The design and effect of automated directions during scenario-based training

During scenario-based training, the scenario is dynamically adapted in real time to control the storyline and increase its effectiveness. A team of experienced staff members is required to manage and perform the adaptations. They manipulate the storyline and the level of support during their role-play of important characters in the scenario. The costs of training could be reduced if the adaptation is automated by using intelligent agent technology to control the characters within a virtual training environment (a serious game). However, such a system also needs a didactical component to monitor the trainee and determine necessary adaptations to the scenario. This paper investigates the automation of didactical knowledge and the corresponding dynamic adaptation of the scenario. A so-called director decides upon and distributes the necessary changes in real-time to the characters. First, the nature and goals of the adaptations are analyzed. Subsequently, the paper introduces a conducted study into the applicability of directable scenarios. Thereafter, an experiment is introduced that investigates the effects of directorial interventions upon the instructive quality of the scenario. Qualitative results indicated that trainees experienced scenario-based training to be instructive and motivating. Moreover, quantitative results showed that instructors rated directed scenarios as significantly better attuned to the trainee's needs compared to non-directed scenarios. Our future research will focus at the design of an architecture for automatically directed scenario-based training. Cues relevant for the learning process can be identified in real-time.These cues can trigger scripts to effectively adapt training in real-time.Adapted training scenarios improve the quality of learning.

[1]  Jenova Chen,et al.  Flow in games (and everything else) , 2007, CACM.

[2]  Randall L. Oser.  A Structured Approach for Scenario-Based Training , 1999 .

[3]  Lloyd P. Rieber,et al.  Seriously considering play: Designing interactive learning environments based on the blending of microworlds, simulations, and games , 1996 .

[4]  Eduardo Salas,et al.  Advanced technology in scenario-based training. , 1998 .

[5]  Tom Murray,et al.  Toward an Operational Definition of the Zone of Proximal Development for Adaptive Instructional Software , 2003 .

[6]  L. S. Vygotksy.  Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes , 1978 .

[7]  John-Jules Ch. Meyer,et al.  Situated cognitive engineering : the requirements and design of automatically directed scenario-based training , 2012, ACHI 2012.

[8]  Patrick R. Thomas,et al.  Relationships between Flow, Self-Concept, Relationships between Flow, Self-Concept, Relationships between Flow, Self-Concept, Relationships between Flow, Self-Concept, Relationships between Flow, Self-Concept, Psychological Skills, and Performance Psychological Skills, and Performance Psychological , 2001 .

[9]  Jeroen J. G. van Merriënboer,et al.  Training Complex Cognitive Skills: A Four-Component Instructional Design Model for Technical Training , 1997 .

[10]  Newton Lee,et al.  Anna Marie Piersimoni , 2005, CIE.

[11]  Michael F. Young,et al.  Instructional design for situated learning , 1993 .

[12]  Richard E. Clark,et al.  Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching , 2006 .

[13]  Timothy T. Baldwin,et al.  TRANSFER OF TRAINING: A REVIEW AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH , 1988 .

[14]  Michele D. Dickey.  Engaging by design: How engagement strategies in popular computer and video games can inform instructional design , 2005 .

[15]  P. Kirschner,et al.  Taking the Load Off a Learner's Mind: Instructional Design for Complex Learning , 2003 .

[16]  V. Shute,et al.  Melding the Power of Serious Games and Embedded Assessment to Monitor and Foster Learning: Flow and Grow , 2009 .

[17]  Peta Wyeth,et al.  GameFlow: a model for evaluating player enjoyment in games , 2005, CIE.

[18]  S. Dreyfus,et al.  Peripheral Vision , 2005 .

[19]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[20]  M. David Merrill,et al.  First principles of instruction , 2012 .

[21]  Celeste Kinginger,et al.  Defining the Zone of Proximal Development in US Foreign Language Education , 2002 .

[22]  Maaike Harbers,et al.  Intelligent Agents for Training On-Board Fire Fighting , 2009, HCI.

[23]  Lloyd P. Rieber,et al.  The Value of Serious Play , 1998 .

[24]  Simon Egenfeldt-Nielsen.  Overview of research on the educational use of video games , 2006 .

[25]  Joanna C. Dunlap,et al.  Rich environments for active learning: a definition , 1995 .

[26]  S. Chaiklin.  The zone of proximal development in Vygotsky's analysis of learning and instruction. , 2003 .