The use of multimedia for training maintenance tasks

F.M.M. van der Vloed, F.B.M. Min and J.C.M.M. Moonen

University of Twente, Faculty of Educational Science and Technology, Department of Instrumentation Technology, P.O. Box 217, 7500 AE Enschede, The Netherlands

Abstract: In this article it was investigated by what means Computer-Based training and Virtual Reality could be used to support the training of maintenance personnel at a company which, inter alia, trains people to operate or repair Naval Combat Systems. Interviews were carried out to explore the situation at this company. Amongst other outcomes, this resulted in a further description of the specific target group (foreign technical personnel) and the testing methods used (informal questions and observation). Necessary design requirements were derived from this information, for example, that long tracts of text should be avoided due to students’ poor control of the official course language.

Keywords: Training, maintenance tasks; multimedia applications; computer-based training; virtual reality.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Van der Vloed, F.M.M., Min, F.B.M. and Moonen, J.C.M.M. (2001) ‘The use of multimedia for training maintenance tasks’, Int. J. Continuing Engineering Education and Lifelong Learning, Vol. X, No. Y, pp.000–000.

Biographical notes:

Mona van der Vloed – Claessens graduated in Cognitive Ergonomics at the University of Utrecht in the Netherlands. After that she worked at the TNO Human Factors Research Institute in Soesterberg, where she studied traffic behaviour in order to modify road design, traffic signs and ‘in-vehicle devices’. Now she is working on her dissertation at the department of Educational Science and Technology at the University of Twente in the Netherlands. Here she runs a project in which she is investigating how information can ideally be presented to train procedural tasks. Ultimately suitable (combinations of) media and an effective and efficient situating of information, such as text, pictures, animations and interactive 3D models will be implemented in a Dutch company where specialist staff are trained to perform preventive and corrective maintenance procedures on radar equipment.

Dr. Ir. F.B.M. (Rik) Min is an electro-technical engineer from the University of Delft, specialized in computer simulation and modelling for education and training. In 1982 I received my Ph.D. at the medical faculty of the University of Maastricht.

Since 1983 he is working as engineer in the educational sciences. He is a researcher, developer and university lecturer at the University of Twente (the Netherlands). He does research to learning environments and educational multimedia computer simulation methods and techniques. He gives courses, both practical as theoretical, about designing educational multimedia productions, in particular model-driven simulation environments.

Prof. Dr. J.C.M.M. Moonen is professor of Educational Instrumentation in the Faculty of Educational Science and Technology of the University of Twente. Previously he was director of the National Centre for Education and Information Technology. His current research interests are multimedia design methodology, implementation of ICT in education and training, and the cost-effectiveness of educational media.

1 Introduction

Until now, much research has been done about human-machine interaction. The nature of this interaction depends on both characteristics of the system and characteristics of its users. Systems or machines must meet certain requirements with respect to human cognitive abilities and weaknesses. In other words, knowledge about human information processing must be used to adjust a system fully to its users. For example, with the development of learning tools, it must be considered that humans can only store seven plus/minus two chunks of information in their memories at once [1]. Besides research about restrictions on human memory, other important research has been done about the construction of memory [2], human knowledge [3,4] human performance [5–8], and so on.

A successful interaction between system and user also depends on several other factors. The design of a system has to be adapted to the types of tasks users have to perform on this system. Different tasks demand different types of interactions between the user and the interface resulting in different demands and criteria for their interface design. Criteria for displaying ‘In-vehicle information’ while driving a car differ from those applied to computer screens in the control room of a ship. An IVIS (In Vehicle Information System) is not allowed to force road users to pay visual attention to its display [9,10], while with a vigilance task in a control room active interference of the system is needed to keep operators alert [11]. Apart from differences in tasks, also more context-based aspects such as the availability of (financial) resources can also result in completely different design solutions.

In this study the interest was in the possible implementation of multimedia applications (‘machines’) to train maintenance staff (‘man’) within a company that produces naval combat systems and trains people to operate or maintain these systems. Therefore a good definition about the types of multimedia applications, in specific Computer–Based Training (CBT) and Virtual Reality (VR), the target group, the kinds of tasks and the residual situation within the company had to be obtained. Here the goal was to explore the context within which these multimedia were to be used. Because this led to questions that were not to be found in literature or ‘company-documentation’, such as: ‘what kind of training methods does each instructor use?’, ‘what are typical problems with students?’ and so on, interviews were taken from the instructors of the company. The concern was to learn more about the condition of the current situation, about eventual problems and about what was expected to be the ideal situation. On the basis of this information, necessary design requirements were obtained that could be specifically related to the particular circumstances in which the system had to be used. In the following study, experiments were planned to test these and other (gained from a literature study about the use of virtual objects and CBT for training procedural tasks [12]) suggested design requirements.

