Competency-Based Education in Aviation

Exploring Alternate Training Pathways

Suzanne K. Kearns, Timothy J. Mavin, Steven Hodge

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781134801879
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Technology & Engineering
• Subtopic: Aviation
• Index: Technology & Engineering

Whether a trainee is studying air traffic control, piloting, maintenance engineering, or cabin crew, they must complete a set number of training 'hours' before being licensed or certified. The aviation industry is moving away from an hours-based to a competency-based training system. Within this approach, training is complete when a learner can demonstrate competent performance. Training based on competency is an increasingly popular approach in aviation. It allows for an alternate means of compliance with international regulations - which can result in shorter and more efficient training programs. However there are also challenges with a competency-based approach. The definition of competency-based education can be confusing, training can be reductionist and artificially simplistic, professional interpretation of written competencies can vary between individuals, and this approach can have a high administrative and regulatory burden. Competency-Based Education in Aviation: Exploring Alternate Training Pathways explores this approach to training in great detail, considering the four aviation professional groups of air traffic control, pilots, maintenance engineers, and cabin crew. Aviation training experts were interviewed and have contributed professional insights along with personal stories and anecdotes associated with competency-based approaches in their fields. Research-based and practical strategies for the effective creation, delivery, and assessment of competency-based education are described in detail.

PART I
Competency-Based Education in Aviation

Introduction to Part I
Competency-Based Education in Aviation

I don’t think anybody was excited about competency-based training, I really don’t. I think it was this almost gradual evolution. I don’t recall any point at which there was this conscious decision, “okay we’re starting to switch to competency-based approaches!” … It was just something that was gradually happening in the various different countries. (ATC1)¹

The term competency-based education (CBE) has become increasingly common within aviation in recent years. In the authors’ experience, almost everyone involved in training and assessment has their own unique opinion. The views expressed range from “it just does not encapsulate the complexity of performance” to “well, it appears to be a logical approach” and sometimes to an almost evangelistic enthusiasm for CBE. What has led industry, professional and regulatory groups to ask for competency-based education? Was their decision based on traditions of educational instruction, or on a new understanding of how adults learn and perform in the workplace?

Hours or Competence?

CBE initially caught on within aviation training because it was generally recognized that a focus on “hours” of training (such as a pilot’s flight hours) did not necessarily reflect proficiency or skill. It seems logical that what occurs during those hours is more important than the hours themselves. Linking length of training (hours) with the quality of a person’s skill is a bit like saying the length of a book is directly related to its quality—in which case the authors of this text may consider adding a few additional chapters.

Why, then, have we historically equated hours of training with competence? The aviation industry has a long history of regulating a specific number of training hours per license or certificate. Similarly, as challenges have arisen in our industry and new training needs are identified, we have addressed these issues by “throwing a few hours of training” at the problem (PIL3).²

However, thanks to new training technology and a better understanding of instructional methods, the industry has come to recognize that we can improve upon the hours-based methods of our professional predecessors. CBE has gained popularity as the approach that may lead to training improvements.

What is Competency-Based Education?

This is a question without a simple answer. Most aviation professionals vaguely understand that CBE focuses on the quality of training rather than number of hours. While writing this book, the authors conducted interviews with a variety of aviation training professionals from around the globe. Interestingly, each professional had a unique understanding of competency-based education. The differences among them tended to be related to their role in the industry:

• Instructional designers understand CBE as student-centered learning that is tailored specifically to the needs of each learner and their professional role.

• Professionals who work closely with multi-crew pilot licensing (MPL; further discussed in Chapters 2 and 4) understand CBE as the application of MPL training.

• Regulators regard CBE as an evolved form of training that incorporates modern teaching methods. Yet they acknowledge some challenges; for example, CBE can be expensive to implement, competency-based regulations must be adapted differently depending upon the organizational context, and many instructors might not fully understand how to modify teaching to be competency-based.

• Instructors with practical experience in teaching CBE often describe it as scenario-based training that they facilitate by coaching the learner.

• Recruitment and selection professionals regard “competencies” as a listing of attributes that can be used to select appropriate candidates for a job.

Ultimately, all of these experts are correct in different ways. To help clear up any confusion, we propose the following definitions, which will be explained and expanded upon throughout this book:

Competence: the ability to fully participate in a complex social practice, such as an aviation profession. Full participation requires skills, knowledge and attitudes relevant to that practice.

Competencies: negotiated and agreed written statements (texts) that attempt to represent the ability to fully participate in a social practice. Competencies embody assumptions about:

• the nature of competence

• the number of discrete written statements (texts) required to represent competence

• the most appropriate language for representing competence.

