THE PROCESS OF DEVELOPING AND IMPROVING COURSE CONTENT FOR MILITARY TECHNICAL TRAINING
Harold G. Hunter, J. Daniel Lyons, Eugene F. MacCaslin, Jr. Smith, Wagner Robert G., Harold
Abstract
Harold G. Hunter, J. Daniel Lyons, Eugene F. MacCaslin, Jr. Smith, Wagner Robert G., Harold
Abstract
Curriculum development procedures in use as of 1966 for first- enlistment technical training in the Army, Navy, and Air Force are analyzed. A model process for training curriculum development was defined from training research findings and practices: (a) Analyze the system, (b) develop task inventories, (c) develop a job model, (d) analyze its tasks, (e) derive training objectives, (f) develop the training program, and (g) monitor the trained product and modify the curriculum. A comparison between this model and the training development procedures in use in the services indicated a need for (a) better procedures for determining the adequacy of training content and the means for improvement; (b) detailed guidance for developing or conducting the first four steps of the model process, criteria for allocating training content to formal instruction or on-the-job learning, performance specifications for graduates, and feedback from training programs; and (c) more opportunities for career fields in training.
OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Curriculum development procedures in use as of 1966 for first- enlistment technical training in the Army, Navy, and Air Force are analyzed. A model process for training curriculum development was defined from training research findings and practices: (a) Analyze the system, (b) develop task inventories, (c) develop a job model, (d) analyze its tasks, (e) derive training objectives, (f) develop the training program, and (g) monitor the trained product and modify the curriculum. A comparison between this model and the training development procedures in use in the services indicated a need for (a) better procedures for determining the adequacy of training content and the means for improvement; (b) detailed guidance for developing or conducting the first four steps of the model process, criteria for allocating training content to formal instruction or on-the-job learning, performance specifications for graduates, and feedback from training programs; and (c) more opportunities for career fields in training.
Key concepts: Course (navigation), Process (computing), Training (meteorology), Computer science, Instructional design, Multimedia, Content (measure theory), Mathematics education