Multichannel Learning System (MLS) Collaboration Working Group

1. Multichannel Learning System (MLS)Collaboration Working Group Ms Janie Glover Deputy Director, Technical Director Naval Education & Training Security Assistance Field Activity (NETSAFA) MLS Project Manager

2. AGENDA – DAY 1

3. AGENDA – DAY 2

4. MLS PROJECT us stakeholders

5. N E T S A F A NAVAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING SECURITY ASSISTANCE FIELD ACTIVITY NETSAFA MISSION & RELATIONSHIPS SECDEF SECNAV Develop, execute and manage the Department of Navy’s Security Assistance and Security Cooperation training and education programs that support the U.S. security strategy in building partner capacity to build and strengthen enduring international partnerships. DSCA ASNRD&A International Policy NAVYIPO Maritime Engagement Management USCG/IA USMC MCSCG

6. N E T S A F A NAVAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING SECURITY ASSISTANCE FIELD ACTIVITY NETSAFA’S ROLE PME Country Teams Flight Training Material Cases Mission Training Training Providers Requirements / Priorities COCOM / NCC Mobile Teams Technical Training CTFP/CD/I-MET/1206

7. DEFENSE INSTITUTE OF SECURITY ASSISTANCE MANAGEMENT (DISAM) Department Of Defense (DoD) Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) Defense Institute of Security Assistance Management (DISAM) Defense Institute of International Legal Studies (DIILS)

8. DISAM MISSION STATEMENT • The Defense Institute of Security Assistance Management provides professional education, research, and support to advance U.S. foreign policy through Security Assistance and Cooperation. Tasks • Resident, non-resident, and online courses • Seminars and tutorials • Research, consultation, studies • Information dissemination

9. IMS PRE-DEPARTURE BRIEFING • International Military Student Pre-Departure Briefing (IMSPDB) • For all International Military Student (IMS) selected to attend training in U.S. • Security Cooperation Offices (SCOs) tasked with ensuring IMS are briefed • Minimum content spelled out in Joint Security Cooperation Education and Training regulation (JSCET)

10. JOINT KNOWLEDGE ONLINE (JKO) • On behalf of the Joint Staff J7, JKO develops and delivers online joint training to prepare and assist individuals to support joint and coalition operations. • Provide 24/7 global access to JKO Portals to deliver cost effective, and efficient training using state-of-the-art technology. • Develop and deliver Web-based joint training products, courses, tailored curricula, small group staff training and immersive mission scenario culture and language training per the requirements of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Combatant Commands, and other JKO Stakeholders. • Track, document and report DoD-wide individual joint training completed in order to meet DoD/Combatant Command mandatory training requirements, and Service retirement / promotion or joint credit criteria.

11. Mobile Learning JKO TRAINING PLATFORM Tier III – Expand Access Interactive Desktop Simulation Small Group Scenario Trainer Virtual Cultural Awareness Trainer Tier II – Enhance Learning with Advanced Technology JKO Content Management Architecture First Level Web-based Courses Learning Content Management System Web-based Courseware Authoring Tool JKO Portals JKO Portals Tier I – Deliver Global, Distributed Learning Capability

12. Continuous Learning (711HPW/RHAS) • Develop mission relevant content for learning • Measure training outcomes in complex mission environments • Accelerate development of mission critical competencies • Optimize training value of live, virtual, and constructive environments

13. Where We Are Going: Game Changing Learning S&T Near Mid • Metrics and scenarios • Tailored needs assessment/gap analyses • Cross-domain readiness assessment • Proficiency tracking and feedback • Proficiency-based training • Evidence-based fidelity assessments • Cross domain after-action reviews • Team and team-of-teams assessment • Family of complementary trainers • Adaptive, distributed content and assessment • Scenario authoring, scripting, and metrics definition standards • Common data exchange, control, management • Managed learning/feedback across LVC contexts • Globally distributed learning • Seamless integration of LVC environments and players • Adaptive training and operational environments • Portable, personal learning and occupational records • Predictive performance models anticipate gaps/refreshers Far

14. Approach for Continuous Learning OBJECTIVES • Warehousing • What was learned • Where • How much • How often Adapt Conditions Based on Performance & Diagnosis Readiness/Proficiency Monitoring • Competencies • Knowledge • Skills • Experiences • Gaps … Adaptation Diagnosis Learning Opportunities AAR FEEDBACK CONDITIONS Record Measure Match Opportunities to Objectives ScenariosInstructional EventsStructure & TriggersStrategies & Principles Support resources Data ASSESSMENT Match Measures to Objectives & Conditions Individual/Team/Team of Teams Objective and Subjective What/How to Measure

15. OTHER US ORGANIZATIONS • ADL Co-Lab • Office of Naval Research Global (ONRG) • Office of Naval Research (ONR) Reserve Component (RC) • U.S. Naval Space & Warfare Systems Command Pacific (SPAWAR Pacific)

16. MLS PROJECT GOALS, OBJECTIVES & deliverables

17. MLS VISION

18. MLS GOALS • Evaluate the effectiveness of using multiple learning technologies (i.e., web-based e-learning, mobile apps, etc.) to support learning objectives • Assess the interoperability between U.S. and foreign partners learning management systems and their ability to meet Joint Security Cooperation Education and Training regulation (JSCET) training, information sharing, collaboration and coalition interoperability requirements

