Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
May 2016
Copyright 2016
Andrew Jenkins
Table of Contents
List of Tables
List of Figures
Abstract
Overview
Needs Analysis
Overview of the Learning Environment
Learner Profile
Task Analysis and Overall Learning Goal
Assessment and Evaluation Plan
Instructional Methods and Learning Activities
Media Selection
Learning Environment Design
Conclusion
References
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
13
17
28
33
36
39
41
List of Tables
Table 1: Assessment and Evaluation Matrix
20
21
22
24
25
27
31
36
List of Figures
Figure A: Cognitive Task Analysis for MDMP
15
Abstract
The purpose of this project is to present the design for a hybrid distance learning course on
MDMP. The overall goal of the task addressed in this course is for the students, the Battalion Staff
Officers, to properly use MDMP to develop a tactically-sound and synchronized plan that effectively
takes into account the terrain and threat. This course is designed for maneuver battalion staff
officers to learn how to apply MDMP at their current job. All students in this course will be US
Army officers assigned as a member of a maneuver battalion staff. They are all college educated, and
have received at least basic-level Professional Military Education (PME). This project consists of the
ADD portion of the ADDIE instructional design process model in that analysis was performed on the
specific problem identified and then course materials were designed and developed address the problem.
The course has not yet been implemented or evaluated but will be used by the U.S. Army following
approval of this thesis.
Overview
Feedback from Combat Training Centers (CTCs) to the Maneuver Center of Excellence
(MCOE) indicates that maneuver battalions are not conducting the Military Decision-Making
Process (MDMP) appropriately when faced with a near-peer simulated threat. MDMP is the
collective decision-making process used by battalion-level and above organizations to create
mission plans and orders. The process supports the commander to make decisions by integrating
the subject-matter expertise of each staff member in their respective functional areas. This
integration of different functional areas is critical in battalion-level operations because it allows
the unit to synchronize and employ all of the Warfighting Functions (intelligence, fires,
sustainment, maneuver, etc.) into a unified effort to achieve desired effects. The failure to
conduct MDMP negatively affects the units ability to accomplish their assigned missions.
MCOE is currently looking at options for how to improve the capabilities of battalion staffs to
conduct MDMP, and that begins with ensuring all staff officers understand the process and their
role in it appropriately. The purpose of this project is to present the design for a hybrid distance
learning course on MDMP. This course is designed for maneuver battalion staff officers to learn
how to apply MDMP at their current job. The course will be a distributed-learning course
available online for senior officers to use off the shelf to instruct their subordinate officers on
staff as needed by to support their units training plan. The learning will take place at the
officers homestation unit.
The course, if conducted in-person and completed from start to finish, would take
approximately 80 hours (two weeks). This time, though, includes both instruction and practical
exercises. I estimate actual instructional time would be less than 40 hours. The course will be
divided into eight lessons, an introduction and then one lesson for each of the seven steps of
MDMP. The shortest lesson will be the introduction (two hours, estimated, including the
practical exercise associated with the step) and the longest will be Step 2: Mission Analysis (18
hours, estimated, also including the practical exercise).
Needs Assessment
The original idea for this course developed during conversations between senior leaders
at Combat Training Centers (CTCs) and the Maneuver Center of Excellence (MCoE). Senior
Observer/Controllers-Trainers (O/C-Ts) identified that the vast majority of battalion-sized units
(500-1000 men) deploying to CTCs were failing to properly plan for operations. Battalions have
been developing plans that do not effectively take into account the terrain and threat, and the
plans lack synchronization across all the Warfighting Functions. Compounding these problems,
battalions are taking far too long to publish a plan to their subordinate units, which results in less
preparation for the operation at company-level and below echelons. Leaders from Fort Benning
who had observed several unit rotations agreed and wanted to work through the institutional
Army to create a process that would support the operational forces execution of MDMP.
