process for new MLIs consists the assignment of a Job Qualification

Standard (JQS), which lists all the basic tasks in which a trainee must demonstrate competence

prior to becoming fully qualified. A mentor, when available, observes the trainee and certifies

that the trainee’s performance was satisfactory. As pointed out by a participant in the learner

survey conducted for this project, this was a ‘sink or swim’ process, which accurately

summarizes the issues with carrying out training in this manner.

The goal of this Capstone Project is to develop interactive eLearning modules to train

new MLIs in three important basic tasks they will routinely carry out in the performance of their

duties. The instructional material will be standardized and enable the learner to demonstrate

competence in the tasks after only a short amount of training. After reviewing the results of

separate SME and learner surveys, the Capstone Project will address the following three

knowledge areas and associated tasks:

Student Absence Accountability Procedures

Student Counseling Procedures

Student Academic Actions Procedures

This Capstone Project will not cover all of the basic tasks listed in the JQS that a new

MLI is expected to perform. In addition, the instructional project should not be considered an

overall solution, but perhaps an integral part of any future plans to revise or change the MLI

training process.

INTRODUCTIONBackground

Although many of the military service members selected to a tour of duty as a Military

Language Instructor (MLI) at the Defense Language Institute (DLI) have previously learned a

foreign language, their role in this academic environment requires knowledge of administrative

processes and software systems that are unique to the institution. As a mentor and teacher, the

MLI is not only expected to guide their students through learning a foreign language, but also be

very familiar with DLI rules and requirements in order to guide and advise civilian faculty

members, as well as military leadership. However, DLI does not have a formal, standardized

training program for teaching MLIs how to carry out these basic tasks.

Problem DescriptionMLI performance and knowledge items are outlined in the MLI Job Qualification

Standard (JQS). Per DLI Regulation 600-2, MLIs must complete 32 JQS core tasks no later than

180 days from assignment to a language school (US Dept of Army, 2010, p. 9). These JQS tasks

range from simply stating pertinent knowledge items to demonstrating the proper use of certain

DLI software systems. According to this regulation, an experienced MLI mentor will evaluate a

trainee’s competency of the core tasks listed on the JQS, and then certify with their initials that

the trainee has completed the task.

In reality, the MLI mentor is frequently called away for additional duties or absent due to

other reasons, leaving their trainee to learn how a core task is completed from job aids, known as

Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), and then perform the core task in an on-the-job-training

(OJT) work environment. The MLI mentor typically “signs off” on satisfactory performance of

the task without any formal, standardized evaluation process. Therefore, without an MLI

mentor’s consistent input and direction or a standardized evaluation process, an MLI trainee will

likely becomes improperly trained in their core tasks or fail to meet the 180-day qualification

deadline, as required by DLIFLC regulation.

Target AudienceApproximately 80 to 90 MLIs are assigned throughout DLI’s nine schoolhouses to

augment the civilian faculty in providing foreign language instruction, counseling, and

administrative support to military students. An MLI typically has had previous successful

4

assignments in the career field and from 5 to 15 years of military service. MLIs have excellent

foreign language skills, management expertise, and interpersonal skills. Like most people who

join the military, MLIs come from a wide variety of educational, employment, and cultural

backgrounds. MLIs tend to be very intelligent, adaptable, and willing to learn and master new

ideas and concepts. They are able to learn new technology quickly and use this technology to

complete their assigned tasks in the military linguist field. However, MLIs are likely to have

varied backgrounds when it comes to carrying out certain MLI tasks, such as student counseling,

and possess little to no previous experience with DLI administrative processes.

The average MLI is required to teach a minimum of 10 hours per week in the classroom,

and spends an additional 5 to 10 hours in lesson planning. In addition to these teaching

requirements, MLIs spend a large part of each day carrying out routine administrative tasks such

as writing and administering student counseling documents, entering absence and grade

information into DLI-specific databases, and organizing other documentation pertinent to a

student’s academic progress in the program of instruction. There is no formal, classroom training

for MLIs, and most core tasks are currently learned on-the-job or by working side-by-side with a

more experienced MLI mentor.

The proposed instructional project must provide enough flexibility for MLI trainees to

access the training material access at any given time. If the required training time for this

instructional project began to intrude on time needed for MLIs to effectively teach and lesson

plan, their motivation and desire to become more quickly qualified would likely decrease.

DLI leadership would likely welcome an instructional project that increases training

efficiency and decreases the time it takes for an MLI to demonstrate competence in the core

tasks. Most MLIs are only assigned to DLI for three to four years, with an estimated year of the

total assignment spent away from the position with other training requirements such as annual

language refresher courses, military professional education courses, and personal leave.

