App a. Initial Measures for Instructors in Outcomes Based Training & Education

8/12/2019 App a. Initial Measures for Instructors in Outcomes Based Training & Education

1/56

Riccio, G., & Diedrich, F. (2010). OBTE Principles and Practices: Instructor Measures. In: Riccio, G., Diedrich, F., & Cortes, M. (Eds.).An

Initiative in Outcomes-Based Training and Education: Implications for an Integrated Approach to Values-Based Requirements (Appendix A).

Fort Meade, MD: U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group. [Cover art by Wordle.net represents word frequency in text.]


2/56


3/56

Appendix A: Instructor Measures 272

Asymmetric Warfare Group

A.2 Principles of Outcomes-Based Training & Education

We use Bransford, Brown, & Cocking (2000) as a framework within which to organize and

describe the multidisciplinary considerations implicit in the set of formative measures for OBTE

(Chapters 2 and 3). This framework addresses learner-centered, knowledge-centered, and

assessment-centered needs of a learning environment that are grounded in a deep understanding

of community-centered needs (Figure 1). Bransford et al. argue that learning systems will bemore effective to the extent that they meet these needs. We believe that this framework facilitates

understanding of the capability gaps to which OBTE is a response as well as the way in which it

addresses those gaps.

Figure 1. Needs for design of a learning environment that is effective with respect tohuman development and far transfer [after Bransford et al., 2000].


4/56

273 Riccio & Diedrich (Eds.)


Table 1: Needs of the learning environment in OBTE

Leadership and enculturation of Soldiers

Inculcation of Warrior Ethos and Army Values Instructor is a leader, facilitator, advisor, mentor, and role model Instructor gives purpose & vision, allows passion & risk, fosters growth

What is taught and how it is taught reflects necessity of Full Spectrum Operations Community-centered learning environment

Integrated understanding of basic Soldier skills in Full Spectrum Operations

Condition Soldiers to overcome the psychological and physiological effects of combat Condition Soldiers always to exercise deliberate thought under stress Demonstrate the linking of tasks in a military situation Understand relationships between what is taught and why, when, and how it is taught Knowledge-centered learning environment

Collaborative reflection and problem solving

Training to grow problem solving Teach Soldiers to learn for themselves within an established framework of knowledge

Teach through contextual understanding of the task such as its mission application Draw out of the Soldier a critique of performance during the process Assessment-centered learning environment

Soldier motivation and development of intangibles

Training to develop intangibles such as confidence, initiative, and accountability. Assist the Soldier to understand the situation and desired result Assist the Soldier in identifying obstacles to the desired result Allow the Soldier to work towards a solution within defined principles Learner-centered learning environment

A.2.1 Leadership and enculturation of Soldiers

What can be done to develop curricula and courses that improve the quality of life-long learningand development such as in an operational context where significant and critical learning occurs?

One answer to this question follows from the realization that a collective, not an individual, is the

most fundamental unit of analysis in the Army. The goal should not necessarily be to wean

Soldier-students from guidance so that they are competent on their own when they leave formal

instruction. It should be to make them more competent at eliciting, utilizing, and providingguidance within a task-organized unit.Task organization and division of labor in the Army bothrequires and provides opportunities for momentary leadership that is not necessarily formal as

designated by rank, position or specialty. Leadership and guidance that individuals provide to

each other is not limited to formal learning events. Learning events can be designed to develop

this competency in individuals and thus to prepare Soldiers for success in Full Spectrum

Operations.

Given that there is an abundance of Soldiers with recent and relevant experience in Full Spectrum

Operations, how can we determine what kind of experience is useful in the classroom? OBTE

assumes that the most valuable experience is in the development of individuals. The outcomes

emphasized by OBTE are long-term developmental trajectories and milestones more commonlyassociated with leader development. In this sense, OBTE essentially is a leadership-based

approach to training, education, and self-development. OBTE is based on the recognition that


5/56



competent confident Soldiers are developed when leaders allow subordinates reasonable

autonomy to exercise individual and small-unit initiative. This requires a climate of

accountability that is fostered by mutual trust among superiors and subordinates. It also requires

that leaders at every level recognize their influence as role models by thinking and acting flexibly

based on constant awareness and adjustment to deviations from optimal or expected conditions in

any situation. We tend to interpret this need in terms of its implications for establishing a

community-centered learning environment.

A.2.2 Integrated understanding of basic Soldier skills in Full Spectrum Operations

OBTE emphasizes that instruction is most effective when it reflects and responds to the most

urgent requirements of Full Spectrum Operations. These requirements are considered in terms of

basic Soldier skills such as move, shoot, and communicate but at a layer or two deeper than what

those words commonly connote. These operational requirements can be addressed at a level that

relates to individual adaptability and collective agility and that addresses the why, what, when,

where, and how of actions that can have irrevocable consequences. Thus, they can be addressed at

a level that benefits all Soldiers and their units.

Many of these requirements address stress, psychological and physiological effects of stress,performance given these effects, and strategies that are resistant to stress. Experience with these

relationships and effects across disparate learning events helps a Soldier overcome stress by

avoiding distraction, maintaining an outward orientation, and always exercising deliberate

thought. It helps students make sense of the relationships between what is taught and why, when,and how it is taught. It provides them with a path toward ever deepening understanding of their

capabilities in context. We tend to interpret this need in terms of its implications for establishing a

knowledge-centered learning environment.

A.2.3 Collaborative reflection and problem solving

OBTE seeks to establish a mindset of collaborative reflection and problem solving in which there

is continuous vigilance for noteworthy events and lessons learned worth discussing amonginstructors, students, and peers. Development of mastery in assessing oneself and ones unit is a

key outcome for OBTE. It is important to understand that collaborative reflection is a ubiquitousopportunity that exists in any program of instruction. It can be done on an as-needed basis when

the lessons learned justify the investment of time and resources. It can exploit naturally occurring

events and utilize whatever method is appropriate at the time, such as after action reviews, hot

washes, and informal conversation. This does not mean that constant discussion is a goal of

OBTE or that the mere occurrence of discussion is a reflection that OBTE is occurring. It is asimportant to decide not to engage in collaborative reflection if there has not been a noteworthy

event or if there is a more valuable use of time for learning. This mindset, then, also continually

reinforces the importance of prioritization and tradeoffs required in most military scenarios.

If a decision is made to engage in collaborative reflection (e.g., to execute a planned after-actionreview), the discussion should be conducted in an open and supportive manner regarding lessons

learned. The purpose is not to summarize merely what happened in the learning event but to

facilitate a discussion that allows students to evaluate their own performance in terms of the

consequences of their actions for the rest of the team and with respect to other linked tasks.