Using the problem model (Smith & Ragan, 2005), I obtained additional data by
conducting surveys with O/C-Ts, analyzed current training techniques and previous After-Action
Reviews (AARs) from the CTCs. Much of this data showed that MDMP proficiency has
degraded significantly in the past 14 years, which coincides with the timing of the Global War on
Terror (GWoT). Prior to the GWoT, units regularly exercised and employed MDMP, but during
the war the usage of MDMP fell off dramatically. This is primarily due to the stead-state nature
of deployments during these years. Units would not conduct unique planning efforts through
MDMP, but instead would maintain a regular battle-rhythm of decision-making. Now that the
Army is transitioning away from deployment construct of GWOT and back to preparedness for
any one of a number of emerging threats around the world, units are beginning to use MDMP
more often. They are finding, though, that it is not as effective for them as it once was because
they do not have the organizational knowledge that they used to have. The understanding of how
to use MDMP is not as pervasive as it once was through all the officers of the staff. This
situation is similar to the Army of the late 1970s. At that time as well, the Army found that its
battalions were unable to plan as thoroughly as necessary for complex, high-intensity operations.
The difference, though, is that at that time MDMP did not exist, so it was created from scratch
and spread across the Army. This time, the process already exists, so there is just a need for
reeducation as units have gotten away from MDMP as a planning methodology. In recent
conflicts units have used the repetitive Targeting Process to plan counterinsurgency operations,
but this methodology is ill-suited for the complex operations we anticipate needing to perform in
the future.
To assess the organizational or motivational barriers to the proper use of the MDMP, I
interviewed 32 former battalion staff officers and former battalion commanders. The officers
overwhelmingly agreed that the current battalion staff organization is sufficient and capable of
conducting MDMP based on their observations of the few organizations that they have seen that
were actually successful at MDMP. Several respondents indicated, though, that there are some
motivational factors impacting the use of MDMP, but these particular officers all agreed that the
lack of motivation they experienced was due to their lack of knowledge and understanding of
MDMP, as formal MDMP instruction is currently only provided during specific Professional
Military Education (PME) courses, which is often after many officers have already served on
battalion staffs. They all agreed that if they better understood MDMP while on staff, they would
have had positive motivation for using the process. Based on these interviews, I then analyzed
the learning environment and prospective learners to identify the best instructional
methodologies to address this need, and created a program of instruction for a blended online/inperson course.
10
and climate may not foster a positive learning environment as the learners would most likely be
uncomfortable and distracted throughout the course.
Basic instructional supplies and materiel should be available through the unit, such as
computers, projectors, white boards, printers, and all necessary office supplies. Units may have
the Command Post of the Future (CPOF) and Blue Force Tracker (BFT) systems available as
well, but they may not have the required secure network to run them properly.
Learner Profile
Demographic Characteristics
All students in this course will be US Army officers assigned as a member of a maneuver
battalion staff. They are all college educated, and have received at least basic-level Professional
Military Education (PME). The majority of officers will be 22-27 years old, and approximately
70% will be male with 30% female. The officers will all have varying socioeconomic
backgrounds, but are all paid equitably based on their current rank and grade. They are fully
proficient in reading, communication, and critical thinking. They have the ability to seek out
resources and self-develop when they are aware of specific knowledge gaps. Cognitive
processing styles will vary greatly by individual. No specific style is necessary for instruction to
be successful as long as officers are able to work and communicate with their peers who may
possess different or contrasting styles.
Staff officers are expected to demonstrate an ability to use a variety of tools, resources,
and systems to perform their roles. These standards are established by Army doctrine and
reinforced through performance counseling. All officers are required to maintain a standard
level of health and physical fitness.
11
Prior Knowledge
All student officers should have some understanding of how their staff role works with
the other staff functions. Staff officers are subject matter experts in their given fields (S1 Personnel, S2 - Intelligence, S3 - Operations, S4 - Sustainment, S6 - Signal, FSO - Fire Support,
etc.) and know specific capabilities and limitations of their field. All officers must demonstrate a
high level of language development and must have a solid grasp of the Armys language as
defined in ADRP 1-02, Operational Terms and Graphics. Students will have been exposed to
MDMP in the past, but may have never been formally instructed on the entire process. They will
all have some prior knowledge of some sub-steps as some are identical to the sub-steps of the
Troop Leading Procedures (TLPs) that all officers learn when they first enter the service.
Specifically, they should have some knowledge of Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield
(IPB), Course of Action (COA) Development, and Orders Production.
Motivation
Generally, these students are highly motivated to learn, but that motivation may be
somewhat moderated on this topic due to their prior knowledge of MDMP which may impact the
value they see in learning the process. There should be no concerns, however, regarding their
ability to acquire and apply the knowledge and skills, in other words, their self-efficacy.
