Monday, September 17, 2007

Simulation and skills development

The path to skills development

I've been trying to understand better where simulation fits within the skills development process and whether simulation is the only/best option available to trainers and/or learners. My diagram shows a stepped transition from the abstract/theoretical/2D to the live application of the skill in a concrete/practical/3D environment. From a learning and development perspective, the aim of this process is a simple one: to have the learner develop the skills and confidence required to fulfil their job responsibilities effectively, without risk to themselves, to the other people with whom they work, or to their employer. It's possible that there are situations in which these risks are minimal and the skills so easy to attain, that employees could skip all the preliminaries and just learn by doing the job for real. On the other hand, I'm sure we can all think of plenty of examples of jobs that we rely on to be carried out according to strict guidelines, with great agility and confidence, and with the utmost consideration for our interests. We want these people to be properly trained and that's likely to include lots of safe practice away from real hazards.

Simulation seems to me to sit somewhere between the observation of expert performance and trying out those skills for yoursef on the job, however well supported. It enables learners to experiment, make mistakes, experience successes, obtain feedback, reflect and hypothesise. To be effective, simulations need to approximate the situation in which the skill must be applied for real. This requires a degree of physical fidelity (the simulation looks and feels like the real thing) and functional fidelity (it behaves like the real thing). Fidelity comes at a cost (many millions of dollars if you're talking flight simulators or similar, many hundreds of thousands if you're looking to enact a critical incident with multiple players in a virtual world) but cost has, of course, to be balanced against risk. The degree of physical or functional fidelity that you need will also depend on the type of skill that you're looking to address - cognitive, motor, interpersonal, or some combination of these.

Simulation is certainly figuring much more prominently in the thoughts of learning and development professionals, not least because of the evangelising efforts of thinkers such as Clark Aldrich, Roger Schank and Clark Quinn, but also because we now have so many more options available to us. Here's my comparison of some of the main options at our disposal:
  • Classroom exercises (role-play, etc.): real-time/collaborative; physical fidelity depends on whether the classroom can be made to appear like the job environment; functional fidelity depends on the ability of the players to behave realistically; peer pressure means the environment isn't quite as psychologically safe as it might seem.
  • 2D e-learning sims (interpersonal skills scenarios, software sims, business sims, etc.): self-paced, self-study; physical fidelity can be low, but can be improved by the use of rich media; functional fidelity depends on the sophistication of the design and the capabilities of the tool (Flash, Captivate, etc.).
  • live 3D sims (enactments of real-world scenarios): real-time/collaborative; physical fidelity depends on the quality of the 3D model, but is likely to be good; functional fidelity depends on the sophistication of the tool (Forterra, etc.) and on the ability of the players to behave realistically.
  • asynchronous 3D sims (problem-solving sims, etc.): self-paced, self-study; physical fidelity depends on the quality of the 3D model, but is likely to be good; functional fidelity depends on the sophistication of the design and the capabilities of the tool (Caspian, etc.).
  • simulators (flight, driving, etc.): typically for individual use; combination of hardware and software delivers high physical and functional fidelity.
These are first thoughts. Have I placed simulation correctly in the skills development process? Are there are other forms of simulation that I've missed?

2 comments:

  1. The first question is always, what are important concepts that students are missing (such as learning binary), or that we have not even bothered teaching in the past because we just do not know how (such as learning leadership)?

    Second, simulations present a framework of Actions, System Content, and Desired Results. The actions impact the system, but only the system gets results. These are then formatted into a practice-able environment. If this framework seems to be able to meet the unmet needs described above, simulations are a good fit.

    ReplyDelete
  2. While this certainly doesn't fall under normal simulation categorizations, the simple act of storytelling and narrative functions in much the same way.

    There is all sorts of interesting neuroscience research going on that is trying to back up Bruner's narrative theory- by including enough context and motivation in a story (and visuals if you can), you may be able to trigger mirror neurons, making the learner's brain feel like they themselves are doing the action.

    Certainly a low-tech sort of simulation, although any time you let a learner use their own imagination, you run the risk of them learning something other than what you intended.

    ReplyDelete