Learning to navigate: the centrality of instructions and assessments for developing students’ professional competencies in simulator-based training

Despite the promises of simulations to contribute to learning in safe-critical domains, research suggests that simulators are poorly implemented in maritime education and training systems. From the current state of research, it is far from evident how instruction in simulator-based should be designed and how skills trained in bridge simulators should be assessed and connected to professional practice. On this background, this article aims to investigate the role of instructions and assessments for developing students’ professional competencies in simulation-based learning environments. The research draws on ethnographic fieldwork and detailed analyses of video-recorded data to examine how maritime instructors make use of simulator technologies in a navigation course. Our results reveal an instructional practice in which the need to account for general principles of good seamanship and anti-collision regulations is at the core of basic navigation training. The meanings of good seamanship and the rules of the sea are hard to teach in abstraction because their application relies on an infinite number of contingencies that have to be accounted for in every specific case. Based on this premise, we stress the importance of instructional support throughout training (from briefing thorough scenario to debriefing) in order for the instructor to bridge theory and practice in ways that develop students’ competencies. Our results highlight, in detail, how simulator technologies enable displaying and assessing such competencies by supporting instructors to continuously monitor, assess, and provide feedback to the students during training sessions. Moreover, our results show how simulator-based training is related to the work conditions on board a seagoing vessel through the instructor’s systematic accomplishments. Finally, our results highlight the close relationship between technical and non-technical skills in navigation, and how these are intertwined in training for everyday maritime operations.

[1]  Ericka Johnson,et al.  Surgical Simulators and Simulated Surgeons: Reconstituting Medical Practice and Practitioners in Simulations , 2007, Social studies of science.

[2]  R. Hanzu-Pazara,et al.  Higher Performance in Maritime Education Through Better Trained Lecturers , 2010 .

[3]  Hans Rystedt,et al.  Experiences, appearances, and interprofessional training: The instructional use of video in post-simulation debriefings , 2017, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[4]  Peter Dieckmann,et al.  Video-assisted Debriefing in Simulation-based Training of Crisis Resource Management , 2008 .

[5]  E. Hutchins.  Cognition in the wild , 1995 .

[6]  Charlott Sellberg,et al.  From briefing, through scenario, to debriefing: the maritime instructor’s work during simulator-based training , 2018, Cognition, Technology & Work.

[7]  Charlott Sellberg,et al.  Simulators in bridge operations training and assessment: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis , 2017 .

[8]  S. Hamstra,et al.  Reconsidering fidelity in simulation-based training. , 2014, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[9]  Lucy Suchman,et al.  Human-Machine Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Actions , 2006 .

[10]  Wolff-Michael Roth,et al.  Situational Awareness as an Instructable and Instructed Matter in Multi-Media Supported Debriefing: a Case Study from Aviation , 2015, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[11]  L. Suchman.  Human-Machine Reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions (2nd edition). , 2007 .

[12]  K. Wotton,et al.  High-Fidelity Simulation Debriefing in Nursing Education: A Literature Review , 2011 .

[13]  Wolff-Michael Roth,et al.  Contradictions in the practices of training for and assessment of competency: A case study from the maritime domain , 2008 .

[14]  Christian Greiffenhagen,et al.  Unpacking Tasks: The Fusion of New Technology with Instructional Work , 2008, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[15]  R. Glavin,et al.  Low‐ to high‐fidelity simulation – a continuum of medical education? , 2003, Medical education.

[16]  Ricki Goldman,et al.  Conducting Video Research in the Learning Sciences: Guidance on Selection, Analysis, Technology, and Ethics , 2010 .

[17]  S. Ludvigsen,et al.  Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning , 2017 .

[18]  C. Chauvin,et al.  Impact of training programs on decision-making and situation awareness of trainee watch officers , 2009 .

[19]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  Toward a Theory of Situation Awareness in Dynamic Systems , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[20]  Rhona Flin,et al.  Safety at the Sharp End: A Guide to Non-Technical Skills , 2008 .

[21]  Johanna Dahlberg,et al.  Method matters: impact of in-scenario instruction on simulation-based teamwork training , 2017, Advances in Simulation.

[22]  Magnus Hontvedt,et al.  Professional vision in simulated environments — Examining professional maritime pilots' performance of work tasks in a full-mission ship simulator , 2015 .

[23]  J. Hindmarch.  Video in Qualitative Research: Analysing Social Interaction in Everyday Life , 2012, QMiP Bulletin.

[24]  M. P. Wickers,et al.  Establishing the Climate for a Successful Debriefing , 2010 .

[25]  Magnus Hontvedt,et al.  Simulations in Maritime Training: A video study of the socio-technical organisation of ship simulator training , 2015 .

[26]  B. Asher.  The Professional Vision , 1994 .

[27]  Hans Rystedt,et al.  Realism, authenticity, and learning in healthcare simulations: rules of relevance and irrelevance as interactive achievements , 2012 .

[28]  Hans Christian Arnseth,et al.  On the bridge to learn: Analysing the social organization of nautical instruction in a ship simulator , 2013, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[29]  Libby Hemphill,et al.  Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions, 2nd ed , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[30]  N. Dahlstrom,et al.  Fidelity and validity of simulator training , 2009 .

[31]  David M. Gaba,et al.  The Role of Debriefing in Simulation-Based Learning , 2007, Simulation in healthcare : journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare.

[32]  Erik Styhr Petersen,et al.  Epistemology in ethnography: assessing the quality of knowledge in human factors research , 2010 .

[33]  Helen Sampson,et al.  Computer‐based assessment in safety‐critical industries: the case of shipping , 2011 .

[34]  Gr Emad,et al.  Introduction of technology into workplace and the need for change in pedagogy , 2010 .

[35]  Charlott Sellberg,et al.  Demonstrating professional intersubjectivity: The instructor's work in simulator-based learning environments , 2017 .

[36]  Helen Sampson,et al.  Water-tight or sinking? A consideration of the standards of the contemporary assessment practices underpinning seafarer licence examinations and their implications for employers , 2011 .

[37]  Jarle Eid,et al.  Perceived learning outcome: the relationship between experience, realism and situation awareness during simulator training. , 2010, International maritime health.

[38]  Avijit Banerjee,et al.  Work to make simulation work: ‘Realism’, instructional correction and the body in training , 2014 .

[39]  Charlott Sellberg,et al.  Representing and enacting movement: The body as an instructional resource in a simulator-based environment , 2017, Education and Information Technologies.

[40]  Asghar Ali.  Role and Importance of Simulator Instructor , 2008 .

[41]  Paulica Arsenie,et al.  Reducing of maritime accidents caused by human factors using simulators in training process , 2008 .

[42]  Mona Lundin,et al.  Tasks and instructions on the simulated bridge: Discourses of temporality in maritime training , 2018 .