IMPROVING THE SUCCESS OF LIGHT ARMORED VEHICLE DRIVERS: A

QUALITATIVE DESCRIPTIVE NARRATIVE STUDY

by

Dathan Byrd

© 2016

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership
with a Specialization in Curriculum and Instruction

University of Phoenix




ProQuest Number: 10258047




All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.






ProQuest 10258047

Published by ProQuest LLC (2017 ). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.


All rights reserved.
This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.


ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
 ABSTRACT

This qualitative descriptive narrative research was the first known study to collect

participants’ perceptions on the effectiveness of the Marine Corps’ Light Armored

Vehicle driver training. The general problem was the Marine Corps’ vague guidance on

curriculum development, instruction, and assessment for driver training of the Light

armored Vehicle (LAV). Specifically, it is unknown how LAV drivers perceive the

effectiveness of their driver training. The single research question for this study was

what are the participants’ perceptions of the effectiveness of the Light Armored Vehicle

Training Course’s driver curriculum? This study used a semi-structured interview format

comprised of 10 open-ended questions to interview 20 former LAV drivers. Thematic

coding discovered six themes: (1) heavy reliance on PowerPoint, (2) instructors rushing

through the course, (3) low instructor motivation, (4) minimal driving time, (5) highly

standardized instruction, and (6) the need for an extended course. Uncovered by

participants, the findings of this research showed gaps in the LAVTC’s current education

procedure, a heavy reliance on traditional learning methods, improper training emphasis,

and instructor weaknesses. To ensure training and education standards are in keeping

with the expectations of the United States Marine Corps. Participants’ observations,

perceptions, and experiences are reference points to address the specific problem

statement of this study, and to assist military educators and leaders in making measurable

and pragmatic corrections to the LAVTC’s driver training.

iii
 DEDICATION

I dedicate this dissertation to the family and friends who have supported me

throughout the years. Their belief and confidence has driven me to finish what I thought

was impossible. Shirley Wainwright, David Byrd, Demetrius Byrd, JoAnn Smolen,

Andrea Avila, Campbell Dill, the Folks, and the Smolens, whose unconditional support

have demonstrated that all things are possible through hard work and determination.

To my mother, Debra Byrd. You are the backbone of who I am. You have

nurtured my intrigue for education and have inspired me to dream of the impossible by

doing what you knew was possible. Everyone comes with a story and yours is where

mine begins. I can trace my life’s successes to the principled, academic, and physical

education that you have afforded me. I only hope my accomplishments reflect the

mother you are as much as the man I have become.

To my children Serenity, Salana, and Danica. Courage is the commitment to

begin without the guarantee of success. In pursuit of a better life for you and our family,

I have missed countless birthdays, special events, and occasions. This dissertation and

my accomplishments are dedicated to you for your patience in me as a loving father.

To my wife Sonia Byrd. Throughout my career, my education, and my life you

have been my steadfast and accepting partner and friend. All that I have achieved is

because of the support you have given me. Your unending love and dedication

throughout every aspect of my life has allowed me to accomplish all that I have dreamed.

You are the wind that has kept me soaring for over two decades. All things in our life

have been made possible because of your love and dedication to our ambitions. I thank

you from the bottom from my heart!

iv
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This dissertation is the conclusion of my journey to an Ed.D, which was shaped by

encouragement, adversity, belief, and frustration. As I conclude this chapter of my life, I

recognize though only my name appears on the cover of this paper, several individuals

have contributed to its success.

To Dr. Melissa Holmberg for her assistance, understanding, endurance, and

genuine concern throughout this process. For three years, she has developed me from a

novice student of academic research to a scholar-practitioner. Dr. Holmberg’s

professionalism and sincerity assisted me in seeing past the chapters and instilled

confidence that I was capable of completing this paper. Always on-call to answer my

concerns, Dr. Holmberg’s rapport went beyond that of just an instructor. Her approach as

a professional went beyond personal expectations and school requirements. I am

professionally and personally grateful!

To Dr. Rinyka Allison for her upfront openness and sincerity during this process.

For over a year Dr. Allison has had high expectations for the quality of my work and has

never let me relax on becoming a scholar-practitioner. Her direct approach has fueled my

desire to learn, persevere, and grow throughout this process. Dr. Allison has humbled me

through this journey and because of that; professionally I am better. I will always be

appreciative!