Collective self-examination leads to an understanding in which the whole is greater than the sum

of the parts. We tend to interpret this need in terms of its implications for establishing an

assessment-centered learning environment.


6/56



A.2.4 Soldier motivation and development of intangibles

OBTE occurs when instructors make principled decisions about when and how to adapt the

instructional environment to achieve a positive outcome; that is when they exemplify leadership.

Such adaptation includes utilization of whatever instructional methods are appropriate for the

problem at hand, whether that is direct instruction, problem-centered instruction, or experiential

learning for example. The strategy is to provide learners with right amount of guidance at theright time to achieve both the learning objective for the event and longer-term developmental

outcomes such as the growth of confidence, initiative and accountability. Even in situations in

which students do a "worked example" or solve a well-defined problem given by the instructor, it

is beneficial to the student to understand that the assumptions of the given problem are valid and

why the assumptions are necessary, even if they aren't ready to be thrown into a situation in

which assumptions are violated. This allows them to become ready, to become prepared, to be

thrown into such a situation. The foundation for collective agility is thus reinforced in all training

and educational situations, even ones that ostensibly do not require individual adaptability.

The intent is to leverage internal motivation and to internalize sources of motivation by balancinginitiative with a sense of accountability based on discipline and awareness of ones relationship to

others, and by building confidence based on enhanced self-efficacy and commitment to thepursuit of mastery. We tend to interpret this need in terms of its implications for establishing a

learner-centered environment for training and education.


7/56



A.3 Guide to Using Measures of Instructor Behavior

Table 2 is a guide intended primarily for novices in the use of instructor measures for OBTE. The

example after the table demonstrates how the table can be used to select measures from Table 3.

Table 2. Mapping between the needs of the learning environment

in OBTE and the categories of observable instructor behavior.Usage is as follows: (a) start with planning, execution, or AAR; (b)

select a need or a behavioral category; (c) choose a row that maps

to one of the four columns or a column that maps to one of thebehavioral categories; (d) if undecided, use cells with higher

number for guidance to go between rows and columns. Each cell

generally will lead to between five and nine measures from which to

choose. Note that, while the priorities below are helpful for novice

users, each measure is relevant to all columns to some degree. 1.Leadership

2.PreparedforFSO

3.ProblemSolving

4.DevelopIntangibles

Before Learning Event (Planning)

(1) Robust and adaptable plan for instructional events 3 1 8 measures

(2) Consider how to reveal task relevance of instructional events 1 3 1 1 5 measures(3) Focus on development of the individual 1 1 2 3 9 measures

During Learning Event (Execution)

(4) Instructors are role models 3 2 1 6 measures

(5) Reveal multifaceted operational-relevance of events 1 3 2 7 measures

(6) Incorporate stress into instructional events 2 1 1 6 measures

(7) Facilitate communication and collaborative problem-solving 2 1 6 measures

(8) Nature and extent of guidance provided by instructor 1 3 2 7 measures

(9) Get students to take ownership of their own learning 1 1 3 8 measures

After Learning Event (AAR)(10) Identify general lessons and extrapolate to new situations 3 2 2 measures

(11) Establish a pervasive mindset of collaborative reflection 1 2 3 2 measures

(12) Collaborative reflection as a means to develop self efficacy 2 3 5 measures


8/56



Example: Choose "problem solving" (column 3) for instructional focus in an upcoming learning

event

1. Before learning event (planning)a. Not sure what to do, so choose cell in the focus on development of individual row

over low ranked rows in column 3

b. Go to table of individual measures for "focus on development of the individual"c. Nine measures to choose from, some of which seem better than others for problem

solving

d. Choose measure 3.7 because of interest in getting students to begin learning on theirown

e. Consider a few additional measures so instructional focus is not too narrowf. Choose another column such as "develop intangibles" (column 4) because of

relevance to current interest

g. Could look into another behavior category but stay with focus on development ofindividuals because many measures seem relevant

h. Choose measure 3.6 because transfer of ownership seems to be another importantdeterminant of student beginning to learn on their own

i. Go to another behavior category to keep instructional focus from being too narrowj. Choose Consider how to reveal task relevance of instructional events row to keep

focus on individual development

k. Five measures to choose from but can't make good pedagogical connection, so scannearby cells

l. Measure 2.2 catches the eye because of inkling that task organization may be a goodway to transfer ownership

m. The two behavior categories and two columns provide some useful constraints tofocus planning for upcoming event

n. Planning can be assessed with respect to the three measures chosen: 2.2, 3.6, and 3.7o. That wasn't so hard, it didn't take much time, and probably saved time that would

have been wasted amid uncertainty

p. There is greater confidence in the value of the planned learning event and outcomes itcan influence

2. During learning event (execution)a. Some but not all measures should be chosen before execution to focus attention of

observers or participants

b. Now that there is a focus for the learning event, nature and extent of guidanceprovided by instructor looks like a logical behavior category to use

c. There are seven measures to choose fromd. Both measure 8.1 and 8.6 look pretty interesting and pedagogically relevante. Choose 8.1 because explaining the why of task organization looks like a good way to

draw students into participation

f. There is a gist of adapting to the students in several other measures so needs for

adaptation would be good to look forg. Instructor can self assess or be assessed by others with respect to measures such as

8.2 to 8.5

h. Collaborative reflection can occur in stride, one need not wait until a formal AAR touse measures

3. After learning eventa. Some but not all measures should be chosen before the learning event to ensure that

there is a clear plan for the AAR


9/56



b. Measure 11.2 foster an environment that allows Soldiers to discuss their mistakesand consequences might be a good one to discuss immediately after the attempt to

utilize task organization

c. Measure 11.2 can be revisited in the formal AAR perhaps by way of elaborationusing measure 10.2 relationship between the individual and big picture/mission

d. There was a lot that could have been attended to and discussed but the focus made

the situation manageablee. The issues that could have been addressed during or after the learning event can help

in designing the next event

f. There is a growing sense of confidence in a systematic approach to teaching andlearning across learning events

g. Accountability within respect to a system of measures reveals opportunities andpurpose in variable conditions

h. There is growing understanding that initiative can build on lessons learned andprogress in prior learning events

i. There is growing understanding and confidence that describable initiative can leadone into the knowable unknown


