1 / 28

The 2006 ADL Survey

The 2006 ADL Survey. 70th Meeting of the NATO Working Group on Individual Training and Education Developments 17-21 September 2007 Bergen, Norway J. D. Fletcher (Fletcher@ida.org). Some Background (Why are we doing this?). Tasking From NATO Training Group.

dinah
Download Presentation

The 2006 ADL Survey

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The 2006 ADL Survey 70th Meeting of the NATO Working Group on Individual Training and Education Developments 17-21 September 2007 Bergen, Norway J. D. Fletcher (Fletcher@ida.org)

  2. Some Background (Why are we doing this?)

  3. Tasking From NATO Training Group Purpose: Improve the quality of NATO training and education through cooperation and resource sharing. Approach: Implement ADL on a large scale. Task Objective: Identify common needs, priorities, and existing capabilities for ADL (i.e., need for interoperable education and training systems that address common, high-priority NATO and PfP operational needs). Product(s): Provide an annual report to the Military Committee through the International Military Staff.

  4. Some Results from the 2002 “Quick Survey” • Responses from 23 countries • Seven high priority training areas identified: NCO Staff Training, English Language, Staff Procedures, C2, Doctrine, Information Technology, and Cross Cultural Training • Internet delivery preferred over high-bandwidth lines • Cooperative development preferred over centralized development • Distributed content libraries preferred over centralized libraries • Unclassified content preferred over classified content • Agreement on the need for an interoperable, distributed ADL capability for NATO/PfP

  5. 2004 Survey • 31 responses from 19 Countries • Mostly Land, but substantial representation from Air, Sea, and MoD • Academies and civilian education and training also represented

  6. Some Results from the 2004 Survey • Thirty-one responses received from 20 countries. • Total of 387 courses that use or planned to use ADL technologies Mostly Technical training (52%); Basic C2 (21%); and Staff training (18%) -- Mostly blended approaches (68%). • Infrastructure needed for ADL widely available, but costly and not everywhere available (e.g., in homes). • Top six obstacles to adoption of ADL were seen as: Availability of Development Expertise; Expertise of Military Instructors in using ADL; Expertise of NCOs in using ADL technologies; Availability of ADL Materials; Understanding of ADL by Military Commanders and School Administrators; and Cost of ADL. • The value of ADL on-demand learning to NATO/PfP nations continued to be widely recognized and accepted.

  7. 2006 Survey (What have we found?)

  8. 2006 Survey • 24 Responses from 17 Countries • Mostly MoD, but substantial representation from Air, Sea, and Land • Academies and Civilian also represented • ADL applications in nations range from few to 1000s • Final report at May 2007 WG IT&ED meeting • Final Final report at September 2007 WG IT&ED meeting

  9. Courses Using ADL Technologies “Now” “In 3 Years”

  10. Increase in Number of Courses Using ADL Technologies

  11. ADL Plans and Policies

  12. Course Length and ADL Use *For courses using any ADL capabilities

  13. Teams, Crews, Staffs

  14. Course Importance (most to least) -- ADL Aside Language and culture training Professional development for officers Training for trainers Preparation for ‘other’ NATO assignments Preparation for NATO staff assignments Professional development for NCOs Preparation for in-country staff assignments General military training for officers Command and control training General military training for NCOs Professional development for civilian personnel Initial training for officers General military training for civilian personnel Initial training for NCOs Initial training for civilian personnel

  15. Authoring Tools Ready-Go; D2L editor Web-CT editor; Authorware; Breeze, Knowledge Assembler; Articulate Present; Articulate Quiz Maker; Director; Question Mark Perception; Adobe Acrobat; InfoPak; Captivate; Rapid Builder; Document Editor; Course Composer; Flash; ToolBook; Explicanto; Sumatra; IDEA; LAPODA; Dreamweaver; PfP LMS Prototype 2 Development Tool; IBM Authoring Tool; Toolbook Instructor; iLEX; Aloha II; TurboDemo; Oracle; Lotus; Lectora; Powerpoint Our respondents reported over 900 authoring tools now being used to prepare ADL materials

  16. Learning Management Systems Sun Learntone; Web-CT; D2L; Learn Logic; A-tutor (LCMS); Edu-Center; GENERATION; Global Teach; LOTUS Release 1.04; LOTUS Release 1.05; iLearning; ILIAS; Intuitext; MOODLE; First Class; Fronter; Lotus LearningSpace 5; Learngate; Army Learning Management System (ALMS);Blackboard; Aspen; Meridian KSI;Plateau; Learn.com; MGen Our respondents reported over 2500 courses now using Learning Management Systems (aka LMSs)

  17. Infrastructure

  18. Acquiring ADL

  19. Acquiring LMSs

  20. 2006 - Top Six Obstacles to ADL Use

  21. 2006 - Next Six Obstacles to ADL Use

  22. 2006 - Top Six Benefit(s) Expected from ADL

  23. 2006 - Benefits 7-12 Expected from ADL

  24. 2006 - Benefits 13-18 Expected from ADL

  25. Comments … • Quick Survey suggested there was strong interest in not replacing current courses, but in using ADL for: - Preparation for training and new assignments - Refresher/sustainment training - Specific information seeking and problem solving • However we now seem to be busy developing replacement ADL materials for blended environments -- many courses -- about 1/3 ADL • Strong interest in advancing in-country ADL capabilities - Training for in-country staff positions - Training for trainers - Language and culture training • 35 repositories reported -- CORDRA coming along • Expertise in ADL improving, but both costs and expertise still seen as “obstacles”

  26. More Comments … • • Major benefits: • Agility (rapid preparation and modification), accessibility (anywhere, anytime), and reduced costs for training (and overall infrastructure costs) • • Interoperability currently of more interest than reuse • • Availability and quality of learning management systems does not seem to be an obstacle (cf ILIAS) • ADL materials (e.g., courses) split about evenly between “off the shelf” and in-house acquisition • Infrastructure needed to support ADL satisfactory(?) and still improving • • High command support for ADL continues

  27. Question … Is this survey business worthwhile?? Next time: - Web based - NTG Website - More sensible questions - Fewer questions - More ACT involvement

More Related