I would like to thank Dr. Jacquelyn Kelly who took me under wing when my

desire to complete this process began to fade. I would like to express my sincere

gratitude for her willingness to be a part of my team so late in the process. I am indebted

for her confidence in helping me see this through, and because of which, I am thankful.

v
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Contents Page

Chapter 1: Introduction ........................................................................................................1

The Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion ........................................................2

Military Occupational Specialties ................................................................4

The Light Armored Vehicle Training Course ..............................................5

Marine Corps Learning and Instruction .......................................................6

Background of the Problem .....................................................................................7

Statement of the Problem .........................................................................................9

Purpose of the Study ..............................................................................................11

Significance of the Study .......................................................................................13

Significance of the Study to Leadership ................................................................14

Nature of the Study ................................................................................................15

Qualitative Study .......................................................................................16

Descriptive Narrative .................................................................................16

Research Question .................................................................................................17

Theoretical Framework ..........................................................................................18

Systems Approach Training .......................................................................19

Curriculum Development...........................................................................20

Training ......................................................................................................21

Definition of Terms................................................................................................22

Assumptions...........................................................................................................22

Scope, Limitations, and Delimitations ...................................................................24

vi
 Scope ...…………………………………………………………………..23

Limitations .................................................................................................24

Delimitations ..............................................................................................26

Summary ................................................................................................................27

Chapter 2: Literature Review .............................................................................................29

Documentation .......................................................................................................31

Marine Corps Course Development.......................................................................31

The Alignment of Curriculum Design and Student Achievement .........................32

Learner-Centered: Constructive Alignment and Inductive Approach ...................35

Differentiated Instruction .......................................................................................38

Differentiated Instruction in Standards-Based Curriculum .......................41

Authentic Assessments ..........................................................................................44

Education Taxonomies...........................................................................................46

Bloom’s Education Taxonomy ..................................................................47

Fink’s Education Taxonomy ......................................................................49

The Light Armored Vehicle Training Course: Educational Strategies ..................51

Experiential Education ...........................................................................................53

Literature Gap ........................................................................................................54

Summary ................................................................................................................56

Chapter 3: Methods ............................................................................................................58

Research Method and Design Appropriateness .....................................................58

The Qualitative Research Method .............................................................59

The Design: A Descriptive Narrative ........................................................60

vii
Population and Sampling .......................................................................................62

Sampling Frame .........................................................................................62

Recruitment ................................................................................................64

Snowball Sampling ....................................................................................65

Informed Consent.......................................................................................66

Confidentiality ...........................................................................................67

Geographic Location ..............................................................................................68

Data Collection ......................................................................................................69

The Interview Process ................................................................................70

Instrumentation ..........................................................................................72

Interview Script ..........................................................................................73

Field Test ...................................................................................................74

The Researcher’s Role ...........................................................................................75

Data Analysis .........................................................................................................76

Validity and Consistency .......................................................................................78

Validity ......................................................................................................79

Internal validity ..............................................................................79

External validity .............................................................................80

Consistency ................................................................................................81

Credibility ......................................................................................81

Conformability ...............................................................................81

Dependability .................................................................................82

Reliability.......................................................................................82

viii
 Summary ................................................................................................................83

Chapter 4: Findings and Data Analysis .............................................................................84

Population and Sample Demographics ..................................................................85

Population Demographics ..........................................................................85

Sample Demographics ...............................................................................86

Review of Data Collection Procedures ..................................................................86

Qualitative Data Analysis ......................................................................................87

Field Study Results ................................................................................................88

Findings and Interpretations: Themes from Interviews .........................................90

Theme 1: Heavy Reliance on PowerPoint .................................................90

Theme 2: Instructors Rushing through the Course ....................................95

Theme 3: Low Instructor Motivation .........................................................99

Theme 4: Minimal Drive Time ................................................................101

Theme 5: Highly Standardized Instruction ..............................................105

Theme 6: Need for a Longer Course........................................................110

Outliers.................................................................................................................111

Summary ..............................................................................................................113

Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations ..............................................................115

Implications..........................................................................................................116

Significant Findings and Interpretations ..............................................................117

Theme 1: Heavy Reliance on PowerPoint ...............................................117

Theme 2: Instructors Rushing through the Course ..................................120

Theme 3: Low Instructor Motivation .......................................................122

ix
 Theme 4: Minimal Driving Time .............................................................124

Theme 5: Highly Standardized Instruction ..............................................126

Theme 6: Need for an Extended Course ..................................................128

Recommendations for Future Research ...............................................................129

Recommendations Based on the Current Study’s Scope .........................129

Recommendations for Marine Corps Leaders .........................................130

Researcher Reflection ..........................................................................................134

Summary ..............................................................................................................135

References ........................................................................................................................137

Appendix A: Introductory Letter to Participants .............................................................162

Appendix B: Informed Consent .......................................................................................163

Appendix C: Phone Interview Questions .........................................................................165

x
 Chapter 1

Introduction

Currently, the U.S. military is undergoing several education reforms (Johnson-

Freese, 2012) and although designed to win a traditional war, existing military training

has become sluggish against recent threats (Vandergriff, 2006). However, instead of

service members clambering to attend War Colleges and Professional Military Education

(PME) courses. Many are augmenting this traditional form of learning with combat and

deployment experience; and because of this, the armed services has seen a decrease in

unit and individual military proficiency (Vandergriff, 2006).