10/56



A.4 Complete Menu of Instructor Measures

Table 3. Menu of formative measures for instructors used before a learning event (planning).Measuresare listed in the order in which they are presented in the following pages. The number in the leftmost columnsindicates the reference code for each measure. The numbers in the cells corresponding to the needs of the

learning environment (rightmost four columns) indicate the relative extent to which each measure reflects theneeds of the learning environment. Higher numbers indicate a stronger relationship. 1.L

eadership

2.Prep

aredforFSO

3.ProblemSolving


1 Robust and adaptable plan for instructional events

1.1 Does instructor plan collective decision/evaluation pointsduring learning? 3 1 2

1.2 Does instructor design/plan the learning event to be flexible depending on conditions of instruction? 2 1 3

1.3 Does instructor adapt outcome expectations to account for environmental conditions? 3 1 2

1.4 Does instructor adapt outcome expectations to account for Soldiers who learn slower or faster? 3 2 1

1.5 Does instructor adapt outcome expectations to account for limited resources? 3 1 2

1.6 Does instructor adapt outcome expectations to account for unsupportive command climate? 3 2 1

1.7 Does instructor plan for maximizing learning opportunities under less than perfect conditions? 3 2 1

1.8 Does instructor identify andprovisioninformation resources necessary to support learning objectives? 2 1 3

2 Consider how to reveal task relevance of instructional events

2.1 Is learning event designed to emphasize the importance of combat applications? 3 2 1

2.2 Does instructor plan totask organize the Soldiers and themselves to facilitate learning? 1 2 3

2.3 Does instructorplan to discuss the tactical relevanceof the task with the Soldiers? 2 1 3

2.4 Does instructor build time for discussion of tactical relevanceinto the schedule? 3 2 1

2.5 Will instructor ask the Soldiersto describe the tactical relevance of the events? 2 3 1

3 Focus on development of the individual

3.1 Is learning event designed to develop intangibles? 2 1 3

3.2 Do measures of effectivenessrelate learning event to the development of intangibles? 1 3 2

3.3 Does Commander's intent focus on effective learningof task and development of the individual? 1 3 2

3.4 Does instructor incorporate development of intangibles into visionfor achieving CDR intent? 2 1 3

3.5 Does instructor plan to scale down from authoritarian style to mentoring leadership style? 2 1 3

3.6 Does instructor plan to transfer ownershipof learning to the Soldiers? 2 1 3

3.7 Does instructor structure the learning events to allow Soldiers to learn for themselves? 1 3 2

3.8 Does instructor actively participate in creating apositive learning environment? 3 1 2

3.9 Does instructor design the learning events to gradually increase in difficulty? 1 3 2


11/56



Table 4a. Menu of formative measures for instructors used during a learning event (execution).Measuresare listed in the order in which they are presented in the following pages. The number in the leftmost columns

indicates the reference code for each measure. The numbers in the cells corresponding to the exigencies of thelearning environment (rightmost four columns) indicate the relative extent to which each measure reflects theexigencies of the learning environment. Higher numbers indicate a stronger relationship. 1

.Lead

ership

2.PreparedforFSO

3.Problem

Solving


4 Instructors are role models

4.1 Are instructors communicating with each other regarding theprogression of instruction? 2 3 1

4.2 Are instructors discussing the effectivenessof the instruction? 2 1 3

4.3 Are instructors evaluating how effectivelythey are delivering the instruction? 2 1 3

4.4 Does instructor effectively exhibit intangible attributes in his/her own behaviorsduring instruction? 3 1 2

4.5 Which intangible attributes were exhibited by the instructors? 3 1 2

4.6 Does instructor demonstrate opennessin changing the progression of instruction? 3 1 2

5 Reveal multifaceted operational-relevance of instructional events

5.1 Does the learning event emphasize broad combat/mission success? 3 1 2

5.2 Does learning event contain problem solving events that require Soldiers to understand the why? 2 3 1

5.3 Does instructor encourage Soldiers to discuss the why beyond the current context? 3 2 1

5.4 Does instructor use unexpected conditions to provide tactically relevant learning events? 3 2 1

5.5 Does instructor put tasks into contextand relate them to other tasks? 3 2 1

5.6 Does instructor group tasks into collective behaviors? 3 2 1

5.7 Does instructor ensure that Soldiers understand the combat/mission applicationof a task? 3 2 1

6 Incorporate stress into instructional events

6.1 Does instructor effectively incorporatestressinto learning events to benefit development of Soldier? 3 1 2

6.2 Does instructor encourage deliberate thoughtin stressful situations? 3 1 2

6.3 Does instructor encourage the Soldiers to think abouthow the stress affects their capabilities? 3 1 2

6.4 Does instructor introduce Soldiers to broad range of stressors and cultivate stress management? 3 1 2

6.5 Does instructor effectively manipulate stress levelsto achieve learning objectives? 2 3 1

6.6 Does instructor effectively manipulate task complexityto achieve learning objectives? 2 3 1

7 Facilitate communication and collaborative problem-solving

7.1 Does instructor encourage inter-trainee communicationand discussion? 1 3 2

7.2 Does instructor encourage Soldiers to discuss the whywith each other? 1 3 2

7.3 Does instructor provide feedback to student in a constructive/diagnostic(non-directive) manner? 1 3 2

7.5 Does instructor communicate an interest in the quality of performance? 1 3 2

7.5 Does instructor communicate a willingness to guide learning through self-discovery? 1 3 2

7.6 Does instructor positively influence motivation though non-task related comments? 1 3 2


12/56



Table 4b. Menu of formative measures for instructors used during a learning event (execution).Measures are listed in the order in which they are presented in the following pages. The number in theleftmost columns indicates the reference code for each measure. The numbers in the cells correspondingto the exigencies of the learning environment (rightmost four columns) indicate the relative extent towhich each measure reflects the exigencies of the learning environment. Higher numbers indicate astronger relationship. 1.

Leadership

2.PreparedforFSO

3.Pr

oblemSolving

4.Dev

elopIntangibles

8 Nature and extent of guidance provided by instructor

8.1 Does instructor articulate the whyto the Soldiers? 1 3 2

8.2 Does instructor adaptthe learning eventto the audience/environment? 1 2 3

8.3 Does instructor adapt coachingto individual Soldiers? 1 2 3

8.4 Does instructor successfully address individuallearning predicaments? 1 2 3

8.5 Does instructor recognizewhen a Soldier is too withdrawn/distracted to participate in learning? 2 1 3

8.6 Does instructor guideSoldiers to self discovery of how to achieve a desired outcome? 2 1 3

8.7 Does instructor use safetyas an instructional enabler? 2 1 3

9 Get students to take ownership of their own learning

9.1 Does instructor balance perception ofpower vs. leadership? 3 1 2

9.2 Does learning event foster enthusiasmin the Soldiers? 2 1 3

9.3 Does instructor foster self-developmentamongst the Soldiers? 2 1 3

9.4 Does instructor assume the role of helperin Soldiers pursuit of success? 3 1 2

9.5 Does instructor reinforce the importance ofproblem solving? 1 2 3

9.6 Does instructor incorporate resource constraintsas a problem solving challenge for Soldiers? 3 2

9.7 Does instructor ask questions and allow/encourage the Soldiers to answer? 1 2 3

9.8 Does instructor encourage Soldiers to ask questions to discover the why? 1 2 3


13/56



Table 5. Menu of formative measures for instructors used after a learning event (AAR).Measuresare listed in the order in which they are presented in the following pages. The number in the leftmostcolumns indicates the reference code for each measure. The numbers in the cells corresponding to theexigencies of the learning environment (rightmost four columns) indicate the relative extent to whicheach measure reflects the exigencies of the learning environment. Higher numbers indicate a strongerrelationship. 1.