Research design A qualitative method of investigation was maintained, because the goal was to explore the situation [13]. It was decided to use the expert knowledge of instructors by interviewing them about certain topics. First, ‘company-documentation’ [14–17] was read, part of a course was followed and informal conversations with three instructors were held to discover further points of interest that seemed to have an influence on the implementation of multimedia in training. During these conversations the interviewer brought up subjects like the nature of the courses, the types of students and the learning material, without expressing her own opinion about these matters. On the basis of these conversations the checklist was extended to serve as a topic list for interviews with instructors. The interviews were semi-structured [18], that is, they were fixed formulated questions, but allowed for open answer possibilities. During the interview these questions were ‘discussed’. Table 1 shows the topics that were treated in the interviews.

Table 1 Topics that were used in the interviews

A frequently recurring topic during the informal conversations was that instructors and their teaching methods have to be flexible. The reason seemed to be that student groups vary in cultural background (students from at least eight different countries), size (small versus large groups), composition (poorly and highly educated people versus poorly and highly educated people) and entry level (low versus high). In addition, regardless of certain requirements from the involved company as to preliminary knowledge and skills, in practice customers decide for themselves what kinds of people they will send on a course. Finally, the potential market and wishes of the customer determined the kinds of products or systems that this company produces.

Systems. There is a whole scale of different systems and tasks available at this company. The systems that need to be supported and maintained are situated on naval vessels. There are a number of radar systems on the upper deck, there are several (Marine) operator consoles (MOCs) in the control room between-decks and on the lower deck there are cabinets that contain the hardware of the radar systems. Table 2 shows the systems mentioned that are placed on a frigate.

Table 2 Systems divided into those on the upper deck, those between-decks and those on the lower deck.

Systems
Upper deck	Between-decks	Lower deck
Surveillance radar Track radar Navigation radar	TACTICOS Multifunction Operator Console (MOC)	Cabinets

Equipment that has to be used varies between different kinds of jobs and different apparatus. Nowadays, the use of measuring equipment has reduced because hardware is more and more operated by software. Table 3 shows the equipment that is used in courses for maintenance staff.

Table 3 Equipment used in courses for maintenance staff

Equipment

Measuring equipment Maintenance Requirement Cards Procedure books Software installation manuals (SIM) PIOD (laptop) GSS

Tasks. There are several training levels (OLM, ILM, DLM) in which maintenance staff can be trained. They do not always seem to provide information about the difficulty of a course. They are bound to the location at which the maintenance takes place. The depth or difficulty level of a course will be determined in consultation with clients and it depends largely on the following two aspects:

• The kind of ship; the larger the ship the higher the training level
• The mission time; the longer the mission the higher the training level

Courses are divided into four difficulty levels: 1, 2, 3, and 3+. All levels include looking at whether the system works or not. The first two levels include the transfer of very simple knowledge or skills. For example, cleaning or changing the system units due for replacement (preventive maintenance tasks). There is no technical education needed to learn this. Some teachers consider that the first two levels are insufficient to give students the feeling that they are capable of performing their maintenance tasks. Courses 3 and 3+ both involve corrective maintenance (solving technical problems that can occur) with the help of measuring equipment. Students of level 3+ are also given enough background knowledge of the system to be able to solve problems that emerge unexpectedly and cannot be solved with the available procedures. Reasoning is required and detailed schemes will be used. Table 4 shows the different difficulty levels of maintenance.

Table 4 The difficulty levels of maintenance

Difficulty levels of maintenance
Level 1/2	Level 3	Level 3+
Learning preventive maintenance No technical education needed Using simple procedures	Learning corrective maintenance Technical education needed Using procedures Solve envisaged malfunctions Using measuring equipment	Learning corrective maintenance Technical education needed Learning to maintain with and without procedures Solve envisaged malfunctions and malfunctions that have not yet occurred Using measuring equipment

The tasks mentioned that maintenance staff have to learn were inventoried and shown in Table 5.

