Está en la página 1de 6
 
1
INITIAL RESULTS OF WEB BASED BLENDED LEARNING IN THE FIELD OF AIR CARGO SECURITY
Philipp Sury Sandrina Ritzmann Adrian Schwaninger, Prof. Dr.
University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland (FHNW), School of Applied Psychology (APS) Institute Humans in Complex Systems (MikS) Riggenbachstrasse 16 4600 Olten, Switzerland philipp.sury@fhnw.ch
University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland (FHNW), School of Applied Psychology (APS) Institute Humans in Complex Systems (MikS) Riggenbachstrasse 16 4600 Olten, Switzerland sandrina.ritzmann@fhnw.ch
University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland (FHNW), School of Applied Psychology (APS) Institute Humans in Complex Systems (MikS) Riggenbachstrasse 16 4600 Olten, Switzerland adrian.schwaninger@fhnw.ch
and and and Center for Adaptive Security Research and  Applications (CASRA) Thurgauerstrasse 39 8050 Zurich, Switzerland Center for Adaptive Security Research and  Applications (CASRA) Thurgauerstrasse 39 8050 Zurich, Switzerland Center for Adaptive Security Research and  Applications (CASRA) Thurgauerstrasse 39 8050 Zurich, Switzerland
 Abstract 
 – With the currently implemented high standards in passenger screening, air cargo is being perceived as the security chain’s weakest link in civil aviation and therefore becomes an attractive target for terrorists. Detailed regulations exist to harden air cargo against terrorist attacks. Blended learning training methods can be used to enable screeners to detect suspicious consignments even in situations when technical measures (e.g. x-ray) do not indicate any threat. In this study, blended learning was conducted at a handling agent’s premises at a Swiss airport in three courses (seven trainees in total) and evaluated subsequently. Results show a very high satisfaction with the training and very high scores in the final exam. However, trainees repeatedly skipped text inside the web based training (WBT) leading to the conclusion that the WBT has to be optimized in terms of presentation modes. Suggestions on how to create even more engaging WBT content can be found in various methods of classification of computer based training (CBT) and are discussed in this paper.
Index Terms
 — airport security, web-based training, blended learning, training evaluation.
I. INTRODUCTION
 Although the aviation industry currently experiences a suboptimal period (freight ton kilometer growth was down -2.2% in May 2012 compared to May 2011) [1] due to the recent global economic conditions, air cargo is still a major facilitator according to the International Air Transport Association (IATA). While air cargo is relatively small in volume in comparison to freight shipped on the sea, it delivers disproportionally highly valuable goods and is expected to grow with the continued emergence of the BRICS economies (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) [2]. In this context, terrorist attacks on air cargo pose a major security threat to an important pillar of the world economy. On top of that, according to TIME [3], 42% of the total weight of 7.3 billion pounds of air cargo annually shipped to the USA are being transported on passenger flights, so threats against air cargo are not only a threat against the global economy, but also a threat against the lives of air travelers worldwide. As a matter of fact, TIME reports in the same article [3] that the bombs in the famous printer bomb plot traveled as cargo in two passenger flights before being discovered. In October 2010, two parcels, each containing a used desktop printer with an improvised explosive device (IED) inside the printer cartridge, traveled from Yemen to the United States until they were discovered in Dubai and the United Kingdom. US authorities believe that these two IEDs were targeting the planes that carried them and not the two locations in Chicago they were addressed to. It is evident that the case of secure air cargo is of uttermost importance. In order to reach the required level of security, extensive security measures need to be implemented involving sophisticated equipment, standardized processes, high quality training, and continuous quality control. As there is always a human operator at the end of the decision process, whether an object is secure or not, high quality training of screening officers still is a key factor for success despite the high standards of modern technology. In Sury, Nef & Schwaninger [4], blended learning [5] in combination with systematic training evaluation [6] was suggested as an efficient approach to training in the field of securing air cargo. In this approach, computer based training (CBT) or web based training (WBT) is combined with training by an instructor in face to face settings (FTF). This approach allows drawing from the strengths of both CBT/WBT and FTF to create an efficient and comprehensive learning experience.
 
