PERCEIVED VALUES: FACE TO FACE VS. VIRTUAL TRAINING
MSA 600 Foundations of Research Methods in Administration
Central Michigan University
Gregory X. Brown
Dr. Marty Meloche
10 August 2015
Table of Contents
List of Tables ii
List of Figures ii
Chapter 1 Problem Definition 3
Chapter 2 Literature Review 10
Chapter 3 Research Methodology 21
Chapter 4 Data Analysis Future
Chapter 5 Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations Future
Definition of Terms Future
References Pages 29
Appendix A Permission to Conduct Study
In doing so, Soldiers are able to receive most training value from the conducted activity. However, as stated previously, training is going through a transition. Soldiers are now being engaged by an avatar on a computer monitor as they “click away” through a block of instruction. Such as the Survival Evasion Resistance Escape 100 (SERE 100), which is a basic crash course of what to do if a Soldier should become a Prisoner of War (POW) or go Missing in Action (MIA). Typically, the training would last about seven days if taught in person, however since it’s a virtual course it has the potential to be completed within four hours.
The perceived value in using virtual training is convenient, cost effective, and reduces the chances of major risk that would be associated with dangerous tasks. Soldiers are able to take part in virtual convoys and weapon ranges. Soldiers are given the same block of instruction as if they were actually onsite at a live range or were actually about to depart on a convoy. However, the small details are overlooked and/or missed when this type of training is simulate. Soldiers still need to experience being uncomfortable whether it’s laying in the dirt at a range or in an up armored vehicle without air-conditioning. The virtual world has yet to figure out a system that can replicate those conditions while maintaining a safe environment and being cost effective. Not exposing the Soldiers to how things smell, feel, sound, and taste will leave them vulnerable when they do experience those aspects in combat.
The leaders of HHC have been in the unit a minimum of 2 years and have seen numerous ways to train. HHC’s leaders have mixed views on the two learning platforms. Usually, time constraints will dictate which platform will be used. However, very seldom will the value of the training be the deciding factor because there are several tasks that need to be completed in a limited time. The Soldiers, especially the brand new ones, suffer from these unforeseen actions. As mentioned earlier, training that deals with actual combat needs to be replicated with extreme attention to detail. Since HHC takes pride in realistic training, knowing the details of the battlefield is essential. ADP 7-0 states “that the principles of unit training are to train to standard”.
On the other hand, automated systems that accomplish administrative tasks are highly favored. As stated above, these tasks take a fraction of the time to complete. The automated systems also allow a single Department of the Army Civilian (DAC) to work with multiple Soldiers at a single time and provide consistent training. For instance, every year HHC has to take an annual Cyber security class. The class is required for all 200 HHC Soldiers. Available classrooms have a maximum capacity of 35. The block of instruction for the Cyber Awareness is about 45 minutes. Conducting this one class in a face to face platform would take a minimum of 2 days. With the virtual...