In addition to this inventory about the systems the company produces, the equipment it uses and the scale of tasks which have to be taught, an inventory about teaching methods was made. They were ranked on the basis of the frequency with which they were mentioned.

Table 5 Tasks that maintenance staff have to learn

Tasks

Start up the system Making the system ready for operation Noticing malfunctions Tracking defective units or malfunctions/Performing faultfinding procedures Exchanging defective units Performing adjustment procedures Functioning and tuning of the different cards Maintenance and repair of different software layers Communication between subsystems Performing preventive maintenance Installing software according to procedures Make a distinction between hardware and software faults

Training goal(s). In general the goal of instructors is to train students in the most important tasks (skills) (5) and knowledge (2) (5 and 2 are the numbers of teachers who expressed this opinion. Tasks that were mentioned are recognizing whether the system works, faultfinding, interpreting fault reports, exchanging procedures, tuning procedures and learning to install. With respect to knowledge, instructors demanded comprehension and overview, knowing technical details and knowing the meaning of buttons. Table 6 shows the goals that were mentioned by instructors and how often they were referred to.

Table 6 The goals mentioned by instructors and the frequency with which they appeared

Training goal	Number of goals mentioned
Training in most important tasks Transferring understanding and knowledge about the functioning of the system Training students in what is officially needed Training students in what they expect See to it that students are comfortable and learn at own pace The instructor should have positive feelings about the degree of communication (non-verbal and verbal).	5 2 1 1 1 1

To test whether the goal was reached at the end of a course, instructors did not use formal verbal or written tests. This was because it would be an invasion of a student’s privacy. It could for example, endanger a student’s career. As a consequence, instructors used alternative methods to measure the students’ capabilities. These informal tests are further called observation judgements. Table 7 shows the nature of these observations.

Table 7 The kinds of (informal) ‘tests’ that were used by instructors to measure whether the training goal was reached and the frequency with which they were mentioned

Tests to measure whether the training goal was reached

Number of tests mentioned

– Observing students during practical lessons/simulating defects Speed with which students perform tasks Independence with which students perform tasks   – Judging answers from students to questions during theoretical or practical lessons Quality of answers Speed of answers   – Judging questions from students during theoretical or practice lessons Quality of questions Amount of questions   – Observing students during theoretical lessons Quality of things they write down (own summary is good, literal transference is bad)

4       3         2       1

Theory and practice. Officially a maintenance course should contain 50% theory lessons and 50% practice lessons. The time that instructors get to prepare a course is 1.5 times the length of the course. There is contact in advance with the client about what he or she wants their personnel to be trained in. The current situation is that these times vary now and than (see Table 8). Some instructors came up with ratios specific for certain tasks: faultfinding: 20% theory – 80% practice, fine-tuning: 100% practice and operator course: 10% theory – 90% practice. Table 8 shows the ratio of theory and practice that instructors use with maintainer courses.

Table 8 The ratio of theory and practice that instructors use with maintenance courses and the frequency with which these were mentioned

Ratio theory-practice maintained by instructors	Number of ratios mentioned
Theory: 60% – Practice: 40% Theory: 50% – Practice: 50% Theory: 40% – Practice: 60%	3 3 1

The amount of theory and practice instructors used in their lessons varied from time to time according to the given circumstances. According to the teachers this was caused by the varying availability of the system (mostly not for 50% of the time available, as it should be) (3) and the variation in students’ entry levels that stressed the importance of theoretical education (3). Other reasons mentioned were the type and difficulty of tasks (for some tasks more theory lessons were needed) (2) and the fact that with large student groups less time could be spent with the system (a maximum of three students was allowed to practice with the system at any one time). Table 9 shows the reasons why instructors had to maintain a certain ratio of theory and practice.

Table 9 The reason instructors had to maintain this ratio of theory and practice and the frequency with which these were mentioned

Reason for ratio theory-practice	Number of reasons mentioned
The availability of the system The entry level of the students Difficulty level of the tasks Size of the student group	3 3 2 1

There were instructors who explicitly judged theoretical knowledge to be more important than practical skills (3). Reasons were that skills are easy to learn, so less time had to be spent on these and the fact that built in tests (BITE, system checks itself for failures) from the systems are not perfect just as the same as the procedures from procedure books. Other instructors considered knowledge as a basis (3). Students have at least to understand the system as a whole (what is in it, the location of all system parts/ units and how it functions). One instructor considered theory and practice as equally important. Table 10 shows the reasons for the need for theoretical knowledge.