Leadership

2.PreparedforFSO

3.Pr

oblemSolving

4.Dev

elopIntangibles

10 Identify general lessons learned and extrapolate to new situations

10.1 Does instructor ensure the Soldiers can articulate how to apply concepts to newsituations? 3 2 1

10.2 Does instructor focus the why on the relationship between the individual and big picture/mission? 3 2 1

11 Establish a pervasive mindset of collaborative reflection

11.1 Does instructor conductAAR and Hotwashes as needed? 1 2 3

11.2Does instructor foster an environment that allows Soldiers to discuss their mistakesandconsequences? 3 1 2

12 Collaborative reflection as a means to develop self efficacy

12.1 Does instructor ask Soldiers to assess their own performance? 1 3 2

12.2 Does instructor ensure the Soldiers can articulate the why regarding the learning event? 1 3 2

12.3 Does instructor ensure the Soldiers can articulate the consequencesof their actions? 1 2 3

12.4 Does instructor ensure that the Soldiers recognize the effects of their actions on their teams? 1 2 3

12.5 Do the instructors identify any needs for remedialinstruction? 1 2 3


14/56



(1) Robust and adaptable plan for instructional events

Exigency: Leadership

1.1Does instructor plan collective decision/evaluation points during learning event?

c Yes c No

c N/A Comments/Notes:

c N/O

1.2Does instructor design/plan learning event to be flexible depending on conditions (e.g.Soldier skill level, environment, etc.)?

c Yes c No


c N/O


15/56


16/56





1.5 Does instructor adapt outcome expectations to account for limited resources (e.g. types ofranges, ammo, time, number of trainees, transport)?

Cancels instruction or

maintains focus on

specific outcomes for

original task

Chooses different

outcomes but does not

achieve effective

instruction

Chooses outcomes to

achieve instruction

effectiveness; leverages

condition as another

opportunity


c N/O

1.6 Does instructor adapt outcome expectations to account for unsupportive commandenvironment (if applicable)?

Maintains focus on

specific outcomes for

original task

Chooses different

outcomes but does not

achieve effective

instruction

Chooses outcomes to

achieve instruction

effectiveness; leverages

condition as another

opportunity


c N/O


17/56





1.7 Does instructor plan for maximizing instructional opportunities under less than perfect

conditions?

Does not develop a

backup plan

Develops a backup plan

that will not achieve

learning objectives

Turns less than perfect

opportunities into

opportunities for Soldier

problem solving


c N/O

1.8 Do the Drills identify and provision the information resources necessary to support learningobjectives?

Does not recognize the

need for information

resources

Recognizes need for

information resources;

focuses only on specific

event/task (e.g. reliance on

TSP)

Recognizes need for

information resources;

anticipates and prepares

for broader questions

from Soldiers


c N/O


18/56



(2) Consider how to reveal task relevance of instructional events

Exigency: Prepared for Full-Spectrum Operations

2.1 Is learning event designed to emphasize the importance of combat applications?

Instruction focuses on

tasks/events; goal is to

pass (e.g. qualify)

Combat applications are

described, but instruction

focuses on tasks/event

Tasks/Events resemble

combat application and

mission success


c N/O

2.2Does instructor plan to task organize the Soldiers and themselves to facilitate learning?

Does not task organize Task organizes to achieve

efficiency

Task organizes groups

and Instructors to

facilitate learning(capabilities, group size,

Soldier/cadre ratio)


c N/O


19/56



(2) Consider how to reveal task relevance of instructional events


2.3Does instructor plan to discuss the tactical relevance of the task with the Soldiers?

c Yes c No


c N/O

2.4 [Follow-up] Does instructor build time for this discussion into the schedule?

Does not build in time

for discussion into the

schedule

Builds in time for short

discussions after the day is

complete

Builds in time for short

discussions between tasks


c N/O

2.5 [Follow-up] As part of the discussion, will instructor ask the Soldiers to describe the tacticalrelevance of the events?

Only plans to lecture to

Soldiers on the task; no

context

Plans to engage the

Soldiers on why the event

is tactically relevant, but

states solution in the

context of the problem

Plans to state the

problem, then guide the

Soldiers to discovery of

the tactical relevance (i.e.

problem solving exercise)

c N/A Comments/Notes:c N/O


20/56



(3) Focus on development of the individual

Exigency: Develop Intangibles

3.1 Is the learning event designed to develop intangible attributes (Confidence, Initiative,

Accountability, Awareness, Discipline, Judgment, Deliberate Thought)?

Focus of instruction is

solely to accomplish

the task

Instructor discusses

intangibles directly related to

task being trained; does not

focus plan on development

Instructor discusses

intangibles directly

related to the task being

trained; plan focuses on

development


c N/O

3.2 Do the measures of effectiveness relate the learning event to the development of the

intangible attributes (Confidence, Initiative, Accountability, Awareness, Discipline, Judgment,

Deliberate Thought)?

c Yes c No


c N/O


21/56





3.3Does the Commanders intent focus on effective learning of the task and the development of

the individual?

CDRs intent is focused

on apparently efficient

and correct procedural

accomplishment of the

event/TSP

CDRs intent focuses on

correct Soldier

performance of the task

but not development of

the individual

CDRs intent focuses on

effective development

of the individual and

correct Soldier

performance of the task

3.4 [follow-up] Does instructor incorporate development of intangibles into the vision forachieving the Commanders intent?

Vision is focused on

apparently efficient

and correct procedural


event/TSP

Vision focuses on correct

Soldier performance of

the task but not

development of the

individual

Vision focuses on

effective development

of the individual and

correct Soldier

performance of thetask


c N/O


22/56





3.5Does instructor plan to scale down from an authoritarian approach to a mentoring leadership

style as appropriate?

c Yes c No


c N/O

3.6Does instructor plan to transfer ownership of instruction to the Soldiers?

c Yes c No


c N/O

3.7Does instructor structure learning event to allow Soldiers to learn for themselves?

Focus on efficiency,

regimented instruction,

learning outcomes not

specified

Builds in time to explain

the learning outcomes to

the Soldiers

Builds in time for Soldier

self-discovery of learning

outcomes


c N/O


23/56





3.8Does instructor actively participate in creating a positive learning environment?

