1 / 41

Dissertation Oral Defense

Dissertation Oral Defense. Aviation & Space. Applied Educational Studies. Todd P. Hubbard. Introduction. Problem statement . There appears to be a relational dichotomy between the classroom environment and the aircraft environment in aviation training. Introduction. Purpose statement

jaden
Download Presentation

Dissertation Oral Defense

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Dissertation Oral Defense Aviation & Space Applied Educational Studies Todd P. Hubbard

  2. Introduction • Problem statement. There appears to be a relational dichotomy between the classroom environment and the aircraft environment in aviation training.

  3. Introduction • Purpose statement This study was conducted to determine if, and to what extent a relationship or difference existed between the cognitive context of the classroom and the cognitive context of the aircraft for private pilot students.

  4. Introduction • Hypotheses. • The context of cognition differs in relationship and degree between the private pilot classroom and private pilot flight lessons. • There is a strong relationship between subjects in the same context of learning. • There is a weak relationship between subjects in different learning contexts.

  5. Chapter One, Introduction • Assumptions. • Not all subjects are equally distracted by stimuli. • Some subjects, by temperament, have better innate ability to inhibit. • Some subjects, by previous training, will inhibit faster than others. • Some subjects may have learning disabilities or other disorders not known to the subject or reported before the test.

  6. Chapter One, Introduction • Limitations • Only Part 141 or Part 61 certified ground schools • Only students enrolled in the 1999 fall semester

  7. Chapter One, Introduction • Scope Focus on the development and use of the Inhibition Testing Model within the certified ground school environment in Oklahoma

  8. Chapter Two, Review of the Literature • Review of cognitive inhibition produced • Awareness of instructional strategies • Definitive cognitive construct of the airplane pilot • Awareness of the facets of inhibition • Cognitive characteristics of the private pilot classroom • Appreciation for computer-mediated systems

  9. Chapter Two, Review of the Literature • Key contributors • ADHD (Barkley, Phelan, Denckla, Castellanos, Hallowell & Ratey, Levin) • Training Issues (Kershner, Jeppesen-Sanderson, Glaeser/Gum/Walters, Telfer & Biggs) • Inhibition Theory (Kausler, Rafal & Henik, Lepley-Hull, Anderson & Bjork, Dagenbach & Carr, Jacoby & Brooks)

  10. Chapter Two, Review of the Literature • Key contributors, continued… • Training design (Jeppesen-Sanderson, Gagné/Briggs/Wager, West/Farmer/Wolff, Bloom & Krathwohl, Kershner, Federal Aviation Administration) • Meaning and Comprehension (Keenan/Baillet/Brown, Kintsch & van Dijk, Murdock, Glanzer/Fischer/Dorfman, Dong & Kintsch)

  11. Chapter Two, Review of the Literature • Key contributors, continued… • Computer-mediated training (Hodes, Oshima, Thissen/Wainer/Wang, Mayer & Moreno)

  12. Chapter Three, Methodology • Foreshadowing questions • What were the training needs of student pilots in private pilot ground school? • Could some training be successfully accomplished through computer-aided instruction and testing? • What words or concepts are consistent among private pilot instructional texts?

  13. Chapter Three, Methodology • Foreshadowing questions, continued… • How would on devise an instrument to emulate the flight training environment, short of actually being in a simulator or aircraft? • Was there a cognitive link between the classroom and the flight deck?

  14. Chapter Three, Methodology • Six working hypotheses • Student pilots . . . need to learn how to inhibit • Personal computers can be used effectively in the classroom • Aviation training . . . Purposeful association of cognitive cues and psychomotor development • A contextual difference exists between the classroom and flight training

  15. Chapter Three, Methodology • Six working hypotheses, continued… • Ground training could be reduced to sets of referent pairs • A cognitive link exists between the classroom and flight deck

  16. Chapter Three, Methodology • Type of design • Classroom delivery of the pretest • Jeppesen-Sanderson Training Systems • Computer-delivered posttest • Flight Deck Cognitive Emulator

  17. Chapter Three, Methodology • Test reliability Federal Aviation Administration’s Airmen Knowledge Test • Validated source • Reliable

  18. Chapter Three, Methodology • Sample Selection Purposive sampling of intact groups of private pilot ground school students

  19. Chapter Three, Methodology • Selection of an instrument Flight Deck Cognitive Emulator • Based on the Inhibition Testing Model • Developed in Macromedia Authorware 4.0