Table 10 The need for theoretical knowledge and the frequency with which it was mentioned

The need for theoretical knowledge

Number of times knowledge mentioned

Theoretical knowledge is more important than skills Knowledge as a basis Depends on insight, entry level and former experience of students Depends on whether theory has value in practical situations Knowledge gives more feeling for system Knowledge gives betters imaginative powers of what can go wrong (faultfinding) Knowledge elicits more pleasure and more motivation The ability to gain new information is more important than skills Affection for the subject is more important than skills Relevant technical knowledge and practical skills are equally important

3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

An equal amount of instructors stated that practice is more important than skills (3). ‘Practice is the final goal’. The reasons given were that dealing practically with the system was the final goal and that in the end procedures had to be done without thinking (automatically). Table 11 shows reasons given for the need for practical skills.

Table 11 The need for practical skills and the frequency with which they were mentioned

The need for practical skills	Number of skills mentioned
Practice is most important Students do need some practical experience, otherwise it would take too much time to train subject matter The students have to be active, because reading is passive and can only be efficient for a short time. Interest is very important for practical skills	3 1 1   1

Training materials. The materials the instructors used in their lessons were mostly the same for all instructors. For example, all the interviewed instructors used handouts (with block diagrams and service schemes or schemes to adjust), a blackboard and overhead projectors. One instructor used demonstration materials such as transmitters. Table 12 shows the training materials that were used for the maintenance staff courses.

Table 12 The training materials that were used for the maintenance staff courses and the frequency with which they were mentioned

Training materials used	Number of training materials mentioned
Handouts Blackboard Overhead projectors ‘Signaal’ manuals Videos of maintenance procedures Commercial folders/documentation folders Demonstration material	7 7 7 4 4 2 1

Multimedia applications: Instructors were also questioned about more modern lesson materials, namely multimedia applications such as Virtual Reality and Computer Based Training. Instructors agreed with the use of VR and CBT on condition that they would not replace the instructor. Students need social contact and personal guidance. One instructor stated that students would possibly get used to training without instructors later, but that now it would be too radical.

Table 13 shows the mentioned advantages and disadvantages of Virtual Reality.

Table 13 The advantages and disadvantages of Virtual Reality mentioned by instructors and the frequency with which they were mentioned

Advantages of Virtual Reality	Number of advantages mentioned	Disadvantages of Virtual Reality	Number of disadvantages mentioned
Things can be easily edited It can reduce costs (the system will be needed less often) One can easily clarify and visualize things It can make the information more accessible and get rid of abstractions It can be used when the availability of the real system is critical It can be used when it is risky to break things in the real system It can be used for extra training, when students do not have the presumed entry level	1 1   1   1   1     1   1	Too expensive It may be too hard to simulate a very complex system	3 1

Almost all instructors put forward that Virtual Reality could not replace the real system (6). This is because VR is never the same as the ‘real thing’. One instructor suggested using VR as training tool before working on the real system, whereas another suggested using it as replacement for practice lessons.

Table 14 shows what subjects are appropriate to be learned with the help of Virtual Reality according to the instructors.

It did not become very clear how instructors would implement good educational Virtual Reality. They mentioned both passive VR (on a large screen, for example the Signaal Company VR room with moving 3D images) (5) and active VR (with head-mounted display and glasses, possibility of walking around objects and enter them plus possibility of performing actions) (5). However, many of them did not regard active VR as a realistic option in the near future. One instructor mentioned the importance of feedback by means of alarm noises that warn of illegal operations. And another advised keeping the sequence of actions intact.

Table 14 Training in subjects that are appropriate to be taught with the help of Virtual Reality and the frequency with which they were mentioned

Ideal subjects to train in with the help of Virtual reality

Number of subjects mentioned

– Corrective/Preventive maintenance procedures Faultfinding Tuning Exchanging procedures (replacing units) See through a gearbox (mechanical jobs)   – Theoretical concepts Principles of radar energy/electrical beams Demonstrating physical properties of system (size, number of parts or units)   – Operators tasks – Tasks that occur often – Tasks that are difficult to do in reality – Time consuming tasks

5           2       1 1 1 1

Table 15 shows the mentioned advantages and disadvantages of Computer Based Training.