Not involved in

planning

Involved in planning from

a functional standpoint;

task/resource focused

Demonstrates creativity

and enthusiasm; wants to

make instruction better;

planning is an

opportunity


c N/O

3.9Does instructor design the learning events to gradually increase in difficulty?

Unaware of stress

management; Plans to

increase difficulty of

instruction according to a

set schedule/process

Plans to introduce stress,

but not at the appropriate

level or time

Balances stress and

difficulty to the capability

of the Soldiers


c N/O


24/56



(4) Instructors are role models


4.1Are instructors communicating with each other about the progression of instruction?c Yes c No


c N/O

4.2Are instructors discussing the effectiveness of the instruction?

Instructors

automatically advance

different groupswithout considering

progress

Instructors check on

Soldiers progress but do

not effectively adjust theinstruction

Check on Soldiers

progress and discusses

when to advance to nextevent or revisit a learning

objective


c N/O

4.3Are instructors evaluating how effectively they are delivering instruction?

Instructors

automatically advancewithout evaluating

delivery

Instructors monitor the

effectiveness of deliverybut do not adjust

accordingly

Instructors collectively

monitor effectiveness ofdelivery and adjust

delivery accordingly, or

revisit learning objectives

if necessary


c N/O


25/56





4.4Does instructor effectively exhibit intangible attributes in his/her own behavior during

instruction?

c Yes c No


c N/O

4.5 [Follow-up] Which intangible attributes were exhibited by the instructors?

N/A N/O Yes No

Judgment ! ! ! !

Adaptability ! ! ! !

Accountability ! ! ! !

Problem Solving ! ! ! !

Confidence ! ! ! !

Initiative ! ! ! !

Awareness ! ! ! !

Thinking Skills ! ! ! !


c N/O


26/56





4.6Does instructor demonstrate openness in changing the progression of instruction?

Instruction will not

deviate from a set

schedule

Instructors determine when

it is time to move on a new

task

Soldiers have input into

the progression of

instruction


c N/O


27/56



(5) Reveal multifaceted operational-relevance of instruction


5.1Does learning event emphasize broad combat/mission success?

Train to a specific task

only

Train to examples or

experience only; reflects

specific conditions or

resources only

Creates instruction that

emphasizes problem

solving irrespective of

conditions or resources


c N/O


28/56





5.2Does learning event contain problem solving events that require Soldiers to understand thewhy in order to succeed?

Problem solution is

based on memorization

or repetitive action

Problem solution may not

require an understanding of

the why; rooted in either

technical or tactical

application

Successfully solving the

problem requires

investigation of the why;

rooted in both tactical and

technical application


c N/O

5.3 [Follow-up] Does instructor encourage Soldiers to continue to discuss the why beyond thecontext of the current learning event?

c Yes c No


c N/O


29/56





5.4Does instructor use unexpected conditions to provide tactically relevant learning events?

Allow the unexpected

conditions to interfere

with instruction

Make in-stride adjustments

to continue instruction but

do not leverage unexpected

conditions as an

opportunity

Make in-stride

adjustments to

incorporate unexpected

conditions into the

instruction design if

appropriate


c N/O

5.5Does instructor put tasks into context and relate them to other tasks?

Trains task in isolation;task taken out of

context; detached fromapplication

Trains task within contextbut does not relate to other

tasks

Trains task within contextand explains relationship

to other tasks


c N/O


30/56


31/56



(6) Incorporate stress into instructional events


6.1 Does instructor effectively incorporate stress (mental and physical) into learning events to

benefit the development of the Soldier?

No stress resulting in

apathy or too much

stress resulting in

chronic failure

Some stress resulting in

some learning; Soldier

unchallenged or overly

challenged

Stress is proportional to

the task and Soldier

capabilities resulting in a

sense of accomplishment


c N/O

6.2 Does instructor encourage deliberate thought in stressful situations?

Rushes or encouragesSoldier to complete the

task without deliberate

thought; focuses on

speed

Encourages Soldier tothink but fails to establish

effective conditions to

reinforce thinking

Focuses Soldier onthinking through situation

regardless of the stress

level; focuses on

accountability


c N/O


32/56





6.3 Does instructor encourage the Soldiers to think about how the stress affects their capabilities?

Marginalizes the true

effects of stress; doesnot discuss

Tells Soldiers how the

stress affected theirperformance

Allows Soldiers to

discover how stressaffects their performance

and how it is mitigated

c N/A Comments/Notes:c N/O

6.4Does instructor introduce the Soldiers to a broad range of stressors and cultivate stressmanagement?

No strategy for

effective introduction

of stressors and stress

management as a tool

for positive Soldierdevelopment

Strategy for stress

introduction and

management exists but

does not effectively

promote positive Soldierdevelopment

Strategy for stress

introduction and

management promotes

positive Soldier

development


c N/O


33/56





6.5Do the instructors effectively manipulate stress levels to achieve learning objectives?

Trains the

fundamentals of a task

in a stressful

environment; increases

stress level before

Soldiers are ready

Fails to effectively

manipulate stress

proportional to Soldier

skill level

Increases stress level as

Soldiers begin to master

the current task in a no

stress environment


c N/O

6.6 Do the instructors effectively manipulate task complexity to achieve learning objectives?

Trains thefundamentals of a task

in a complex

environment; increases

complexity before

Soldiers are ready

Fails to effectivelymanipulate task

complexity proportional to

Soldier skill level

Increases complexity asSoldiers begin to master

the current task in a

minimally complex

environment


c N/O


34/56



(7) Facilitate communication and collaborative problem-solving

Exigency: Problem Solving

7.1Does instructor encourage inter-trainee communication and discussion?

Soldiers do not have

the opportunity to

discuss

Instruction design provides

opportunities for unguided

inter-trainee

communication

Instructor facilitates

discussions and

encourages follow-on

inter-trainee discussion;

instruction design

provides opportunities


c N/O

7.2 [Follow-up] Does instructor encourage Soldiers to discuss the why with each other?

c Yes c No


c N/O


35/56



(7) Facilitate communication and collaborative problem-solving


7.3Does instructor provide feedback to student in a constructive/diagnostic (non-directive)

manner?

c Yes c No _______ Number of Instances


c N/O

7.4Does instructor communicate an interest in the quality of performance?



c N/O

7.5Does instructor communicate a willingness to guide learning through self-discovery?



c N/O

7.6Does instructor positively influence motivation though non-task related comments?



c N/O


36/56



(8) Nature and extent of guidance provided by instructor


8.1Does instructor articulate the why to the Soldiers?

