Technology Use Planning Overview

As posted in my Learning Log December 3, 2013

In the beginning, there was The Plan

Technology Use Planning is process by which an organization develops a path to its future use of emerging technologies. In the field of Nuclear Training, such a plan should follow the ADDIE process defined in the Systematic Approach to Training. Specifically, the organization should:

  1. Analyze the present state of the use of technology.
  2. Design organizational goals for technology use in the future.
  3. Develop incremental steps for making these goals a reality, including measurable Key Performance Indicators.
  4. Implement these changes while at the same time including benchmarks for measuring progress.
  5. Evaluate the organization's progress through a series of self-assessments and snapshot reviews of the organization's progress.

Within the evaluation phase, there should also be a re-validation of the initial goals such that emerging technologies are incorporated into the plan, allowing the organization to keep pace with changes that are occurring while the plan is being implemented.

One Size Does Not Fit All

While the National Education Technology Plan of 2010 addresses the key needs of educational systems in the coming years, it is not particularly germane for the educational needs of a nuclear power plant. None the less, its task list for educators does provide a series of key concepts which should be followed when addressing the plan for the next generation of nuclear professionals.

Learning, Empowering the Workforce

The nuclear industry, more than any other, has suffered the effects of an aging workforce. Those individuals who built and ran the nuclear industry have now reached an age where the vast majority is retiring. Adding to this conundrum is the fact that we are a results driven industry. Specifically, in the areas of plant maintenance, all too often individuals are pigeonholed into specific tasks and not enough thought has been given to training the next generation. As a result of these practices, newly qualified personnel lack the confidence to go out to the field and perform tasks which they are perfectly able to perform. Technical instruction should be combined with hands on experience such that the next generation is prepared to step in when the previous generation retires. Technology offers solutions such as virtual, responding models of plant equipment. Such solutions provide the practical experience within an environment of minimal consequence and thus would enhance worker confidence while maintaining plant safety.

Assessment, When Does Qualified Not Mean Qualified

Procedural use and adherence are the lynchpins of effective, safe and reliable plant operations; however, plant procedures do not address all situations. As the next generation takes over, the nuclear industry must re-define its assessment of newly qualified personnel. It is no longer sufficient for a nuclear professional to simply be able to implement the procedure. The emerging environment dictates that qualified candidates understand the equipment and its relationship to the plant as a system rather than as a discrete, stand-alone component. Because of this, nuclear training should adapt its assessment techniques to include explanations of the inner workings of plant equipment and troubleshooting scenarios which are not addressed by specific plant procedures.

Teaching, This Is Not Your Father's Overhead Projector

Of all the elements addressed in the National Education Technology Plan of 2010, this section most applies to the nuclear industry. It is imperative that nuclear trainers gather together and communicate best practices. Additionally, new methods of instruction must be developed to engage the students of the "You Tube Generation." The attention span of the modern student has changed. The next generation is digitally savvy and expects more from their instructors. Brought up on Super Mario and Playstation 3, the new generation views Power Point as nothing more than a glorified overhead projector. Instructors need to create more interactive content for their students in order to engage them in the learning process. Additionally, instructors should provide a means for the student to understand that there is something to be gained by devoting their entire attention to training, the "What's in it for me?" factor.

National Education Technology Plan of 2010, Conclusions

While the National Education Technology Plan of 2010 puts forth a number of admirable goals, it misses the mark in terms of moving the country forward. This is because the plan was written by educators for educators. Increased college education and graduates are important, but in the end, they overlook what is truly important. If the digital revolution has taught us anything, it is that a group of people, regardless of educational levels, can achieve extraordinary things. The plan's edu-centric focus ignores the lifelong learner who has flourished in the developing digital world. One need only look at the response to the MIT Open Course Ware website to see that the digital age has enabled millions of would be students to learn on their own. In my opinion, the plan should have focused more on the autodidacts of the world. Those that take the time to teach themselves can only enhance the preparedness of the workforce in the coming years.