19. MLS OBJECTIVES • Evaluate the learning effectiveness of using learning technologies (web-based e-Learning, mobile applications, etc.) to support joint, interagency, intergovernmental and multinational (JIIM) education and training requirements. • Assess the interoperability of the US and foreign partners learning management systems to meet US/USG training, information sharing, and collaboration, and coalition interoperability requirements • Ensure that international partners have access to courses via DoD e-learning systems in accordance with Security Cooperation requirements

20. MLS DELIVERABLES • Provide e-learning courses in both the web-based and mobile app formats • The infrastructure to permit informed decision on the best delivery methodology for international partners • The capability of tracking courseware related content via partner LMS’ will be available via web services from the existing Joint Knowledge Online (JKO) coalition training capability. • A legally compliant and integrated tracking with partner Learning Management Systems (LMS) and JKO Mobile courses/content required to support US and its partners that comply with Security Cooperation requirements

21. MLS WORKING GROUPS

22. LEARNING CONTENT WORKING GROUP • Ensure the learning courses are developed according to the optimum format (e.g., audio course, e-course, apps, etc.) to meet the learning objectives • Identify the delivery formats to support just-in-time learning complements traditional training and education systems as well as more of a “personal assistance for learning” approach

23. TECHNOLOGY & INTEROPERABILITY • Develop content, based on US-customer needs, to support a multichannel learning approach (e.g., web-based, mobile applications, etc.) content. • Demonstrate the capability to incorporated a multichannel, multinational distributed learning architecture that uses the Joint Knowledge Online Internet Public (JKO-IP) for both web-based and mobile learning applications. • Make recommendations on how the lessons learned may be used to support future DoD and other USG International Military Student Predeparture Training Requirements.

24. TESTING & EVALUATION • Conduct an evaluation of a multichannel learning approach (e.g., web-based, mobile applications, etc.) to evaluate the effectiveness of providing a ‘personal assistance to learning (PAL)’ approach. • Evaluate the interoperability between US/International Learning Management Systems to support training and education needs and requirements. • Make recommendations on how the lessons learned may be used to support DoD and other USG International Military Student Predeparture Training Requirements.

25. MLS RESEARCH PROTOCOL DISCUSSION

26. HUMAN RESEARCH PROTOCOL GUIDING PRINCIPALS • US Directives : • 32 CFR 219 • DoD Directive 5400.11 • DoD Directive 3216.2 • DoD Instruction 3210.7 • SECNAVINST 3900.39D • UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) Ethics JSP 536 • EU Directives: • Ethical Review in Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) • EU Directive 95/46/EC • Guidance for Informed Consent • Canada Tri-council Policy Ethical Conduct for Research involving Humans

27. PRIVACY OF INDIVIDUALS • DoD Directive 5400.11 (DoD Privacy Program) • The privacy of an individual is a personal and fundamental right that shall be respected and protected • DoD Directive 3216.2 (Protection of Human Subjects in DoD-Supported Research) • …specifies authority for protecting the rights and welfare of human beings “used as subjects of study” in DoD-supported RDT&E • …identifies the requirement that US DoD-support research efforts must also meet the requirements of other countries when the research is conducted outside the US

28. PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECTS • 32 CFR 219 (Sec 219.101): • Unless otherwise required by department or agency heads, research activities in which the only involvement of human subjects will be in one or more of the following categories are exempt from this policy: • (1) Research conducted in established or commonly accepted educational settings, involving normal educational practices, such as (i) research on regular and special educational instructional strategies, or (ii) research on the effectiveness of or the comparison among instructional techniques, curricula, or classroom management methods

29. “INFORMED CONSENT IS NOT JUST ABOUT PATIENTS” • EU Data Protection Requirements: • “From a data protection and privacy issues points of view, all study participants present in a research project need to be informed about the planned research use of the collected data independently of they type of data collected • If a survey is planned within a project, participant need not only to be informed of how their personal data is planned to be handled, but also provide appropriate authorization. The design of the survey must guarantee that only data specifically required for the purpose of the research project will be gathered (unless clearly stated otherwise).”

30. PARTICIPANT TOTALS (MoLE PROJECT) • Original sample design: 30 per country • Minimum number per country: 28 • Minimum sample design: 234 • Launched: 268 • Started Proof of Concept: 177 (66.4%) • Completed Proof of Concept: 137 (51.12%)

31. PROJECT INTERACTION

32. ASIA PACIFIC AREA NETWORK (APAN) https://community.pan.org

33. LINKEDIN COLLABORATION

34. WORKSHOP EXPECTATIONS

35. WORKSHOP EXPECTATIONS • Ensure each participant understands the ‘new focus’ since it is no longer a CWP project • Obtain each organization’s requirements/capabilities in lieu of the aforementioned change • Collaboration on how to ‘effectively’ evaluate multichannel learning (i.e., web based and mobile apps) • Develop a shared understanding of participant expectations for the MLS Proof of Concept (PoC) • Determine if/how many partners will remain with the project to provide the best delivery methods/channels for the IMSPDB content

36. PROJECTED MLS SCHEDULE • May 2013: Requirements & Capabilities Workshop • Oct/Nov 2013: MLS Kick-off Workshop • Apr 2014: MLS Proof of Concept (PoC) Workshop • May/Jun 2014: MLS Proof of Concept • Aug 2014: MLS Final Presentation of Results

37. QUESTIONS/COMMENTS