Literature ReviewAs there is no formal classroom training in place to train MLIs in administrative aspects

of their jobs, applicable research and studies that address learning in an OJT, particularly in a

military environment, are useful in the development of this instructional project. In their work of

transitioning an classroom training program to an OJT environment, Coleman, Collins, and Stiff

(2003) provided good examples of the role and design of instructional materials in such a

5

situation. While the DLI environment is not exactly the same as the operational environment

described in their work, Coleman et al. (2003) recommend in an OJT environment to use simple

graphics, animations, or simulations rather than complex and detailed materials. They also stress

to use focus on the training tasks instead of the instructional materials.

Also useful in this research were recommendations on how to prepare a military

workforce for a transition from the traditional training program to an OJT program. Coleman et

al. (2003) noted that their program was marketed well ahead of its implementation, with

interviews and surveys with experts supporting their goal. Similar strategies will have to be used

in changing the current paper-based MLI JQS training system.

SOLUTION DESCRIPTIONGoals

The purpose of this instructional project is to teach newly assigned MLIs three of the

most important core tasks required of their position: 1) properly input student absence data from

a Form 806 into Student Training and Administrative Tracking System (STATS); (2) properly

perform a student academic counseling session using a Form 864; and, (3) provide assistance to a

teaching team in the preparation of a Form 838 and a student actions package. These three core

tasks pertain to major student actions while in language school: absence accountability, student

academic counseling, and student academic actions. Although there are more core tasks listed in

the MLI JQS, the tasks covered in this instructional project are among the most important for the

MLI to perform accurately and in a timely manner.

ObjectivesThe learning objectives of this instructional project are:

Objective 1: Given a completed Form 806, the MLI trainee will use STATS to select

student name and class, and input absence date and code.

Objective 2: Conduct a mock counseling addressing student requirements while in the

specified academic status, criteria of exiting the academic status, student questions or

concerns, and properly document the counseling on Form 864.

Objective 3: Review a Form 838 student actions package to ensure completeness and that

established timeline requirements are met, according to DLI regulation.

6

Proposed SolutionAn interactive, self-paced approach to the instructional material will best satisfy learner

needs. As the MLI trainee will normally already be assigned to the job prior to receiving any

formal training, the instructional project will be designed to support learning in an OJT

environment, with a focus on the training tasks rather than the instructional materials (Coleman,

Collins, & Stiff, 2003).

MLI trainees gain motivation to completing the training in that they are demonstrating

how to perform the core tasks on the way to achieving final designation as an MLI. Provided the

training can be delivered in an expedient and concise manner, MLIs will also gain confidence in

their daily work as they see a direct transfer from what they learned from the instructional project

to real-life situations.

Learning Theories and Instructional StrategiesThe intended target audience of this instructional project lends itself to the application of

the principles of Malcolm Knowles’ adult learning theory, or Andragogy. In particular, the

instructional project will be designed in accordance with Knowles’ assumptions of adult learners

(Pappas, 2014):

Self-Concept: Learners should be able to explore each lesson topic on their own.

Adult Learner Experience: Content should appeal to learners’ varied experience levels

and backgrounds.

Readiness to Learn: Adults become ready to learn things they need to know and do in

order to cope with real-life situations; design content so adults can apply what they

learned in the present.

Orientation to Learning: Offer real world scenarios and examples so that learners know

that the subject matter is going to help them to solve problems immediately.

Motivation to Learn: Motivate adult learners by offering the reasons for completing the

eLearning module – achieve final qualification, better assist their civilian instructors,

better guide and mentor their students, etc.

In addition, Gagne’s nine instructional events and their corresponding cognitive

processes will be useful in order to achieve learning outcomes with this instructional project,

therefore the instructional modules will be structured to include these events:

1. Gain attention

7

2. Inform learners of objectives

3. Stimulate recall of prior learning

4. Present the content

5. Provide “learning guidance”

6. Elicit performance (practice)

7. Provide feedback

8. Assess performance

9. Enhance retention and transfer to the job

Another strategy of Gagne’s that will be used in the design of this instructional project is

the analysis of the performance objectives and breaking these down into subordinate tasks.

According to Gagne (1962), breaking down the objective into component tasks and then

arranging the learning situation in a sequence ensures positive transfer from one task to the next

and achievement of the learning outcome. Construction of a learning hierarchy through a

learning task analysis forms the foundation of instructional systems design models such as the

Dick and Carey model.

