Developing an Adaptive Trainer for Joint Terminal Attack Controllers

Adaptive training (AT) is training that is tailored to an individual trainee’s strengths and weaknesses, such that each trainee receives a unique training experience. Previous research has demonstrated that AT can lead to higher learning gains and decreased training time when compared to traditional training approaches in certain domains [1]. However, more systematic research is needed to define which AT techniques to employ and for what content in order to determine when to invest in these technologies. The goal of this research is to examine the benefits of two particular AT techniques (i.e., adapting feedback and scenario difficulty) based on trainee performance in a complex military decision-making task. In this paper, we discuss the development of a research testbed, the Adaptive Trainer for Joint Terminal Attack Controllers (ATTAC), from a science of learning perspective. In particular, we review how the Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning and the Expertise Reversal Effect drove design decisions and present preliminary results on participants’ impressions of ATTAC from a pilot study.

[1]  V. Shute.  Focus on Formative Feedback , 2008 .

[2]  J. B. Brooke,et al.  SUS: a retrospective , 2013 .

[3]  Cristina Conati,et al.  Evaluating Adaptive Feedback in an Educational Computer Game , 2009, IVA.

[4]  D. R. Billings,et al.  Efficacy of Adaptive Feedback Strategies in Simulation-Based Training , 2012 .

[5]  Natalie B. Steinhauser,et al.  Evaluation of an Adaptive Training System for Submarine Periscope Operations , 2012 .

[6]  The effects of static and adaptive performance feedback in game-based training , 2013, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[7]  Slava Kalyuga,et al.  The Expertise Reversal Effect , 2003 .

[8]  Wendi Van Buskirk,et al.  Investigating The Optimal Presentation Of Feedback In Simulation-based Training An Application Of The Cognitive Theory Of Multimedia Learning , 2011 .

[9]  Richard Mayer,et al.  Multimedia Learning , 2001, Visible Learning Guide to Student Achievement.

[10]  J. B. Brooke,et al.  SUS: A 'Quick and Dirty' Usability Scale , 1996 .

[11]  R. Mayer,et al.  Multimedia Learning: Frontmatter , 2001 .

[12]  K. VanLehn.  The Relative Effectiveness of Human Tutoring, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, and Other Tutoring Systems , 2011 .

[13]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Effectiveness of Part-Task Training and Increasing-Difficulty Training Strategies , 2013, Hum. Factors.

[14]  Natalie B. Steinhauser,et al.  Review of Adaptive Training System Techniques , 2012 .

[15]  James E. McCarthy.  Military Applications of Adaptive Training Technology , 2008 .

[16]  Amy Bolton.  Immediate versus delayed feedback in simulation-based training: Matching feedback delivery timing to the cognitive demands of the training exercise , 2006 .

[17]  Paula J Durlach,et al.  Designing Adaptive Instructional Environments: Insights from Empirical Evidence , 2011 .

[18]  Slava Kalyuga,et al.  Learner Experience and Efficiency of Instructional Guidance , 2001 .

[19]  Heather A. Priest,et al.  The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning: The Feedback Principle in Multimedia Learning , 2014 .

[20]  B. Bloom.  The 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective as One-to-One Tutoring , 1984 .