Motivation to learn is based on command climate. The value that leadership places on effective
use of MDMP will directly contribute to subordinates value in learning the process. Mental
effort may be on an individual basis. Officers may not have the knowledge that allows them to be
effective staff members but instead are relying on old knowledge and strategies to solve new and
individual problems. This course seeks to provide officers with researched and practice based
strategies that are tried and true. Officers may have a positive attitude towards learning but a
12
negative attitude towards the process. MDMP is not used effectively often in garrison and
therefore, many officers may have a negative belief towards the system as a whole.
All officers are expected to consistently develop their intellect and capabilities. This is
expected through self-development and Army programs. Officers should embrace this concept
and be willing to learn. Anxiety is based entirely on the command climate. If leadership has
created a zero-defect environment, then it will have a negative impact on this course. Learners
will be more focused on performing in a way that will be perceived as positive than learning the
material, which may conflict. Learners may be unwilling to ask questions or seek assistance if
they dont understand material as it may present a less than ideal image to a leader who expects
zero-defects. Leadership must establish an environment where learning and experimentation is
valued, as opposed to perfection.
Attribution of success is highly based on the command climate. Environments with a
zero-defect mentality will generally create more of an internal locus of control on their
performance. That is, officers are likely to believe that the quality of their performance as an
organization is based on their own personal capabilities and performance. This is especially
detrimental to this program in that the purpose of the process is to integrate all elements of the
staff into a single, unified effort. The students generally believe they can learn the process and
make effort- as opposed to ability-based attributions. As the general belief across the force is
that so long as you put in the effort, you can master the learning task, there is no need to build
changing ability-based attributions into instruction.
Summary
Based on these characteristics, no specific accommodations will be necessary for any
subgroups of the student population. What will be necessary, however, is a deliberate attempt to
create a learning environment where actual learning is emphasized and the zero-defect
13
mentality is eliminated. To accomplish this, instructor guides and rubrics will be provided to
senior leaders supervising officers performing this course that will guide them to create a
positive learning environment.
Task Analysis and Overall Learning Goal
Overall Learning Goal and Outcome
The purpose of the course is to teach Battalion Staff Officers the Military DecisionMaking Process (MDMP). Specifically, the course will cover how to conduct the seven steps of
MDMP, how to analyze the mission and operational variables, how to develop a course of action,
and how to analyze a course of action. Related course components will be on Intelligence
Preparation of the Battlefield (IPB) and Information Collection (IC).
The overall goal of the task addressed in this course is for the students, the Battalion Staff
Officers, to properly use MDMP to develop a tactically-sound and synchronized plan that
effectively takes into account the terrain and threat. This plan will be completed in a timely
manner (in accordance with the 1/3-2/3 rule for planning timelines). The students will also
integrate information collection to facilitate decision-making during execution. MDMP is
conducted as a staff with different functional experts working together. It is generally conducted
in a field environment inside the Battalion Command Post, which consists of vehicles and tents.
MDMP timelines are based on the planning time available which is the time between receipt of
mission and mission execution. The 1/3-2/3 rule dictates that any given echelon conducts its
planning in 1/3 of the time available and provide its subordinates the remaining 2/3 of time
available. For battalion-level operations, it is not uncommon for a mission to have 36 total hours
of planning time which would require the staff to conduct the entirety of MDMP within 12
hours.
14
This learning outcome can be classified as an intellectual skill. Smith and Ragan (2005)
define intellectual skills that use the application of rules to previously unexpected or unencountered situations. This differs from other types of outcomes, such as declarative
knowledge, in that the students must be able to apply the knowledge they learn in the instruction
to real-world, unexpected situations they encounter later instead of only retaining the knowledge
simply for knowledges sake. This particular course will be focused on a combination of
procedures and problem solving, in that the outcome is the application of a defined process to
solve a problem and create a deliverable product in the form of an Operations Order (OPORD)
for subordinates to execute.
Cognitive Task Analysis
To determine the specific gaps in knowledge, I conducted a Cognitive Task Analysis
(CTA) with several subject matter experts (SMEs) on how to conduct MDMP by the book
according to Army doctrine, and compared those results with reports from CTCs on how
battalions are currently conducting MDMP. The SMEs I interviewed were all instructors at the
Maneuver Center of Excellence. All have been conducting MDMP for at least seven years in
different units and circumstances. They have all also taught MDMP at the Maneuver Center of
Excellence for at least one year, and in doing so have conducted no less than six instructor-led,
student-driven MDMP iterations. By comparing these CTAs with reports from CTCs, it was
easy to identify several trends across battalions. Few units are properly conducting all the steps
of MDMP. Virtually no units are adhering to proper planning timelines. Very few units are
conducting proper information collection (IC) planning. These trends, among others, should be
rectifiable with proper instruction of MDMP in the units prior to deployment to CTCs.