Competency-based education (CBE): instructional design, training, and assessment that systematically references written competencies.

To assist with understanding a large and complicated issue, we have compiled some key features of these three elements in Figure P1.1.

Figure P.1 Key Concepts of Competency-Based Education (CBE)

CBE Considerations

Despite the recent widespread popularity and adoption of CBE within the aviation industry, the approach is not free from criticisms. Like any methodology, it has strengths and weaknesses, which will be explored in detail throughout this book. The following concerns serve as an introduction to some of the issues associated with CBE.

Reductionism

If we take something as complex as expert professional practice and convert it into a textual statement, it can become artificially simplistic and lose aspects of real-world operations. The risk with this is that narrow competencies may dominate the curriculum. Such an approach can result in poor training by encouraging learners to demonstrate knowledge that fulfills a “checklist,” instead of encouraging them to excel and to think critically (Leung 2002). A narrow competency model may limit the intuition, experience, reflection and higher-order competence that are necessary for expert, comprehensive or well-established practice (Talbot 2004). We must ensure that CBE considers non-technical professional attributes (problem-solving, teamwork and decision-making) and the interconnectedness of competencies with one another.

Interpretation

When text-based written competencies are produced, even if they are of excellent quality, their application will rely on individual interpretation. Throughout this book, the term hermeneutics is introduced to describe the skill of text interpretation, which is an important component of CBE. According to hermeneutic theory, different groups of people in the industry will interpret competency texts in different ways. Students who have a limited understanding may try to conform exactly to what the text says. Regulators may focus on how performance can be standardized within the competency framework and how to assess competencies that are more gray than black and white. Instructors who are responsible for converting competencies into training curricula may have varying levels of understanding of the same competencies.

Personalized Training

A focus on competencies, rather than on time served in training (hours), results in a system that allows learners to progress at their own pace. This individualized, flexible approach to training may lead to improved learner motivation, better skill development and reduced training duration (which results in cost savings). The length of training is still an important consideration of CBE, but training time is seen as a resource, rather than as an organizing framework for instruction.

End Goal

It is important to recognize that competence is a point on a the path towards expertise and does nto represent the end of a learner’s development. Talbot (2004) presents an interesting framework for understanding how “competent” performance is related to the development of professional expertise:

• competence: a trainee “knows how”

• developing proficiency: a professional “shows how”

• global development: a professional “does”

• expertise: an expert “does well.”

Therefore, competence is not the same as the development of expertise that would be acquired during the course of professional practice. CBE focuses its curriculum on what learners need to be able to do in order to perform capably and autonomously in real-world operations. Competence is not an indication of mastery. There is no avoiding the fact that expert mastery requires real-world experience and a great deal of time.

Standardization

CBE is based upon a standardized understanding of the knowledge, skills and attitudes required by a professional within a given field. The list of competencies is standardized and often it is generated by international regulators, which creates a uniform understanding around the globe. The advantage of this is that it should standardize training practices on a global scale. However, the challenge is that it may undervalue personal reflection, responsibility and ideals. Standardization can be too limiting—it can cause trainees to only be understood in terms of conformity and sameness (Leung 2002). It can also result in a focus on the minimum acceptable performance standards.

Administrative Burden

Regulatory oversight of traditional training programs, often referred to as a “check the box” approach, is accomplished by (1) organizations creating training materials that cover specified topic areas and (2) the regulator reviewing that curriculum. This can be considered a “black-and-white” approach, because the regulator checks to see whether all the content areas are included in the curriculum, and if some are missing, the airline or training company must revise the curriculum. By comparison, CBE is “gray”: the training must result in learners achieving competency, but this can be accomplished through a wide variety of methods, equipment and instructional strategies. This can create a significant administrative burden and it requires a highly sophisticated regulator to implement and oversee the training.

Bias

In aviation, competencies are written through either a process of observing and documenting professional behavior on the job or through consensus of a group of experts who discuss and agree upon what defines competence. With either of these approaches, it is important to understand that the creation of competencies is not free from individual values; the meaning of the competencies is shaped by the people who create them (Leung 2002). Experts may not be conscious of the full range of their professional competence, as job elements may become intuitive and not consciously accessible or easily described. Professional groups, regulators, employers and learners may have different ideas about what aspects of the work are most important. This process is political to some extent, because it allows regulators to influence what will be included as important professional competencies (Leung 2002).

Competency-Based Education in Aviation: Book Overview

This book is organized into four parts. Part I, introduced in this chapter, contains Chapter 1, which reviews the history of CBE in the general educational system, and Chapter 2, which explores ...