Ready, Fire, Aim. Dr. John See's Developing Effective Technology Plans

Dr. See's piece is a shotgun approach to developing an effective technology plan; some of the pellets hit the mark and others do not. His plan would have been more coherent had he approached it in a systematic fashion. First and foremost, Dr. See should have tackled the short term problem before addressing long term planning goals.

The Way Things Should Be

Ready

The simple fact of the matter is that educators, as a whole, are not ready. The nation and the education system have, too often, viewed technology as a matter of pumping money into the system to incorporate technology into the classroom. To be sure, a truck load of shiny new iPads delivered to a school makes a wonderful photo opportunity, but cases of processors in a broom closet do not a technology plan make. Dr. See addresses the needs of current faculty and students, but, in order for any plan to be effective, it must begin by teaching the teachers. The education curriculum of the present university system needs to be revamped to include a healthy dose of required technology courses. It is no longer enough that a teacher know how to point and click and search using a browser. Educators must be completely comfortable in the digital environment, including content creation and program modification. In addition, this knowledge must be taught to educators who are currently within the system. Only by taking this first step can the education system develop an effective technology plan.

Aim

Only after a faculty is comfortable in a technological environment can an effective technology plan be developed. Dr. See does present some salient points for this phase of the planning process; specifically the concept that effective technology plans focus on a vision. Again, regarding the current state of affairs, the educational community has focused on a square peg, round hole approach. It is as if Boards of Education have said to their teachers, "Here's a bunch of iPads, now go make it work." To be sure, funds must be made available, but those funds should be invested in the technology that the teachers need and not that which the educational system wishes to present them. I am reminded of one of my classmates who is a special education instructor who was presented with an expensive touch screen table for his classroom. The school administrator simultaneously urged him to protect the specific piece of equipment while at the same time admonishing him for not using it in his day to day classroom environment. Clearly, this technology was misplaced and forced the teacher into a hopeless situation. The touch screen table was obviously too delicate for a special education environment, and yet the administrator thought he was providing a wonderful tool for enhancing the student's educational experience. See has it spot on when he recommends that technology plans be driven and developed by the faculty.

Fire

Unfortunately, where See hits the mark with grassroots development, he misses the mark in terms of the scope and breadth of technology plans. See advocates that technology plans should be application rather than technology driven. This simplifies a complicated process in which every problem is countered with a software solution. An effective technology plan, in my opinion, seeks to offer maximum versatility while at the same time controlling costs. This point harkens back to the "Ready" portion of the plan. A digitally educated workforce will find ways to execute their technology plans within the constraints of their software environment. For example, a rudimentary knowledge of HTML5 and Javascript combined with the tactile experience of a smart board offers a wide array of learning tools which can be created by teachers for teachers. In this case, the software required is nothing more than a computer and a web browser. By dictating software solutions, See is advocating constraints on the very people who are implementing the plan. Such an approach limits options and stifles individual creativity.

Additionally, See supports a short term rather than a long term approach. Ironically, this approach is short sighted. Effective plans find a way to incorporate both short and long term goals. An example of a long term goal would be the development of a statewide teacher think tank in which all educators would gather to share tools and practices to incorporate digital technology within the classroom. Obviously, such a group would not be possible unless every faculty member was digitally fluent and receptive to the concepts put forth by the organization. In this case, the short term goal would be to increase the knowledge of the faculty. In See's mind, this knowledge would be an end point rather than a launch pad for something greater. Only by incorporating both long and short term goals, while at the same time defining measurable milestones, can a technology plan be effective.

Technology Plans and the Nuclear Industry

Because of the makeup of the nuclear industry, technology plans for nuclear training are especially difficult to develop. Most instructors are chosen for their technical knowledge and come from an industrial, rather than an educational background. Instructors are given instruction in the Systematic Approach to Training and learn to develop courses based on plant need. Unfortunately, because there is a lack of digital technology knowledge, the tools for digital learning are often overlooked and technology plans are non-existent. The nuclear industry's approach has been similar to the approach of education systems nationwide, throw money at technological solutions and hope they are effective. Any technology plan for the nuclear industry needs to begin with instructor education. Instructors must be made aware of the tools that are available and instruction must be provided for the use of these tools. Only then can appropriate technology use plans be developed.