MDMP is a seven-step process. It begins with the staff receiving and processing the
mission through products provided from a higher headquarters. The staff then analyzes the
15
mission by analyzing the operational variables and the mission variables. The staff then
develops, analyzes, and compares courses of action at the direction of the commander, so that he
can ultimately choose a course of action. Finally, the staff communicates the final plan to
subordinates through an Operations Order (OPORD). Figure 1 depicts the CTA I developed
through my interviews of MDMP.
1. Receive the Mission
1. Alert the staff
2. Gather necessary tools
3. Issue a Warning Order (WARNORD)
2. Analyze the Mission
a. Determine available time
b. Conduct Information Preparation of the Battlefield (IPB)
c. Determine essential/specified/implied tasks
d. Determine resources available
e. Develop information requirements and collection plan
f. Issue a Warning Order (WARNORD)
3. Develop Courses of Action (COA)
a. Analyze relative combat power
b. Generate options
c. Array forces
d. Develop a broad concept
e. Assign headquarters
f. Prepare COA statement and sketch
g. Issue a Warning Order (WARNORD)
16
17
18
This course will be divided into seven lessons, one for each step of MDMP. Each lesson
will include a distinct post-assessment, that goal of which is to determine the officers
competency to conduct that particular step of MDMP. These post-assessments will be used in
place of pre-assessments for the following lessons as each will be conducted sequentially. The
following matrix presents the different types of assessment used during pre-instruction, as
formative assessments during instruction, and evaluation conducted for each level of evaluation
following instruction.
The first level of evaluation will be used to assess the effectiveness of instruction and
training through measuring the officers reactions to the training. This will first be evaluated at
the end of each lesson in a formative assessment. The assessment will include items to measure
motivation which will be able to show the officers reactions to the training, specifically their
value associated with the content of the lesson. The summative assessment at the end of the
entire course will also include these items. This should show the officers value and self-efficacy
increasing through the course.
The next level of evaluation will assess the level to which the learners have increased
their knowledge and skill levels (Champion, 2002). This will be evaluated through a pre-test, a
series of formative tests, and a summative test. The pre-test will include knowledge items from
each of the lessons of the course, while the formative tests will be conducted at the immediate
conclusion of each lesson and will include knowledge of that lesson as well as previous lessons.
The summative test will then include knowledge items from all the lessons. Through this test,
the instructor should be able to see an increase in knowledge through the course.
The third level is used to determine if learners are applying the knowledge and skills
taught in the course to other environments (Champion, 2002). Evaluation for this level will
19
occur near the conclusion of the course when the staff conducts an MDMP cycle. The instructor
will observe the staff to ensure the knowledge and skills gained during instruction are applied to
this practical exercise. Based on this training, the students should develop a synchronized,
tactically sound plan in the controlled environment. This is conducted in the field in an austere
environment at the units home-station. The scenarios the staff face can be changed and
conducted multiple times over a long period of time.
The final level of evaluation is used to measure the long-term effects of the training
(Kirkpatrick, 2001). Specifically, the learners should be able to use MDMP as a staff to create a
plan that allows the unit to defeat the threat and achieve all of their assigned objectives, which is
the ultimate purpose of MDMP. This may be difficult to evaluate in the short-term for this
course. To truly gauge whether the training impacts the real-world performance of the staff, this
evaluation would have to occur in real combat, but due to the nature of war, it is unfeasible to
conduct useful evaluation in the face of a real-world enemy. The most applicable opportunity for
assessment will occur when the unit goes to a CTC rotation. A CTC rotation is as close to real
combat as possible, and is specifically designed to replicate all threats and conditions a unit
could expect to face fighting any enemy force anywhere in the world. This will be an
opportunity for the staff to conduct MDMP multiple times under less-than-ideal conditions. The
staffs performance in this environment will be able to show what knowledge and motivation
was truly gained. Observers should expect to see the same synchronized, tactically sound plans
as were developed in the courses practical exercise, that result in the unit defeating their threat
and achieving all of their assigned objectives.