For such a diverse group as MLIs, a particular focus has to be placed on the design of

instructional project to accommodate three important factors identified by both Gagne and

Knowles: individual differences, readiness, and motivation (Gredler, 2009). Individual

differences among students include their entry capabilities. This is one particular area that the

current JQS training process does not take into account, as its structure assumes that all new

MLIs bring exactly the same skills and capabilities to DLI. For example, one current MLI core

task is simply written as “conduct disciplinary counseling as necessary”. Beyond the number of

subtasks that could be identified in making up this performance objective, the entry capability of

carrying out a counseling session will likely vary greatly among new MLIs. Therefore, effective

instruction would include an assessment of this capability prior to learning the objective of

“conduct counseling”, so that the MLI could begin training in order at a suitable point.

Related to student entry capabilities is readiness for learning, which is defined by Gagne

as the availability of essential prerequisite capabilities to include lower skills in hierarchy of

intellectual skills and essential rules and concepts in procedures (Gredler, 2009). An example of

this concept in the current training program can be seen in analysis of the MLI core task

“demonstrate the ability to use STATS and input student data”. If the MLI trainee lacks the

8

ability to use a particular piece of software, in this case Microsoft Access, or has little experience

and is uncomfortable using a computer, then there is no readiness to learn higher level skills such

as “input student data”.

Perhaps one of the more important factors that influence the effectiveness of training is

the student’s motivation to learn. New MLIs will typically possess motivation to succeed, as they

were selected to the position from among their peers. Furthermore, there is motivation to achieve

full qualification as MLI and be viewed by their peers and the civilian faculty as competent in

the position. The vast majority of new MLIs will possess these motivations upon assignment to

their schoolhouses. A likely de-motivating factor in the current training program is that the new

MLI is handed a paper-based JQS with over 60 numbered tasks and simply instructed to

complete it within 180 days, with no other formal training process other than OJT with an MLI

mentor and written job aids. Therefore, this instructional project will incorporate various types of

motivation for the new MLI to complete training in the core tasks as efficiently and quickly as

possible.

MediaModules within the instructional project will be broken down into self-paced lessons,

with each containing introductory videos, ‘Show Me’ and ‘Try Me’ demonstrations for software

applications and relevant forms, and links to references and pertinent regulations. All media will

be incorporated into the instructional project with Adobe Captivate using HTML 5 and Flash, as

well as Camtasia studio for other desktop applications necessary for the given task.

All media should be compliant on both MacOS and Windows 7 platforms and web

browsers, as DLI-issued MacBook laptops provided to all new MLIs have dual-boot operating

system capability. However, a vast majority of learners surveyed preferred using Windows 7,

therefore, the project’s formative and summative evaluations will be conducted on this platform.

Challenges and ConstraintsThere are several constraints on the instructional project to consider. Some DLI and

language school leadership may see little reason to switch from the paper-based, MLI mentor-

protégé, method of training the MLI core tasks to a computer-based training module. This

perception among the SMEs was shown in the stakeholder survey conducted prior to project

development. Another challenge will be developing training material that is applicable across all

of the DLI language schoolhouses in such a short time period. While the core tasks are the same

9

for all MLIs, each language schoolhouse may have slight variations in the process of carrying out

the core task. Therefore, during task analysis, particular attention must be paid that the objective

and subordinate tasks are broad enough to be common across DLI.

In addition, SME and MLI expectations that the instructional project will be an overall

solution to the training gap will have to be managed. After completion of summative evaluation,

the instructional project would likely have to be further developed and refined, and perhaps

considered as part of a complete revision of the MLI training process. SMEs have also said that

they would prefer a training solution that can track the progress of MLI trainees. DLI currently

uses Sakai as an LMS, but its capabilities to host the instructional project and provide training

tracking are outside the scope of this project.

METHOD AND PROCEDURESPreliminary Steps

A stakeholders meeting with the MLI Management Office (MLIMO) and SMEs has

already taken place to introduce the goals and scope of the instructional project and solicit future

support for needs/learner assessment surveys, as well as formative and summative evaluations.

SME and learner surveys have been completed to identify the training gap, learner entry skills

and backgrounds, and the content areas for the three learning modules to be developed for the

instructional project.

One learning module has already been completed in previous coursework, and the

module’s content was identified in the learner survey as an MLI task that would be most

important to learn first. The learning module will only need some revision and minor editing

prior to the formative evaluation stage.

Design and DeliverablesDick and Carey’s instructional systems design model will be followed for this

instructional project. Modules and lessons will correspond to the performance objectives and

subordinate tasks identified through instructional analysis of the MLI core tasks of proper input

of absence accountability information into DLI computer applications, conducting student

counseling, and reviewing student academic action packages.

Through the identification of subordinate skills and performance objectives, appropriate

module and lesson assessment items will be developed. Next, Knowles’ five assumptions of

10

adult learners and Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction will be applied to the content of each

lesson within the module, with content design taken from storyboards and scripts.