Relies only on tasks

conditions and

standards; focus is on

completing the event

Explains the why but not

in the context of mission

success/problem solving;

states solution in the

context of the problem

Lays the foundation of

why at the beginning of

instruction; states the

problem, then guides the

Soldiers to discovery of

the tactical relevance


c N/O

8.2 Does instructor adapt learning event to the audience/environment?

Sticks to set schedule;

unaware of diminished

learning (e.g. ignores

indicators of

exhaustion)

Reactively balances

learning difficulty to the

capability of the Soldiers

(e.g. reacts after

performance hasdiminished significantly

and then makes a change)

Proactively balances

learning difficulty to the

capability of the Soldiers;

recognizes point of

diminishing return (e.g.exhaustion/ getting burnt

out)


c N/O


37/56





8.3 Does instructor adapt coaching to individual Soldiers?

Doesnt connect with

individual Soldiers;

only at group level

Tells the Soldier how to fix

the problem

Provides individual

coaching and helps the

Soldier discover the

solution


c N/O

8.4Does instructor successfully address individual learning predicaments?

Doesnt recognize

individual problem

Recognizes individual

problem, doesnt help theSoldier find a suitable

solution

Identifies the issue and

helps the Soldier find awork around (e.g. shorter

weapon for smallerperson)


c N/O


38/56





8.5Does instructor recognize when a Soldier is too withdrawn/distracted to effectively

participate in instruction?

Does not recognize a

deeper individual

problem when Soldier

is struggling with a

task

Sees that there is a deeper

problem, but doesnt do

anything (doesnt realize

he CAN do something)

Recognizes there is a

deeper problem, takes

appropriate action to help

Soldier get back in the

game


c N/O

8.6Does instructor guide Soldiers to self discovery of how to achieve a desired outcome?

Dictates a specific path

to the solution to a task

Structures the problem; but

still dictates a specific pathto the solution

Structures the problem

and guides Soldier toefficient self discovery of

solution path


c N/O


39/56





8.7Does instructor use safety as a learning enabler?

Focuses on SOP and is

regimented; safety is

disconnected from its

real purpose

Explains safety in the

context of accomplishing

the instruction events, but

not as a combat and

learning enabler (i.e. safety

is restrictive)

Explains safety as a

combat and learning

enabler (e.g. weapons

awareness allows for

more independent or

complex scenarios)


c N/O


40/56



(9) Get students to take ownership of their own learning


9.1Does instructor balance perception of power vs. leadership?

Overly authoritarian

and maintains symbols

of authority; Soldiers

do not approach

instructors

Removes symbols of

authority but remains

authoritarian; Soldiers still

reluctant to approach

Removes symbols of

authority and exhibits

approachability, assumes

role of mentor; guides

Soldiers through solving

the problem


c N/O

9.2Does learning event foster enthusiasm in the Soldiers?

Purely procedural Enthusiasm is focused on

winning a competition or

event

Enthusiasm is focused on

improvement and combat

application; instructor

reinforces improvements


c N/O


41/56





9.3Does instructor foster self-development amongst the Soldiers?

Tells them how theydid without giving

Soldiers a chance to

reflect

Asks the Soldiers how theythink they did, tells them

what they did wrong

Asks the Soldiers howthey think they did;

facilitates self-discovery

of mistakes through

targeted questioning


c N/O

9.4Does instructor assume the role of helper in Soldiers pursuit of success?

Dictates instructions;threatening; (instructor

focus is


event)

Acts as a mentor butoccasionally reverts back

to role of dictating

Acts as a mentor; wantsSoldier to do well;

(instructor focus is

success of the Soldier)


c N/O


42/56





9.5Does instructor reinforce the importance of problem solving?

Event is scripted;instruction is based on

correct performance of

predetermined task

Instruction providesopportunities for Soldiers

to be problem solvers but

instructors give the

solution

Instruction providesopportunities for Soldiers

to be problem solvers;

events require

assessment, judgment,

decision making andexecution


c N/O

9.6 [Follow-up] Does instructor incorporate resource constraints as a problem solving challengefor the Soldiers?

c Yes c No


c N/O


43/56





9.7Does instructor ask questions and allow/encourage the Soldiers to answer?

Provides answers forthe Soldiers

immediately after

question is asked

Encourages Soldiers toanswer questions, but

provides an answer if one

is not immediately offered

Allows time for Soldiersto think of an answer and

guides them to

appropriate responses


c N/O

9.8Does instructor encourage Soldiers to ask questions to discover the why?

Discourages Soldiers

from asking questions

Questions are answered

but very little time existsfor discussion

Reinforces the Soldiers

for asking questions thatfocus on understanding

the why


c N/O


44/56



(10) Identify general lessons and extrapolate to new situations


10.1 Does instructor ensure Soldiers can articulate how to apply concepts to new situations?

Discussion focuses on

the specific task only;

does not discuss

combat/mission

application

Facilitates a discussion of

the specific tasks and how

they apply to

combat/missions


the intangible attributes

underling the task and

how it applies to

ambiguous

combat/mission situations


c N/O

10.2 Do the instructors focus the why of instruction back to the relationship between theindividual and big picture/mission?

Does not go into depth

on why the Soldiers

need the skills that

were trained (e.g. You

need these skills

because we are at

war.)

Facilitates discussion on

the big picture; less focus

on the individuals

contribution

Facilitates discussion on

the big picture; focuses

on the importance of

individuals (i.e. You can

make a difference)


c N/O


45/56



(11) Establish a pervasive mindset of collaborative reflection


11.1 Does instructor conduct AAR/Hotwashes as needed?

Does not conductAAR/Hotwash or

conducts regardless of

need

Tells/lectures Soldiers thelessons learned in a timely

manner

Facilitates discussion onlessons learned amongst

the Soldiers in a timely

manner


c N/O

11.2 Does instructor foster an environment that allows Soldiers to discuss their mistakes andconsequences?

Overly authoritarian;

does not discuss

consequences

Establishes a mentor like

rapport but too little

discussion of real life

consequences

Establishes a mentor like

rapport and reinforces the

real life consequences


c N/O


46/56



(12) Collaborative reflection as a means to develop self efficacy


12.1 Does instructor ask Soldiers to assess their own performance?

Does not ask Soldiers

to assess their own

performance or is

overly negative in

assessment

Asks Soldiers to assess

their own performance but

does not recognize

accurate self assessments

Asks Soldiers to assess

their own performance

but monitors to ensure

they are realistic


c N/O

12.2 Does instructor ensure Soldiers can articulate the why for the learning event?

Instructor is onlydirective

Instructor delays shiftingfrom telling to asking

about the why

Instructor shifts fromtelling to asking about the

why in a timely manner


c N/O


47/56





12.3 Do instructors ensure Soldiers can articulate the consequences of their actions?

Tells Soldiers what

went wrong and why it

is important in combat,

but does not discuss

how to mitigate

mistakes next time

Asks Soldiers to explain

what went wrong, why its

important in

combat/mission, but does

not discuss how to mitigate

mistakes next time

Guides Soldiers through

explaining what went

wrong, why it is

important in

combat/mission, how they

might improve next time


c N/O

12.4 Does instructor ensure that the Soldiers recognize the effects of their actions on their teams?

Focuses discussion on

individual mistakes;