20
Table 1
Assessment and Evaluation Matrix
LEARNING (Knowledge and Skills)
Survey
Closeended
Openended
Document
and data
analysis
MOTIVATION
Behavior
(choice,
persistence,
effort)
Self-report
(efficacy, value)
Likert
-scale
Interview
X
X
X
21
consist of 60 items each (50 related to knowledge and 10 related to motivation). The formative
assessments will consist of 10 items related entirely to knowledge. The tables below identify
example items for all of these surveys from each level.
Level 1. The table below identifies the items used to assess motivation, and are all
Likert-type items that will be evaluated on a range from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree
with a total of five available options. The first items address efficacy, to determine how the
learners perceive their abilities to conduct MDMP. Next we are assessing extrinsic goal
orientation. Though not tied to a learning outcome, this is important for the leadership to know
to better understand the climate of the staff. Finally we will assess value to determine if the
learners understand the usefulness of MDMP.
Table 2
Value
22
Level 2. The three tables below identify close-ended and open-ended items as well as an
essay question that will be used to measure the learners knowledge.
Table 3
Item
How the
distractors were
developed (M/C
items only)
N/A
N/A
a.
b.
c.
d.
a.
Because it is important so
its done as soon as possible.
b. So that the information
collection can begin and
inform the COA
development.
c. Because the course of action
should already be
developed.
d. So that the plan is finalized
and published in the
OPORD.
23
24
Three
WARNORDs
are to be
produced
during MDMP.
They are to be
published after
steps __, __,
and __.
During which
step of MDMP
is the
Information
Collection plan
developed?
What it is trying to
measure
Steps 1, 2, and 6.
During which
step of MDMP
is relative
combat power
assessed?
During which
step of MDMP
is the synch
matrix
developed?
25
Table 5
Prompt
What knowledge or
skill are being
measured
Interview Protocols
Interviews will be conducted at the conclusion of the course and will focus on Levels 1
and 2 of evaluation. They will be designed to first discuss motivation of the learners and then
knowledge.
Level 1. Motivation.
1. Value.
26
a. How important is it for you to use each step of MDMP to develop a plan?
b. Why would you abbreviate any step of MDMP?
2. Self-Efficacy.
a. How do you feel about your ability to create a plan using MDMP?
b. How do you feel about your ability to utilize the Army Design Methodology?
3. Behavior.
a. Tell me about when you have seen MDMP used successfully in the past.
b. What is your opinion about the involvement of the commander in MDMP?
c. How do you feel about the connection between the Army Design Methodology and
MDMP?
d. Tell me about how you would expect to use MDMP in the field.
Level 2. Knowledge.
1. Tell me what you know about how the components of each WARNORD published during
MDMP are used by subordinate leaders to conduct parallel planning.
2. If you had to analyze a course of action, describe how you would determine which method to
use.
Observation Protocols
Observation will be an important aspect of the assessment and evaluation of this course.
The primary observation will occur during the presentation of the plan developed by the staff as
it is presented in an Operations Order. Observation will be used as formative assessments as
well as to evaluate Level 3: Transfer of Knowledge.
Level 3. Below is the rubric that will be used to assess the Operations Order presentation
as a formative assessment as well as an evaluation for Level 3: Transfer of Knowledge.
27
Table 6
Poor
Average
Excellent
Introduction
Student identifies
area of operations.
Terrain Analysis
Enemy Analysis
Student identifies
Student identifies
some characteristics characteristics of
of the terrain.
the terrain and
informs the
audience of how it
will affect the
operation.
Friendly Forces
Student identifies
area of operations
and orients audience
to key features.
Scheme of
Maneuver
Sustainment
Student has
identified some
methods of
providing support to
sustain the
operation.
28
Student has a
synchronized plan
incorporating all
subordinate and
available forces, and
enablers to achieve
his assigned
purpose with
minimal risk and
exploits maximum
opportunity.
Student has a
synchronized plan
to ensure his plan is
fully supported
throughout the
depth of the
operation.
differ from generative strategies in that they rely more on the instructor providing new
knowledge to the learners rather than the learners generating new knowledge themselves
(through experiences, exploration, etc.). Overall, supplantive strategies will be used in this
course. A supplantive approach is appropriate for this course because the learners will have
some prior knowledge (of individuals steps but unlikely on the entire process) and should be well
motivated, and the tasks they are facing are ill-structured and complex. The nature of teamwork
is that all individual team members need the knowledge and skills to perform their tasks,
including the knowledge of when to give or receive information from another team member.
