Self-paced instruction in the U.S. Army : a boon or a dilemma

Cardinal Scholar

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisor McElhinney, James H. en_US
dc.contributor.author Peterson, Rex H. en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2011-06-03T19:29:55Z
dc.date.available 2011-06-03T19:29:55Z
dc.date.created 1992 en_US
dc.date.issued 1992
dc.identifier LD2489.Z64 1992 .P48 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://cardinalscholar.bsu.edu/handle/handle/179560
dc.description.abstract The study reviews how self-paced training programs were developed by the U.S. Army for Initial Entry Training (IET), and conducted at the various service schools. In early 1975, after a long validation effort, the Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) published guidance to the service schools and training centers to begin self-paced training. Most service schools sought to follow this guidance in one form or another which demanded a job analysis, systematic development, and tryouts on typical soldiers. Through the years 1975-78, the service schools worked diligently to develop, evaluate and implement self-paced instruction in most of the job specialties of the U.S Army. Around 1978, complaints from field units began to find their way to the Department of the Army and TRADOC. The units complained that they were receiving too many unqualified soldiers from the advanced individual training courses. In response to these complaints, an in depth study was conducted at many of the schools and training centers. As a result of this study, in June 1983, the TRADOC Commander of TRADOC directed the service schools to move from their self-pace efforts toward group-pace.Contributing factors that caused the U.S Army to move away from self-paced instruction were: inherent lack of reenforcement training for the students in skills they had learned in basic training (soldierization skills); students entering the U.S. Army had poor reading skills, lack of motivation, and little formal education; there were problems in scheduling students through the school's "pipeline" and on to their first unit of assignment; and a shortage of properly trained developers and instructors.The U.S. Army's decision to introduce self-paced instruction, although not successful, was not wasted time and resources. It laid out a course that has led to group-paced instruction. The victory, called "Desert Storm", has proven the United States has been very successful with its training stratagem and has a well trained military force.This study was prepared as a historiography, and as such, recorded events as they occurred along a time continuum, and analyzed, correlated, and drew conclusions from those events.3 en_US
dc.description.sponsorship Department of Educational Leadership
dc.format.extent iii, 105 leaves ; 28 cm. en_US
dc.source Virtual Press en_US
dc.subject.lcsh Military education -- Evaluation. en_US
dc.subject.lcsh Individualized instruction. en_US
dc.subject.lcsh Curriculum planning. en_US
dc.subject.other United States. Army Training and Doctrine Command. en_US
dc.title Self-paced instruction in the U.S. Army : a boon or a dilemma en_US
dc.description.degree Thesis (D. Ed.) en_US
dc.identifier.cardcat-url http://liblink.bsu.edu/catkey/833007 en_US
dc.identifier.cardcat-url http://liblink.bsu.edu/uhtbin/catkey/1834998


Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Doctoral Dissertations [3145]
    Doctoral dissertations submitted to the Graduate School by Ball State University doctoral candidates in partial fulfillment of degree requirements.

Show simple item record

Search Cardinal Scholar


Browse

My Account