No abstract

A central tenet within the Army Learning Concept 2015 (ALC 2015) and Army Learning Model (ALM) is the need to transition to learner-centric methods and processes that develop critical competencies through rigorous, tailored, outcomeoriented learning experiences. Previous research conducted by the U.S. Army Research Institute (ARI) Ft. Benning Research Unit showed that tailored training in the Army is most likely to occur in technical, functional courses where graduates must be proficient in clearly defined skills, based on specified performance standards, upon graduation. However, there has been little research focused on identifying the actual different tailored training strategies employed in divided small group training based on interpersonal interactions or how the nature and frequency of these interactions affect subsequent student learning or task performance. This effort addresses gaps identified in previous research conducted on tailored training approaches and examines specific training issues raised by the 3-81st AR BN at Ft. Benning, GA. The first objective of the research was to identify potential predictors of performance at different stages of training in the 91A and 91M AIT courses that will enable instructors to better identify strong and weak Soldiers. The second objective was to examine small group processes in both courses to identify the nature and extent of tailored training, peer-to-peer interaction, and how tailoring varies with group composition. The final objective was to examine the effectiveness and other impacts of the Blended Rotation Interactive Technology Environment (BRITE) technologies employed in training (91M course only) on training outcomes.

During discussions with the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) in Feb 2006, the Commanding General (CG), Ft. Jackson, requested that ARI determine what assimilation into the Army culture consists of, while developing and testing prototype methodologies, measurement instruments, and analytical strategies to ascertain which aspects of the Army socialization process are or are not succeeding. To address these concerns, a reliable set of metrics were developed to track attitude and value change at three points in basic training. Data were collected at Ft. Jackson, SC, and Ft. Benning, GA, during Reception, near the end of BCT-White Phase (equivalent to the midpoint of OSUT), and just before graduation. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were used in conjunction with repeated measures ANOVA and hierarchical linear regression to examine how new Soldiers' attitudes and relational identification change during basic training. Selected findings indicate: (1) basic training effects positive changes in Soldier attitudes regardless of variations in personality and other individual difference measures, (2) identification with Battle Buddies, Drill Sergeants, and their platoon significantly impacted Soldierization outcomes during basic training and changed as training progressed, and (3) by the end of basic training, the degree to which their DSs have modeled the Army's values and desired behaviors emerges as one of the most significant factors in the Soldierization process. These findings are discussed in terms of DS training tactics and the relationships that develop among Soldiers and between Soldiers and DSs during basic training.

The goal of Army instructors is to deliver the best possible instructional experience so students can increase their knowledge and transfer it to their duty positions. A major means of accomplishing this goal is to tailor training to the individual student, a concept espoused in the Army Learning Model. In order to tailor training, one must first identify the critical differences that distinguish individuals who are likely to have problems with course content vs. those who will not. One objective of ARI's tailored training research is to identify measures which predict student performance in a variety of courses with different student populations. In agreement with the research literature, relevant prior knowledge has been consistently found to be the best predictor of later performance. It was also determined that experienced instructors had a good understanding of what prior knowledge was relevant for their courses. The purpose of the guide documented in this report is to provide instructors the tools necessary for developing appropriate assessments of prior knowledge, to determine whether these assessments are a good predictor of course performance, and to show them how to apply prior knowledge and course performance data to identify the students who could benefit from tailored training.