Due to the nature of the task, the supplantive nature of instruction is appropriate in providing
these skills. There will be some specific learning objectives, though, that will require a
29
generative strategy, but these will be the exception. Specifically, the staff working together on
practical exercises will be generative in nature as the feedback will help improve their
performance as a team.
Instructional framework. Smith and Ragans (2005) seven components of guided
instruction will serve as a foundational framework for instruction and will reflect the design of
this course on the Military Decision Making Process (MDMP). The ultimate goal of the design
and instruction is for the officers to be able to have the ability to transfer any and all knowledge
learned during the course to new, real-world situations and scenarios. This framework is
especially applicable to this course as it is rooted in both procedures and problem solving.
Description of Specific Learning Activities
A single specific approach will be replicated for all lessons taught in this course. Each
stage of instruction will allow for certain activities to be implemented in order to help students in
the learning process. Additionally, each stage of instruction and learning activity may have
certain accommodations made for the specific students needs. The paragraphs below describe
the framework of the specific approach each of the seven lessons of the course will take.
Learning objectives. This course has four overall learning and motivational outcomes.
Two are regarding learning, and focus on the application of MDMP. The other two are regarding
motivation, specifically utility (i.e., usefulness) value and self-efficacy. The overall course
outcomes are that by the end of instruction, junior captains will
1. Effectively articulate the inputs, actions, and outputs of each step of MDMP.
2. Apply MDMP to create a plan that takes into account the terrain, weather, civil
population, and threat forces that achieves a specified purpose and end-state.
3. Increase their utility value for effectively implementing MDMP.
4. Increase their self-efficacy in regards to their ability to effectively implement MDMP.
30
Each of the seven lessons in this course has specific outcomes nested within the overall
course outcomes. Each has two knowledge-related outcomes; one focused on declarative
knowledge, that is the what of MDMP, consisting of the factual and conceptual knowledge
related to the inputs, actions, and outputs of that step, and another focused on the procedural
knowledge, or the how of MDMP, related to the application of that step. The two motivational
outcomes will likewise be focused first on increasing utility value in that step, and then on their
self-efficacy with effectively conducting that step. Based on these outcomes, specific objectives
for each lesson are based on the CTA for the step covered by the lesson.
Learning activities. The table below identifies the instructional approach that each
lesson in the course follows. As this entire course is to be conducted through blended media
(both in-person and asynchronously online), the instructor in each step may be a senior officer
of the unit or the Blackboard online system. For some steps (identified below), either option can
be used based on the skills and abilities of the senior officer or the time and resources available.
31
Table 7
Specific Learning
Activity
Explain learning
objectives
Give reasons/generate
reasons for the lesson
(benefits and risks)
Instructor
Action/Decision
In-Person: The
instructor will present
the learning
objectives with
associated material
and assign
Blackboard
assignments as
necessary.
Online: The opening
screens of the lesson
will present the
learning objectives
with associated
material.
In-Person: The
instructor will either
use personal
examples of the
success/failure of the
step of MDMP, or
will get the students
to identify previous
experiences involving
success/failure of the
step (based on prior
knowledge and
experience).
Online: A historical
vignette will be
presented through
multimedia
(video/slides) to show
how the
success/failure of the
step contributed to
the outcome of as
significant event.
Learner
Action/Decision
Overview
a. Review/recall prior
knowledge
b. Describe what is
The process and
new (to be learned) outputs of the step
addressed in the
lesson will be
presented.
c. Describe learning
strategies that will
be used in the
lesson/employ
learning strategies
Teach/process
prerequisite knowledge
(the what)
Demonstrate procedures
(how to)
Online: The
instructional method
will be presented and
the practical
exercises will be
described.
32
Online: An
interactive video will
be used to show how
a staff works together
to accomplish the
step. Additionally,
job aids in the form
of SOPs and finished
examples will be
provided.
The learner
understands how the
process works and how
individuals contribute
to it.
33
In-Person: The
instructor will act as
the leader of the staff,
and will drive an
MDMP session with
all the learners
participating in their
assigned roles.
In-Person: The
instructor will
observe each student
as they contribute to
the staffs conduct of
MDMP and grade
based on a
participation rubric.
Online: An opennotes quiz will be
conducted using
multiple-choice and
true/false questions.
