An Initial Evaluation of a Simulation-Based Training Program for Army National Guard Units.

Shlechter, Theodore M.; Bessemer, David W.; Nesselroade, Paul K.; Jr., Anthony; James, Michael

doi:10.21236/ada297271

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These variations were found to be due largely to the foregoing limitations. Another constraint in exploiting Army simulation-based training systems, in addition to not always using simulation systems to their best advantage, was that many units spent considerable time specifying their exercises at training sites after they arrived -rather than using their precious and limited time to actually train (Shlechter, Bessemer, Nesselroade, & Anthony, 1995).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combined Arms Structured Simulation-Based Training Programs: Reflections of Key Developers

Finley¹,

Shlechter²,

Lavoie³

2000

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A series of research and development programs on structured simulation-based training (SST) were conducted during the period 1993-1999. These programs focused on developing SST training support packages (TSPs) to meet collective training requirements for the combined arms at echelons of brigade and below. An SST development methodology was also produced. The purpose of the methodology was to support future TSP developments as requirements for them are identified. This report represents the second portion of a two-part examination of issues related to SST. The first report described the history of these programs and their lessons learned. This report presents findings in three areas which were either not directly addressed or insufficiently resolved in published SST reports. These areas are: the respective roles of the constructivism and behaviorism/Systems Approach to Training instructional theories in designing the SST TSPs; needs for additional information and SST-related research; and planning and logistical requirements for integrating and maintaining SST as a part of the U.S. Army training system. The information needed to address these three areas was obtained from structured interviews and questionnaires. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. SUBJECT TERMS HI FOREWORDVirtual and constructive simulation training systems have been increasingly used by the Army in an attempt to mitigate increasing resource constraints. The U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) has shown, however, that while these systems can be very effective, the extent of this effectiveness depends, in part, on how they are used. The ARI's Armored Forces Research Unit has conducted research and development efforts into structured simulationbased training (SST) in order to maximize the Army's ability to realize the training benefits offered by its simulation training systems. This effort has been directed towards collective training requirements of combined arms forces at echelons of brigade and below.A companion report (Shlechter & Finley, [in preparation]) describes the history of the SST programs, and analyzes the SST instructional design processes, training products, and lessons learned as documented in published reports and training support packages (TSPs). The purpose was to make widely available the knowledge and insights gained from the SST programs. This report completes the effort. It draws upon interviews and questionnaires completed by key SST developers, providing important insights beyond those originally documented and illuminating actions necessary to make the use of SST TSPs a routine part of the Army's training practices. The Armored Forces Research Unit of the U.S Army Research institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI completed a series of structured simulation-based training (SST research and development (R&D) programs during the period, 1993-1999. These programs focused on developing SSTtraining support packages (TSPs) to meet collective training requi...

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combined Arms Structured Simulation-Based Training Programs: Reflections of Key Developers

Finley¹,

Shlechter²,

Lavoie³

2000

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because of the success in the implementation of structured simulation-based training using SIMNET in the VTP (Shlechter, Bessemer, Nesselroade, & Anthony, 1995), and because of the functional similarities between CCTT and SIMNET, the Army initiated the requirement for a corresponding structured training program for implementation with the CCTT. STRUCCTT was to model itself based on two previous VTP projects, "Simulation-Based Multiechelon Training Program for Armor Units" (SIMUTA) (Hoffman, Graves, Koger, Flynn, & Sever, 1995) and "SIMUTA-Battalion Exercise Expansion" (SIMUTA-B) (Graves & Myers, 1996) exercises.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structured Training for Units in the Close Combat Tactical Trainer: Design, Development, and Lessons Learned

Flynn¹,

Campbell²,

Myers³

et al. 1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An Initial Evaluation of a Simulation-Based Training Program for Army National Guard Units.

Cited by 2 publications

References 8 publications

Combined Arms Structured Simulation-Based Training Programs: Reflections of Key Developers

Combined Arms Structured Simulation-Based Training Programs: Reflections of Key Developers

Structured Training for Units in the Close Combat Tactical Trainer: Design, Development, and Lessons Learned

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About