ignores team dynamics


how the team worked

together during the

learning event but does not

discuss strategicconsequences

Facilitates a discussion on

of how the team worked

together during the

learning event and

discusses the strategicconsequences


c N/O


48/56





12.5 Do instructors identify any needs for remedial instruction?

Glosses over the

problems, focuses on

throughput; does not

put together resources

to solve problems

Identifies those who need

additional instruction but

does not fully assess why;

puts together resources to

give them additional

practice

Identifies those who need

additional instruction and

assesses why; puts

together resources to

solve their specific

problem


c N/O


49/56

ix Riccio, Diedrich, & Cortes (Eds.)


TABLE OF CONTENTS

.

page

Prologue: A Programmatic View of the Inquiry into Outcomes-Based Training & Education....... 1Historicity of our Research on OBTE..........................................................................................1The Approach and Lessons Learned from the Research..............................................................3Documentation of the Research ...................................................................................................4

Section I. Development of Stakeholder Requirements for OBTE..............................................6 Chapter 1. Preparation for Full Spectrum Operations ......................................................................7

1.1 Requirements of Full Spectrum Operations...........................................................................81.2 Outcomes-Based Training and Education (OBTE)..............................................................10

1.2.1 Exemplar of OBTE: Combat Applications Training Course........................................111.2.2 OBTE as a Multifaceted Instructional System .............................................................12

1.3 An Appraisal of Instruction with Respect to OBTE ............................................................131.3.1 A Systems Engineering Framework for Integration and Development of OBTE........131.3.2 Preparation for Validation and Verification .................................................................14

1.4 References ............................................................................................................................17Chapter 2. Formative Measures for Instructors..............................................................................20

2.1 Development of Formative Measures ..................................................................................202.1.1 The COMPASS Methodology......................................................................................202.1.2 Development of Measures for OBTE ...........................................................................21

2.2 Description of Formative Measures .....................................................................................212.2.1 Results of the COMPASS Process................................................................................212.2.2 Elaboration on the Description of Measures.................................................................23

2.3 OBTE Performance Measures: Planning for Training.........................................................232.3.1 Define Outcomes ..........................................................................................................232.3.2 Create a Positive Learning Environment......................................................................252.3.3 Create the Parameters of Learning................................................................................27

2.4 OBTE Performance Indicators: Training Execution............................................................282.4.1 Communicate the Parameters of Learning....................................................................282.4.2 Training Emphasizes Broad Combat or Mission Success ............................................292.4.3 Customize Instruction When Possible Based on Constraints/Conditions ....................312.4.4 Facilitates Learning of Concepts ..................................................................................322.4.5 Creates a positive learning environment.......................................................................342.4.6 Instructors Utilize Measures of Effectiveness & Self-Evaluation................................362.4.7 Uses scenarios to facilitate learning..............................................................................382.4.8 Instructors exhibit intangible attributes in own actions................................................402.4.9 Hotwashes and Mini-AAR............................................................................................42

2.5 Uses of the Measures ...........................................................................................................432.5.1 Formative Measures for Instructors..............................................................................442.5.2 Quality Assurance and Instructor Education ................................................................442.5.3 Continuous Improvement of Assessments....................................................................452.5.4 Program Evaluation and Organizational Change..........................................................46

2.6 References ............................................................................................................................46


50/56

Table of Contents x


Chapter 3. Principles and Practices of Outcomes Based Training & Education............................503.1 Multifaceted Inquiry.............................................................................................................50

3.1.1 Interaction with Progenitors of OBTE..........................................................................513.1.2 AWG Documents on OBTE .........................................................................................523.1.3 Collaborative Reflection on Participant Observation in CATC ...................................523.1.4 Interaction with Stakeholders .......................................................................................53

3.2 Essential Characteristics of OBTE.......................................................................................533.2.1 The Meaning of Developmental is a Critical Difference..............................................533.2.2 The Definition of Outcomes is a Critical Difference....................................................563.2.3 The Emphasis on Values and Causally Potent Intangibles is a Critical Difference .....583.2.4 The Meaning of Experience is a Critical Difference....................................................613.2.5 The Emphasis on Instructor-Student Interactions is a Critical Difference ...................623.2.6 The Emphasis on Learning to Learn is a Critical Difference .......................................633.2.7 The Emphasis on Collaborative Design and Development is a Critical Difference.....65

3.3 Toward a Grounded Theory for OBTE................................................................................663.3.1 Need for an Integrated Interdisciplinary Framework ...................................................663.3.2 Formative Measures of Instructor Behavior as Evolving Best Practices of OBTE......67

3.4 Emerging Best Practices in OBTE for a Community-Centered Environment.....................683.4.1 Leadership and Enculturation of Soldiers.....................................................................683.4.2 Robust and Adaptable Plan...........................................................................................703.4.3 Instructors as Role Models ...........................................................................................703.4.4 Collaborative Identification of Outcomes and Measures .............................................71

3.5 Emerging Best Practices in OBTE for a Knowledge-Centered Environment .....................713.5.1 Integrated Understanding of Basic Soldier Skills in Full Spectrum Operations ..........723.5.2 Task Relevance of Planned Instructional Events..........................................................723.5.3 Reveal Operational Relevance of Training...................................................................733.5.4 Incorporate Stress into Instructional Events .................................................................733.5.5 Identify General Lessons Learned and Extrapolate to New Situations ........................74

3.6 Emerging Best Practices in OBTE for an Assessment-Centered Environment...................743.6.1 Collaborative Reflection and Problem Solving ............................................................753.6.2 Communication.............................................................................................................753.6.3 Nature and Extent of Guidance.....................................................................................763.6.4 Establish a Pervasive Mindset of Collaborative Reflection..........................................76

3.7 Emerging Best Practices in OBTE for a Learner-Centered Environment ...........................773.7.1 Soldier Motivation and Development of Intangibles....................................................773.7.2 Plan for Development of the Individual .......................................................................783.7.3 Get Students to Take Ownership ..................................................................................783.7.4 Collaborative Reflection as a Means to Develop Self Efficacy....................................79

3.8 References ............................................................................................................................79Chapter 4. Grounded Theory for Values-Based Training & Education.........................................86

4.1 Exploration of Holistic and Functionalistic Underpinnings for OBTE ...............................864.1.1 Fundamental Units of Analysis.....................................................................................874.1.2 Nested Time Scales and Adaptability...........................................................................884.1.3 Adaptability and Ambiguity .........................................................................................904.1.4 Mechanistic Analogies and Predominant Experimental Paradigms .............................92

4.2 Three Pillars for the Scientific Foundation of OBTE ..........................................................93 4.2.1 Ecological Psychology..................................................................................................934.2.2 Self-Efficacy Theory.....................................................................................................974.2.3 Positive psychology......................................................................................................98

4.3 A More Integrated Scientific Infrastructure.......................................................................101


51/56

xi Riccio, Diedrich, & Cortes (Eds.)


