Ontology-Based Approach for Human Competency Gap Analysis in Air Traffic Management

Abstract

The Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP) is a flexible global engineering approach that allows all States to advance their Air Navigation capacities based on their specific operational requirements. Aviation professionals have an essential role in the transition to, and successful implementation of the GANP. The development of new air traffic control technology requires new competencies from operational and maintenance personnel under the circumstances. And this, in turn, requires new education curricula for initial, vocational and advanced training in this area. The paper is focused on the creation of methodology for the partial automation of the comparison of existing and required competences of Air Traffic Management (ATM) personal and synthesis of training courses and modules, using a formal, ontology-based approach as a tool to solve these problems. One of the problems in the implementation of the GANP is that, on the one hand, there are currently no unified requirements for all categories of ATM personnel, and on the other hand, the development of ATM technologies is far ahead of the pace of training of personnel of appropriate qualifications. This problem becomes even more noticeable in countries that have just started an active modernization of ATC systems and do not have enough experience in this field. The paper describes the general methodological approach based on the education ontology modelling for human competency gap analysis in ATM and for gap analysis between the university curricula outcomes and the ATM requirements. The ontology of key personnel competencies issues for the design and integration of large-scale future ATM programmes is proposed.

The Pressing Needs of Human Resource Management Renovation of Higher Vocational Schools in China: From the Perspective of Teacher Competency

“…1 Knowledge (Lee et al, 2020;Zeeny et al, 2021;Castro & Pereira, 2019;Nanivska et al, 2020;Držaić et al, 2018;Francis et al, 2019;Antera, 2021;Altunova & Kalman, 2020;Smith et al, 2021;Liu & Li, 2021) 2 Teaching implementation (Lee et al, 2020;Zeeny et al, 2021;Maconi & Sousa, 2020;Shafi et al, 2020;Korniienko, 2020;Koç & Fidan, 2019;Altunova & Kalman, 2020;Bartels et al, 2019;Dahlback et al, 2020;Prasetyono et al, 2021;Smith et al, 2021;Liu & Li, 2021) 3 Innovative ability (Ryu et al, 2021;Lee et al, 2020;Francis et al, 2019;Kabashkin & Tikanashvili, 2019;Antera, 2021;Bajwa, 2019;Smith et al, 2021;Liu, 2021;Liu & Li, 2021) 4 Personality (Lee et al, 2020;Zeeny et al, 2021;Castro & Pereira, 2019;Nanivska et al, 2020;Antera, 2021;Dymek et al,…”

“…Job engagement (Nanivska et al, 2020;Janssen et al, 2020;Bajwa, 2019;Cobbinah & Eshun, 2021;Gülyüz Debe, 2021) 3 Effective administrative management (Kabashkin & Tikanashvili, 2019;Lee et al, 2019;Janssen et al, 2020;Bajwa, 2019;Cobbinah & Eshun, 2021;Na & Li, 2020;Guo, 2022) 4 Job satisfaction (Janssen et al, 2020;Bajwa, 2019;Crawford et al, 2018;Leupold et al, 2019)…”