  20. Chapter Three, Methodology • Evaluation and validation of the instrument • Three-judge paradigm • Cognitive psychologist, Instructional Designer, Programmer • Construct and Content evaluation • Certified Flight/Ground School Instructors • Instrument validity tests • Small group trials

  21. Chapter Three, Methodology • Data gathering • Three intact groups • Site visitations • Standardized test format and instructions • IRB supported • Control and Experimental Groups

  22. Chapter Three, Methodology • Statistical analysis approach • Descriptive statistics • Pearson r • T-test • Measures of central tendency

  23. Chapter Four, Findings • Sample Size • N = 34 • OU, N = 9 • Rose State, N = 13 • OSU, N = 12

  24. Chapter Four, Findings • Sample size compared to population • OU, 14% • Rose State, 92% • OSU, 29%

  25. Chapter Four, Findings • University of Oklahoma (Part 141) • N = 9 • Mean age = 21 • Age range = 18-34 • Females = 37.5% of population • Males = 10.9% of population

  26. Chapter Four, Findings • University of Oklahoma, continued… • Pretest scores • Mean (84) Median (84.5) Mode (70) • Posttest scores • Mean (68)

  27. Chapter Four, Findings • Rose State College (Part 61) • N = 13 • Mean age = 31 • Age range = 19-54 • Females = 100% of population • Males = 92% of population

  28. Chapter Four, Findings • Rose State College, continued… • Pretest scores • Mean (88) Median (90) Mode (76) • Posttest scores • Mean (73)

  29. Chapter Four, Findings • Oklahoma State University (Part 141) • N = 12 • Mean age = 18 • Age range = 18-20 • Females = 25% of population • Males = 29.7% of population

  30. Chapter Four, Findings • Oklahoma State University, continued… • Pretest scores • Mean (79) Median (83) Mode (86) • Posttest scores • Mean (67)

  31. Chapter Four, Findings • Correlation Data • Hypothesis One • r = 0.98 • Hypothesis Two • r = .85 (exp. group) .94 (control group) • t = 3.49 (exp. group) 2.25 (control group) • Hypothesis Three • OU, r = .87 (exp/pretest) .70 (cont/pretest) • Rose, r = .94 (exp/pretest) .89 (cont/pretest) • OSU, r = .88 (exp/pretest) .83 (cont/pretest)

  32. Chapter Five, Summation • Restatement of purpose This study was conducted to determine if, and to what extent a relationship or difference existed between the cognitive context of the classroom and the cognitive context of the aircraft for private pilot students.

  33. Chapter Five, Summation • Classroom environment • Low arousal • Low sensory input • Traditional assessment tools • Flight deck environment • Moderate to high arousal • Moderate to high sensory input • No cognitive instrument to assess learning

  34. Visual/Spatial Textual Primers Time Chapter Five, Summation • Inhibition testing model • Based on cognitive theory, aviation psychology, and flight experience

  35. Chapter Five, Conclusions • General • Instrument • Easy to use • Portable • Delayed audio/video presentation • Qualitative studies • Analyzed aviation training • Produced the inhibition testing model • Quantitative study • Sampled behavior among private pilot ground school students

  36. Chapter Five, Conclusions • Specific • Homogeneity among groups • Generally similar compared to entire population (pretest) • Difference in content • OU demonstrated trouble with questions 1, 3, 9, 11, 13, 18, & 29 • Rose State demonstrated trouble with question 29 • OSU demonstrated trouble with questions 5, 13, 23, 24, & 29 • Age mean differential • Rose State students appeared to perform better than OU and OSU (Rose State – 31) (OU – 21) (OSU – 18)

  37. Chapter Five, Conclusions • Specific, continued • Hypothesis One • Pretest/Posttest strong correlation, strong cognitive relationship • Short-term memory not a factor (strong correlation between experimental and control groups)

  38. Chapter Five, Conclusions • Specific, continued… • Hypothesis Two • Strong correlation between experimental and control groups on posttest scores

  39. Chapter Five, Conclusions • Specific, continued… • Hypothesis Three • Correlations between similar tests were high (pretest/control group practice) • Correlations between slightly dissimilar tests were slightly lower

  40. Chapter Five, Recommendations • Generalization • Part 141 and Part 61 schools should provide the same instruction • Standardization • Content should be controlled through common lesson plans

  41. Chapter Five, Recommendations • Other studies • Replication of study (different groups) • Flight Deck Cognitive Emulator & simulator • Flight Deck Cognitive Emulator & aircraft • Three-way comparison, emulator/classroom/aircraft • Classroom instruction using referent pairs • Computer-mediated instruction

More Related