Table 15 The (number of) advantages and disadvantages of Computer Based Training that were mentioned by instructors and the frequency with which they were mentioned

Advantages of Computer Based Training– You will not constantly need the real system Can be used when there is a risk of breaking things in the real system Can be used when parts of the system are difficult to reach   – Can be used for extra training When students do not have the presumed entry level When students with more affinity and experience want extra learning		3             2		– Too expensive One hour of training via CBT is 200 hours of programming. – System differs per client so adaptations have to be made all the time		4     1

CBT is not seen as an application that will replace instructors. Instructors could refer to CBT so students could access the material in their own time. It can also be seen as a ‘tool’ to practice maintenance in advance when the system is not available. Half of the students could use CBT while the other half practises with CBT. The amount of CBT can be adapted to the students’ affinity and/or experience with the subject matter. Another possibility is that CBT will serve/be sold as a renewal course abroad. One instructor stressed the importance of instruction from a book.

According to the instructors there were several learning subjects that are appropriate to be learned with the help of Computer Based Training. Table 16 shows these subjects.

Table 16 Training subjects that are appropriate to be taught with the help of Computer Based Training and the frequency with which they were mentioned

Ideal subjects to train with the help of Computer Based Training	Number of subjects mentioned
– Theoretical knowledge Principles of radar energy/Doppler effects Definitions Subjects that pop up in all courses   – Corrective maintenance procedures Faultfinding Standard procedures	5         2

Instructors would provide good educational Computer Based Training with possibilities to interact (‘pushing buttons resulting in actions’) (2) and animations (2). In addition they would build in the possibility to record every act in enormously large databases.

Students’ entry level (7) and their inability to comprehend or speak the official course language (English or Dutch) (5) were the biggest problems. Another complaint of instructors about the course was that the available time was not enough (4). Courses are too short to deal with all the subject matter at the level of difficulty that was planned. A related problem that was mentioned is the lack of course (preparation) time (3). The more difficulty students had with the subject matter, the more time was spend on extra training, further explanation etc. Another aspect that was said to interfere with the smooth running of training is the hierarchy student groups sometimes have (3). Most groups consist of people of different ranks. This often complicates the method of training. Instructors have to be both cautious about what to tell or ask students of a higher rank (to prevent them from loss of face) and what to tell or ask students of a lower rank (to prevent them from sanctions). Problems with the availability of the system were stated to be caused because it was not ready or defective (3). The poor availability of information consisted of documentation or procedures that were not yet ready (2). Finally, a problem mentioned was that sometimes students became unmotivated during the classes of previous instructors, and that this is very difficult to reverse (1). This was because some of student groups are trained in different subjects and because each instructor has his/her own specialism, these students are brought into contact with different instructors.

Table 17 Problems with the course in general, instructors, students and the frequency with which they were mentioned

Problems with course, instructors and students

Number of problems mentioned

Course Course is too short Equipment is not available/difficult to find System is not available to rehearse with Preparation time is too short Poor availability of information Course is too difficult Documentation not correct Multiple instructors for one student group The amount of students that can rehearse on the system is limited   Instructors Instructors who are stubborn Instructors who have difficulties dealing with another culture Instructors who go through the learning material too quickly Instructors who are not able to motivate students Instructors who are not able to explain difficult things in a simple manner   Students Students who do not have the right entry level Students who cannot comprehend and/or express themselves in the official course language Students who need another approach due to cultural differences Students who are afraid to ask questions (group hierarchy) Students who do not want to admit they do not understand Students who have a lack of motivation

4 4 3 3 2 1 1 1 1     2 2 1 1 1     7 5 3 3 1 1

There were also some questions about specific problems with students: problems with the age of students, problems with their lack of computer experience/knowledge and with their cultural background. Three instructors stated that age is not an influence on the successful performance of students. In addition, it seemed that the stated advantages of being young were also the stated advantages of being old. For example, while young students were said to have little practical experience, older students were labelled as experienced. Younger students were said to be less motivated (2), have less practical experience (2), have a shorter history of education, have more problems with hardware technique and have knowledge only about their own discipline. Older students were expected to have less experience with computers (3), need more time to learn (3) and to have more problems with newer systems and techniques.