Instructional materials are for the most part already available and easily adapted to the

design of the project. Some material will have to be developed to teach new subordinate tasks

identified after instructional analysis. Formative and summative evaluation will take place within

the project, with responses recorded using pre- and post-training surveys using Google Forms.

The steps to complete the project as currently identified are:

1) Conduct needs assessment with DLI MLIMO and SMEs to identify the training gap

2) Conduct learner survey with MLIs for needs/learner analysis

3) Conduct goal and task analysis

4) Develop instructional content, assessment items, and evaluation items

5) Develop instructional materials

6) Conduct formative evaluation with SMEs and MLIs

7) Revise instruction materials

8) Conduct summative evaluation with MLI test group

RESOURCESAs the instructional project will be designed to be a self-paced interactive learning

module, there is no need for a dedicated trainer or training space. Basic instructional materials

can be readily gathered from DLI regulations and SOPs, which are currently used by MLIs.

Additional content, such as related video and images, will have to be developed to correspond to

the learner-centered, self-paced design of the instructional project.

Costs would be minimal with only purchasing of Adobe Captivate for design and

publishing of the interactive learning module. MLIs are already issued MacBook laptops, which

they can use to access the instructional project and surveys hosted on Google Forms and

CSUMB’s ITCDLand. In order to support the MLIMO and SME desires to track MLI training

status, the instructional project will adhere to SCORM standards in order to be integrated into

DLI’s Sakai LMS in the future.

Technical skills required to complete the project will mainly be in Adobe Captivate

interactive learning module design and development, especially in development of “Try Me”

scenarios for new MLIs to practice what they previously learned.

11

TIMELINE

The table below lists the preliminary major milestones and projected timeline for

development of a MLI Trainer proof-of-concept.

Milestones Deliverables Est. Due Date

Phase 1 – Planning and Analysis

X 1.1 Finalize project proposal Project idea final draft 12/17/2013

X 1.2 SME survey to identify proposed gap Brief project

outline/general scope SME survey

9/9/2015

X 1.3 Learner and environment analysis Learner survey Learner needs assessment 9/18/2015

X 1.4 Refine task analysis and objective statements --- 9/19/2015

1.5 Submit to project advisor (Phase 1 overview) Capstone Proposal 9/29/2015

Phase 2 – Design/Development/Evaluation

2.1 Design and develop MLI Trainer Learning Modules Module Scripts Module Storyboards MLI Trainer v 0.1

10/12/2015

2.2 Implement Formative Evaluation Usability Test MLI Trainer v 0.2 10/13/2015

2.3 Meet with project advisor (Phase 3 overview) Capstone Project Check 10/27/2015

Phase 3 – Summative Evaluation

3.1 Implement Summative Evaluation Evaluation Participant List 11/18/2015

3.2 Meet with project advisor (Phase 4 overview) Revise deliverables Revise Presentation

11/24/2015

3.3 Present project Project Presentation 12/18/2015

EVALUATIONFormative Evaluation

A formative evaluation will be conducted with the approximately 9 to 10 SMEs in the

language schoolhouses – the MLI Management Office leadership and the Chief MLIs. Results

12

from the formative evaluation will be gathered using Google Form surveys, and if necessary,

interviews with the testers.

The data collected from the formative evaluation will provide feedback and user input on

the following:

Content Information: Completeness, accuracy, and proper scope of content.

Implementation Information: Ease of use and fit in learning environment.

Technical Information: video/narration quality, media appropriateness, usability issues

Summative EvaluationFor the summative evaluation, MLIs who have been assigned to their respective

schoolhouses for ideally less than a month will be selected to participate in the testing group. A

pre-test will be conducted using Google Forms survey to determine the learner’s knowledge and

competency of the three MLI core tasks. Learners will take a post-test that contains similar

questions to the pre-test so that it can be determined if learning occurred upon completion of the

modules.

13

ReferencesColeman, S., Collins, J., & Stiff, D. (2003). Transitioning learning from brick and mortar to OJT.

Performance Improvement, 42(9), 26-32.

Gagne, R. (1962). Military training and principles of learning. American Psychologist,17(2), 83-

91.

Gredler, M. E. (2009). Learning and instruction: Theory into practice. Upper Saddle River, N.J:

Merrill Pearson.

Pappas, C. (2014). 9 tips to apply adult learning theory to eLearning. eLearning Retrieved from

http://elearningindustry.com/9-tips-apply-adult-learning-theory-to-elearning

U.S. Department of the Army (2010). Management of the military language instructor program.

(DLIFLC Regulation 600-2). Presidio of Monterey, CA: Headquarters, Defense

Language Institute Foreign Language Center.