Media Selection
The instruction method used in designing this course can be delivered in any one of a
number of different media types. Clark et al. (2010) provides a framework to determine the most
applicable and efficient media for given instruction. The first three steps include evaluating each
media in three categories: conceptual authenticity, feedback, and special sensory requirements.
For conceptual authenticity, each media is evaluated on how the instruction applies to the realworld application of the learned knowledge to determine if it is sufficiently authentic.
Authenticity allows for the best transfer of knowledge as it creates real-world context and
situations. For feedback, each media is evaluated on how the students receive feedback
34
regarding their performance and progress. This feedback can be either from an actual instructor
or an automated system (such as a computer or a game). The important aspect regarding
feedback is that, if it is necessary to support learning, it is provided timely and in a manner that
best supports the learner. Immediate feedback allows the student to maximize his/her learning
by immediately correcting or confirming a students learned knowledge. For some learning
objectives, there may be specific special sensory requirements as well, which also have to be
taken into account.
For the purpose of this course, in-person instruction appears to best meet the first three
criteria of Clark et al.s (2010) methodology. The instruction would take place in an authentic
environment, where the students would work collaboratively under similar battlefield situations
as they would expect to face in real-world scenarios. The feedback would not only be
immediate, but would be provided in authentic fashion, especially during practical exercises,
either from an instructor acting as the students commander or from results of a computer-based
wargame. Due to the nature of the simulated wargame, this must be conducted as an in-person,
synchronous action to incorporate the effects of the different staff sections. Finally, the sensory
experiences of this option would fully match the sensory experiences of the authentic task.
Asynchronous online instruction, though, is probably the most efficient and financially
feasible option. This option does not provide sufficient authenticity for the task, but this could
be mitigated through more elaborate artificial intelligence experiences incorporated into the
instruction and practical exercises. Feedback would be immediate and accurate, but would not
be authentic in that the students would not receive guidance and direction from someone they
could look to as a battalion commander. Lastly, the experience would not match the sensory
conditions one would expect to conduct MDMP under during wartime scenarios, which has been
mitigated through measures identified below.
35
Based on the analysis of both in-person and asynchronous online instruction, blended
media was determined to be the best choice. Information will be presented to the learner both inperson and online. Instruction will be provided asynchronously online while the students will
conduct practical exercises in-person. The online portion of the course will be managed and
facilitated by the Maneuver Center of Excellence, and the in-person instruction will be conducted
by senior officers at the unit conducting the course. The course will be available for units to
implement based on their own schedule and priorities. This will allow for maximum
participation and implementation across the force. The content for the course will be contained
in Blackboard, as it is a system the Army already regularly uses for both distance and in-person
courses. Additionally, the instructional materials for the course were developed in Articulate
Storyline. This program allows for the creation of very interactive instruction with increased
engagement that should lead to more positive learning outcomes. There are also several videos
that will be used that were created by both NTC and JRTC that will be used as demonstrations.
The chart below identifies how this blended approach applies to each of Clark et al. (2010)s key
considerations for usage of media.
36
Table 8
Blended Media
Feedback will be two-fold. Assessments will be used throughout the online portion of
the course to provide the students with immediate feedback on their understanding of
the material. Feedback on practical exercises, however, will be provided in-person
from the students regular leadership. This is the same leadership that will be
supervising the students during actual application of MDMP, which is why this level
of authenticity is so important.
Special
This option would meet all sensory requirements necessary for the learned task, as the
Sensory
learning would occur in a manner that can be personalized by the students, while the
Requirements? practical exercises would be performed in an environment almost identical to the one
where and how the task would really be performed.
Learning Environment Design
Primary and Supporting Typologies
This course is designed to be conducted in a flexible, mixed environment. It is flexible in
nature in that the unit conducting the training can change it as necessary to meet their unique
desired training outcomes. The leadership of each organization can modify the level of
formality, synchronicity, and adaptability based on how they desire to train their subordinate
staff officers. The course is mixed in that there is both a virtual and physical component. Course
material is provided online, while practical exercises are conducted in-person. This flexible,
mixed environment provides maximum opportunity for units to take advantage of the course
material and nest it within their already developed training plans and calendars.
Connection to Rossier School of Education Pillars of Learning Environment Design
Learning. This learning environment is specifically designed to promote learning
through authenticity. While the material is provided online, all of the practical exercises will be
37
conducted in-person, with the other officers that the learners will be expected to conduct this task
with in real-life. Also, by coordinating the learning at the unit-level, learners will be completing
the lessons along with their co-workers, which again just adds to the authenticity. A potential
issue with this learning environment, though, is the possibility of cognitive overload. This
overload would not be based solely on the course itself, but because of the nature of the learning
environment, it would be easy for regular work to impact the learners cognitive processes.