Experience with computers was also found of small relevance to the performance of students. However it was mentioned as a convenient ‘characteristic’ with added value (4). ‘It is easier to understand when a student has experience with the computer’. In addition, it was said to becoming more important nowadays. At the same time the number of students who do not know much about computers is decreasing.

Culture was already at the basis of some previously mentioned problems, such as problems with language and group hierarchy. The specific question about problems with cultural differences also elicited some other aspects. Students’ learning methods differed. From one culture students were used to learning everything by heart while students from another culture were used to reasoning and improvizing (2). Students’ customs could also elicit problems. For example, normal behaviour in one culture is considered rude in another culture. Just as the entry level differed per culture the quality of their military and civilian personal did too. Some countries placed more importance upon military personnel and others on their civilian personal.

Finally, affinity with technology and motivation were also seen as typical traits for students from some particular countries. It cannot be claimed that the problems that were mentioned are always necessarily caused by a cultural difference. Another fact is that problems cannot be totally generalized to all students from one culture. Thus, problems mentioned were considered to be typical in general for one particular culture.

Table 18 shows characteristics that were considered to determine the quality of a course, instructor, student and the frequency with which they were mentioned

Table 18 Characteristics that were considered to determine the quality of a course, instructor, student and the frequency with which they were mentioned

Ideal situation	Number of characteristics mentioned
Course Enough time with the same student group Knowing in advance about students’ entry level Enough time with the same student group Enough time to prepare the course A small student group A group with students who all have the same entry level Training on the job afterwards Availability of tools/measuring equipment Availability of right course documentation in advance	5 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Instructors Instructors with expert knowledge Didactic skills Adapting course to entry level of students: 3 Adapting course to cultural background of students: 2 Adapting course to future responsibilities of students Skills to explain difficult things: 2 Ability to formulate in a logical way Transmitting information successfully Involve people Discussing other topics also Admitting lack of knowledge and looking up things you do not know Social skills Patience: 3 Good at contacts Knowing how to deal with people Intuitive in relations outside lessons Students have to trust you: 2	4 13                   8
Students Students with good entry level Students with good command of official course language Motivated students Students who are interested Students who are disciplined Students who are responsive Students who are not afraid to make mistakes Students who are conscious about future responsibilities/tasks Students who are not too serious, not to precise (time absorbing) – Students who have the ability to gain new information or knowledge	7 5 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

During the informal conversations it had already become clear that in the first place, issues such as the potential market and wishes of the customer determine the kind of products or systems that this company produces. As a consequence it is already certain what will be the learning domain (subject matter) of the courses. Second, regardless of certain requirements from the involved company as to preliminary knowledge and skills, in practice customers decide themselves what kinds of people they will send on a course. This was endorsed by the interview result that students’ entry levels in general appeared to be too low. Thus another unchangeable factor here is the target group of students (which also proved to be a largely varying factor looking at the interview results). These aspects and the fact that despite this the available time for a course remains the same stresses the importance of instructors’ flexibility (which was also confirmed by the interview results).

From the interviews it appeared that the company involved possessed a wide range of systems, equipment and tasks. Although further research was planned to investigate what types of design requirements are needed for each type of task (level), some general design criteria were derived from the interview results.

The lack of rehearsal with the system (no system available, system broken, only small numbers of students can rehearse with the system at the same time) could be decreased by means of simulations of the system with which students could interact. In particular, tasks that occur often (recycling of multimedia) and that are difficult (extra practice with multimedia) or time consuming (multimedia reduces costly time with system) are profitable to put into a multimedia application.

The possibility of extra rehearsal (with simulations) is also useful because intended users of multimedia within this company usually have a low entry level and a poor control of the official course language (English). As a consequence, multimedia applications should not contain long passages of (complicated) text, but visualizations to avoid misunderstandings and to get rid of abstractions.

Because of the varying entry levels and command of the course language, multimedia should be flexible with respect to speed and difficulty. Just as instructors have to adapt the speed of lessons to (the entry level of) students, multimedia design should allow the student to maintain his/her own learning speed. In addition, as previously mentioned, the instructor should assign students to the right kinds of lessons or difficulty levels, unless the student is able to judge this for him/herself.