2 The objective of the present pilot study was to put the approach suggested by Sury and colleagues [4] into practice by designing, implementing and evaluating a blended learning program in the field of air cargo screening.
II. METHOD
 A. Participants
To start its air cargo screening business, a handling agent located at one of Switzerland’s major airports had a training need for a total of five trainees. Trainees #1 to #4 were male, trainee #5 was female. Trainees #1 and #2 were experienced professionals in the field of handling air cargo, but did not have any experience in the screening of freight. Their goal was to obtain a Swiss certificate for cargo screening which would permit them to work as cargo screening officers. Trainee #5 already was a certified cargo screening officer, so participation in the study counted towards her mandatory recurrent training. Trainees #3 and #4 are members of the handling agent’s management and participated in the initial training as a precondition for their additional training as prospective instructors. Since they had no intention to work as cargo screening officers themselves, they had no need for the cargo screening certificate.
B. Training
The training goals are defined in a confidential document of the Swiss Federal Office of Civil Aviation (FOCA) [7] and are consistent with EU regulations [8]. The FOCA basically requires two types of training: one type of training for the recognition of objects shapes in x-ray images, and a second type of training covering all other theoretical (e.g. knowledge of terrorist incidents in recent aviation history) and practical (e.g. how to operate x-ray machines) topics. To learn the shapes of forbidden objects in air cargo, the trainees used the X-Ray Tutor (XRT) software [9]. XRT uses an adaptive algorithm to automatically match a trainee’s skill level, so learning the shapes of forbidden objects is very efficient. For the theoretical and practical training, the WBT part of the blended learning was designed according to Gerson’s [10] guidelines for online classes (Table I). The WBT was performed on the CASRA Learning System (CLS) platform, a Learning Management System (LMS) that allows the creation, implementation, and evaluation of web based courses. The FTF parts were designed according to Murphy, Neequaye, Kreckler & Hands [11] where applicable to the learning content (Table II). TABLE I
THE E-CLASS STRUCTURE OF A BLENDED LEARNING LESSON
Step Action
Explain Used to motivate the trainees by explaining the lesson’s purpose and connected benefits. Clarify The main part where theory and the learning content in general is being presented. Look In this part, one or several examples are being presented to illustrate what was previously discussed in theory.  Act & Share In this part, trainees are supposed to act and work with the learning content, for example by solving problems, write summaries, give presentations, engage in groups discussions, etc. Self-Evaluate In the self-evaluate part, trainees solve test questions autonomously to verify whether they have reached the lesson’s learning objectives or not. Based on this verification, they are supposed to go back and restudy relevant parts or move on to the next chapter. Summary The summary provides a “take home message”, in other words the most important parts of the lesson condensed into a few short sentences to be more easily remembered.
TABLE II
THE FOUR STEPS COGNITIVE MODEL FOR FTF INSTRUCTION
Step Instructor and trainee behavior
1 The instructor silently performs the task. The trainee silently observes. 2 The instructor performs the task and continuously provides comments. The trainee silently observes. 3 The instructor silently performs the task. The trainee continuously provides comments. 4 The trainee performs the task and continuously provides comments. The instructor corrects the trainee where needed.
C. Quality Control
For the purpose of getting feedback from the trainees on the perceived quality of the blended learning program, a questionnaire was designed based on Kauffeld, Brennecke & Strack [12]. The questionnaire covered the following five topics: Overall success, basic conditions, training sessions, instructors, and software products. Trainees provided ratings concerning the quality of the course on a five point Likert scale [13]. A sample question can be found in Table III. TABLE III
SAMPLE QUESTION OF THE BLENDED LEARNING PROGRAM EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE Please state how satisfied you are with the instructor’s ability to help you during this training.
 Very dissatisfied
 Dissatisfied
 Unsure
 Satisfied
 Very satisfied
This questionnaire corresponds to the first level (“Reaction”) in Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick’s training evaluation taxonomy [6]. To collect the data, trainees filled in an online questionnaire where they could anonymously rate their learning experience at the very end of the blended learning program.
 
3 Every instance of the blended learning program also ended with a mandatory written and practical exam [7]; their results were later used for evaluation purposes according to Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick’s [6] second level of evaluation (“Learning”). See Table IV for an overview on Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick’s four training evaluation levels. TABLE IV
TRAINING EVALUATION LEVELS ACCORDING TO KIRKPATRICK & KIRKPATRICK
Level Focus Explanation
1 Reaction This step deals with how the trainees feel about the training, how they liked it, whether they found it useful or not, etc. This information is typically being collected using questionnaires. 2 Learning This step tests how much the students retained of the learning content. Usually they have to perform some sort of final exam. 3 Behavior This step asks whether the newly acquired learning content is being transferred into the daily work routine or not. Work analysis, a method in work psychology, is the typical tool for this step. 4 Results This step is concerned with the training program’s economic benefits for a company (e.g., higher productivity, bigger profits, reduced costs, less employee turnover, improved quality).
 After the training, the trainees independently continued their training with the WBT learning content and the XRT software.  After the refresher training, a team of FOCA inspectors performed an audit of the handling agent’s premises and staff. This federal audit was totally independent from the blended learning program, but was an additional and important source of data to determine its validity and success.
D. Procedure
The procedure including types of training, quality control, federal audit and participating trainees can be seen in Figure 1.  After the refresher training, the premises of the handling agent were also audited by a federal inspection team based on the criteria as detailed in [7]. This mandatory audit was a crucial milestone in terms of validity of the blended learning program since an independent audit team assessed on whether the mandatory learning goals were met or not. In order to screen air cargo, trainees #1 and #2 also had to pass a Swiss certification test in order to obtain their screener licenses, trainee #5 also had to take the certification test in order to renew her existing screener license.  As explained in
 A. Participants
, a total of five trainees participated in the blended learning program. However, trainees #1 and #2 participated in both the basic training and the refresher training (see Figure 1), contributing twice to quality control with their questionnaire and examination data. For the purpose of analysis, their contributions were treated as being from independent observers, therefore resulting in a sample size of n=7 rather than n=5. This approach is justified by the argument that there was an eight month gap between the basic and the refresher training when those trainees did not work as security screening officers as they were still lacking their cargo screening certifications. By the time they did the refresher training, it was almost as if they were new to the training again. Fig. 1: Illustration of the procedure used in this blended learning program at the premises of a Swiss handling agent.
III. RESULTS
For all items of the online reactions questionnaire, median values were calculated. The median was chosen due to the small sample size (n=7). Resulting values can be found in Table V. All except one reached the value of five. To measure the trainees’ learning progress, trainees had to take a written and a practical exam. Scores of the written exams and results of the practical exam are displayed in Table VI. For the theoretical test, one point was assigned for every correct answer with a maximum of 76 points that could be achieved. Trainees passed the written exam when they achieved 66% (i.e. 50 points) or more of the maximum 76 points. The practical exam was scored as pass or fail judged by a senior aviation security instructor who closely observed the trainees performances during the practical exams.

Recompense su curiosidad

Todo lo que desea leer.
En cualquier momento. En cualquier lugar. Cualquier dispositivo.
Sin compromisos. Cancele cuando quiera.
576648e32a3d8b82ca71961b7a986505