4.3.1 Self Determination Theory .........................................................................................1014.3.2 Situated Learning Theory ...........................................................................................1034.3.3 Existential Psychology................................................................................................105

4.4 Building on the Scientific Infrastructure for OBTE...........................................................1094.4.1 Triadic Frameworks....................................................................................................1094.4.2 Further Development ..................................................................................................112

4.5 References ..........................................................................................................................112Chapter 5. Passion and Reason in Values-Based Learning & Development ...............................118

5.1 The Nested Self ..................................................................................................................1185.1.1 An Alternative to Individual versus Collective ..........................................................1185.1.2 Cognition and Reality .................................................................................................119

5.2 Conscious Experience and the Dynamics of Thinking ......................................................1225.3 Emotion, Information, and Engagement ............................................................................125

5.3.1 Ecological Perspective on Emotion ............................................................................1255.3.2 Emotion as Engagement .............................................................................................1265.3.3 Implications for Training and Education....................................................................129

5.4 Emotion, Decision-Making, and Inter-Temporal Choice...................................................1295.4.1 Toward a More Integrated Theory..............................................................................1295.4.2 Emotion and Decision-Making...................................................................................1305.4.3 Emotion and Nested Time Scales ...............................................................................1315.4.4 Neuroeconomics and Inter-Temporal Reasoning .......................................................1325.5.5 Inter-Temporal Reasoning and Adaptive Dynamical Systems...................................133

5.5 Beyond Science..................................................................................................................1345.5.1 Existentialism..............................................................................................................1345.5.2 The Soldier-Scholar as an Emergent Property of a Collective Pursuit.......................135

5.6 References ..........................................................................................................................137Section II. Verification and Validation of OBTE as a Service System ..................................142 Chapter 6. Initial Impressions of Participation in CATC .............................................................1436.1 Methods..............................................................................................................................143

6.1.1 Participants..................................................................................................................1436.1.2 Procedure ....................................................................................................................1436.1.3 Analyses......................................................................................................................144

6.2 Results ................................................................................................................................1446.3 Implications for Service System Development: Peer Review ...........................................1466.4 References ..........................................................................................................................147

Chapter 7. Local Development of Measures of Effectiveness .....................................................1497.1 What do Instructors Believe Soldiers Should Learn in Initial Entry Training?.................1497.2 Measure Development Process ..........................................................................................1507.3 What do OBTE-Trained DS Believe is Important to Assess in BRM/ARM? ................... 1517.4 Implications........................................................................................................................1567.5 Conclusions........................................................................................................................1587.6 References ..........................................................................................................................159


52/56

Table of Contents xii


Chapter 8. Observations of Behavior and Communication in Rifle Marksmanship Training .....1608.1 Methods..............................................................................................................................160

8.1.1 Participants..................................................................................................................1608.1.2 Procedure ....................................................................................................................1608.1.3 Analyses......................................................................................................................161

8.2 Results ................................................................................................................................1638.2.1 Behavior of DS ...........................................................................................................1638.2.2 Behavior and Performance of Privates .......................................................................1658.2.3 Patterns of Communication ........................................................................................1688.2.4 Potential Influence of Instructor Behavior on Performance of Privates.....................170

8.3 Implications for Service System Development..................................................................1718.3.1 Verification of OBTE .................................................................................................1718.3.2 Validation of OBTE....................................................................................................172

8.4 References ..........................................................................................................................173Chapter 9. Impact on Rifle Marksmanship Training....................................................................174

9.1 Behavioral Data Collection During Basic Rifle Marksmanship ........................................1749.1.1 Method........................................................................................................................1749.1.2 Assessment..................................................................................................................1759.1.3 Results An Overview...............................................................................................1779.1.4 Evidence for Influence of OBTE................................................................................1789.1.5 Behavior of Drill Sergeants after Exposure to OBTE ................................................1809.1.6 Behavior of Privates....................................................................................................1829.1.7 Patterns of Communication ........................................................................................1869.1.8 Summary.....................................................................................................................186

9.2 Attitudes Toward an OBTE in Basic Training...................................................................1879.2.1 Method........................................................................................................................1879.2.2 Results.........................................................................................................................187

9.4 References ..........................................................................................................................191Chapter 10. Influence of CATC in an Operational Setting ..........................................................19210.1 Methods............................................................................................................................192

10.1.1 Participants................................................................................................................19210.1.2 Procedure ..................................................................................................................19210.1.3 Analyses....................................................................................................................193

10.2 Results ..............................................................................................................................19310.2.1 Downstream Impact on Marksmanship ....................................................................19310.2.2 Downstream Impact on Training in the Units ..........................................................19410.2.3 Downstream Impact on Self Efficacy.......................................................................195

10.3 Implications for Service System Development: Validation.............................................19610.4 References ........................................................................................................................197

Chapter 11. Implications for Service System Development.........................................................19811.1 Lessons Learned about Transfer of OBTE.......................................................................19811.2 Implications for Service System Development................................................................199

11.2.1 Further Development and Analysis of Stakeholder Requirements for OBTE..........19911.2.2 Further Development of OBTE as a Service System ...............................................199 11.2.3 Further Verification and Validation of OBTE..........................................................201

11.3 References ........................................................................................................................203


53/56


54/56

Table of Contents xiv


Chapter 15. Five ways OBTE can enable the Army Leader Development Strategy....................24215.1 Background ......................................................................................................................24215.2 An Emerging Consensus..................................................................................................244

15.2.1 What Part to Balance?...............................................................................................24415.2.2 Improving Training, by Design ................................................................................24515.2.3 Increased Use of dL and Dependence on Self-Development ...................................24615.2.4 Future Orientation, Unknown Requirements............................................................24715.2.5 The Quality Instructor Challenge .............................................................................24715.2.6 Purpose and Design are Key.....................................................................................24815.2.7 A Natural Advantage ................................................................................................24915.2.8 Task Specialization or Generalized Competency.....................................................249