This would take the focus away from the lesson materials and thus detract from learning. I will
attempt to mitigate this through instructions to the instructor on ways of creating a work
environment/learning environment divide.
Diversity. This course is designed for staff officers of maneuver battalions. This is a
very broad description, but it is possible future personnel will want to take this course who are
not defined by this statement (the learner characteristics of a staff officer are identified earlier
in this paper). The only other major audience that would take this course, other than the
identified learner, would be staff officers of non-maneuver battalions. Their characteristics
would change in terms of their prior knowledge. To support these learners, links will be
available throughout the online instruction to additional resources and training to provide them
with the requisite knowledge. There should be no issue with access to this course. The only
other dilemmas that may come in to play would be based on the climate of the units conducting
this course, and while I will not be able to manage those climates, the Army has several
programs (EO, SHARP, etc.) to ensure there will not be issues. This course needs to be
accessible to people of all backgrounds and faiths, which could result in different ethical
implications. The MDMP process, however, is designed to support decision-making based on
federal legal requirements, and ethics based on the Army Values, which may be counter to a
learners personal beliefs and non-beliefs. This program would require learners to suspend their
38
personal beliefs and use the Army Values to guide their moral and ethical decision making. This
may be difficult, as familiarity and beliefs may cause issues, but it is important for the Army, as
an element of the federal government, to not show favoritism or bias related to personal
backgrounds.
Accountability. The purpose of this course is to prepare staff officers to conduct
MDMP, which should then improve performance of maneuver battalions conducting operations.
Success of this program will be based on the performance of these battalions during their
rotations to Combat Training Centers (CTCs) where they will conduct simulated operations
against a simulated enemy. Success of this course will result in better coordination and
synchronization of battalion operations during these rotations. Feedback for the course will be
through the Observer/Controller-Trainers that evaluate the units at the CTCs. This feedback will
flow back to the Maneuver Center of Excellence where updates or modifications will be made to
ensure future success.
Leadership. To gain the maximum benefit from this course across the force, leadership
must be a contributing factor. Brigade and Battalion Commanders must value successful
MDMP, and push their organizations into this course. By driving the MDMP during the
practical exercises of this course, it will give that commander ownership of this program and will
directly contribute to its learning outcomes. To support this learning environment, I will ensure
that the Maneuver Center of Excellence provides timely and accurate updates to the course
materials. Additionally, I will publish information regarding the course in multiple professional
journals to drive interest and discussion. Given more resources, it would be better to provide inperson instructors to travel to each unit conducting this course, but that is not feasible. The goals
laid out in this project are entirely possible based on current contracting and infrastructure in
place to support distance learning across the Army.
39
40
understanding of the process, then they would be more motivated to use MDMP as it is intended
because they would be able to see how effective it can be. Therefore, this course, through a
careful use of research based instructional design principles, seeks to address and provide the
necessary knowledge, skills, and motivated needed to effectively execute the MDMP. The
course is intended to be used off the shelf by senior leaders of the organization to facilitate
learning of all their subordinate officers. By providing material to units to use as a hybrid
online/in-person course, they will be able to develop staff officers earlier in their careers on
battalion-level operations than the current professional military education model allows. Each
step of MDMP will be a complete lesson and all material will be available online. This will
allow leadership to schedule education to minimize impact on other priorities, while also
allowing leaders to focus training where it is needed most, and in doing so improve the planning
capabilities of units across the force.
Clark, R.E., Yates, K. Early, S. & Moulton, K. (2010). An analysis of the failure
of electronic media and discovery-based learning: Evidence for the
performance benefits of guided training methods. In Silber, K.H. &
Foshay, R. (Eds.). Handbook of training and improving workplace
performance, volume 1: Instructional design and training delivery (pp.
263-297). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Gagne, R.M. (1985). The conditions of learning (4th ed). New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston.
Kirkpatrick, D. (2001). The four level evaluation process. What smart trainers
know: The secrets of success from the worlds foremost experts (pp122132). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
Mayer, R.E. (2001). Multi-media learning. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2005). Instructional design (Third Edition). New York: John
Wiley & Sons.
41