The individual character of multimedia applications can partly take care of the ‘group hierarchy problem’. With ‘CBT-lectures’ students are spread across the classroom each behind their own computer. Students who were afraid to ask questions because of the presence of their superiors are now more easily able to ask something in private when the instructor makes his round.

In addition to the current observation methods (does the student asks intelligent questions? Does the student perform a task well during practice lessons?) multimedia can provide a more objective view on students competence. Registration of students’ performance can be used to gain insight into their progress and to anticipate on the ‘educational needs’ of students.

In order to be able to test whether these design requirements hold when the target group of users gets into contact with this multimedia, it is aimed to build a module of Computer Based Training with the use of virtual models. This prototype will contain the subject matter of a typical procedural task. Users will be provided with different designs (for example animation versus interactive models) and tested on their task performance afterwards. In addition, attention will be paid to students’ learning strategies.

I wish to thank the teachers of the Signaal Company for sharing their expert knowledge.

1. Miller, G. (1956) ‘The magical number of seven, plus or minus two: some limit on our capacity for information processing’, Psychological Review, Vol. 63, pp.81–97.
2. Wickens, C. (1984) Engineering Psychology and Human Performance, Columbus, OH: Merrill.
3. Collins, A.M. and Quillian, M.R. (1969) ‘Retrieval time from semantic memory’, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, Vol. 8, pp.240–247.
4. Collins, A.M. and Loftus, E.F. (1975) ‘A spreading activation theory of semantic processing’, Psychological Review, Vol. 82, pp.407–428.
5. Rasmussen, J. (1983) ‘Skills, rules and knowledge: Signals signs and symbols, and other distinctions in human performance models’, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Vol. SMC-3, Vol. 3, pp.257–268.
6. Rasmussen, J. (1982) ‘Human errors: a taxonomy for describing human malfunction in industrial installations’, Journal of Occupational Accidents, Vol. 4, pp.311–335.
7. Rouse (1981) ‘Models of human problem-solving: detection, diagnosis and failures’, Proceedings of IFAC Conference on Analysis, Design and Evaluation of Man-Machine Systems, Baden-Baden, Germany.
8. Reason, J T. and Embrey, D.E. (1985) Human Factors Principles Relevant to the Modeling of Human Errors in Abnormal Conditions of Nuclear and Major Hazardous Installations, Dalton, England: Human Reliability Associates.
9. Kaptein, N.A., Claessens, F.M.M. and Janssen, W. (1998) ‘Safety evaluation of in-vehicle devices that provide real-time traffic information’, TNO-TM Report: TM-98-C047, Human Factors Research Institute, Soesterberg: The Netherlands.
10. Winsum, van W. and Claessens, F.M.M. (1998) ‘Effecten van mogelijke vormen van informatie presentatie van de OBU op rijgedrag en verkeersveiligheid’. [‘The effects on possible kinds of information presentation of the On-Board Unit (OBU) on driving behaviour and traffic safety’], TNO-TM Report: TM-98-C052, Human Factors Research Institute, Soesterberg: The Netherlands.
11. Deatherage, B. (1972) ‘Auditory and other forms of information presentation’, in H. Van Cott and R. Kinkade (Eds.) Human Engineering Guide to Equipment Design (rev. edition), p.124, Table 4-1, Washington, DC: Government printing office.
12. Van der Vloed, F.M.M., Min, F.B.M. and Moonen, J.C.M.M. (2000) ‘The use of virtual objects in multimedia for training procedural tasks’, Unpublished manuscript.
13. Swanborn, P.G. (1987) ‘Methoden van sociaal-wetenschappelijk onderzoek’, (‘Methods of social scientific research’), Boom, Amsterdam: The Netherlands.
14. Signaal (1997) ‘Van oorschelp tot radar; de geschiedenis van een bijzondere onderneming’, [‘From auricle till radar; the history from a special company’], Drukkerij Twente Hengelo, Hengelo: The Netherlands.
15. Signaal (2000) ‘Versatile interactive computer based training for operation and repair’, VICTOR Program Management Plan, Hengelo: The Netherlands.
16. Signaal (1999) Manual for Corrective Maintenance, Hengelo: The Netherlands.
17. Signaal (1999) Manual for Adjustment Procedures, Hengelo: The Netherlands.
18. Emans, B. (1990) Interviewen; Theorie, Techniek en Training, [Interviewing: theory, technique and training], Wolters-Noordhoff, Groningen: The Netherlands.