The U.S. Marine Corps trains and prepares men and women for duties within 200

military occupational specialties (MOSs). Physically and intellectually equipped,

graduates from Marine Corps courses must meet the challenges encountered while on

active duty. The use of curriculum development strategies and systems approach to

training (SAT) constitutes the foundation for all Marine Corps training and curriculum

development (Flynn, 2011).

In addition, the Marine Corps’ Training Information Management System

(MCTIMS) is the official program of record that generates, maintains, shares, and reports

training information as required (Flynn, 2011). MCTIMS uses Training and Readiness

(T&R) manuals as curriculum development models in combination with specific MOS

guidelines. Individual Marine courses may retain curriculum developers who use

MCTIMS to create and manage curriculum for their respective organizations. T&R

manuals provide curriculum developers with direction on how to design, develop,

change, and implement training. The active development, design, and instruction of

1
curricula are critical to unit efficiency and for more than 20 years, one of these

curriculums, the Light Armored Vehicle Training Course (LAVTC), has instructed

Marines on becoming light armored vehicle (LAV) drivers.

This introductory chapter presents information on the background of the Light

Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, military occupational specialty, LAV training

requirements, and Marine Corps learning and instruction. Also covered is the

background of the problem, a statement of the problem, the purpose of the study, the

significance of the research, and its importance to Marine Corps leadership. Lastly, this

chapter explores the nature of the study and its single research question, the theoretical

framework, definition of terms, assumptions, scope, limitations, delimitations, and

summary.

The Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion

Members of the Marine Corps Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalions

(LAR)must make effective practical use of what they have learned at the LAVTC’s driver

training course. Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalions are combined arms units that

bring together many disciplines within the Marine Corps combat arm (Flynn, 2009).

LAR battalions comprise roughly 1,124 Marines and sailors with varying military

occupational specialties (MOSs). However, the 0313 MOS is the mainstay of the force;

these Marines are LAV crewmen trained at the LAVTC.

The doctrinal manual used by the Marine Corps’ LAR battalions is the Marine

Corps Warfighting Publication (MCWP) 3-14, The Employment of the Light Armored

Reconnaissance Battalion (Flynn, 2009). MCWP 3-14 states, “The mission of the LAR

Battalion is to conduct reconnaissance, security, and economy of force operations, and

2
within its capabilities, limited offensive or defensive operations that exploit the unit's

mobility and firepower” (Flynn, 2009, p. 1-1). In addition, an LAR battalion may

function as a self-sufficient maneuvering force or as an attachment to a larger one, e.g.,

regimental combat teams, battalion landing teams, or special purpose Marine Air Ground

Task Forces (SP-MAGTFs).

LAR battalions assist larger units by conducting reconnaissance, security, and

other operations to facilitate a commander’s ability to maneuver forces, concentrate

superior combat power, and apply counter projection against the enemy at a decisive

point (Flynn, 2009). LAR battalions assist in reducing the “fog of war” by locating where

the enemy is and is not and where enemy forces are strong or weak. LAR can also

conduct ship-to-shore missions that give the Marine Corps the capability to project naval

forces ashore (Flynn, 2009).

The core of an LAR battalion is the light armored vehicle (LAV-25), which

weighs 16 tons, has an armament of one 25mm main-gun and two medium machine guns,

and can operate without interruption over a range of 400 miles (Flynn, 2009). Currently,

the Marine Corps fields its LAR battalions with six mission role variants (MRVs): LAV-

L (light armored vehicle–logistics), LAV-R (light armored vehicle–recovery), LAV-25

(light armored vehicle–25 millimeter), LAV-M (light armored vehicle–mortar), LAV-AT

(light armored vehicle–antitank), and LAV-C2 (light armored vehicle–command and

control) (Flynn, 2009). Each variant is vital to the success of an LAR unit and its parent

command.

LAR battalions also integrate specially trained infantrymen in the role of scouts.

The Scouts receive training from the LAR battalion and are used in unique roles to that of

3
the regular infantry. Each LAV-25 carries three to five scouts trained to deploy in

support of the LAV-25. The LAR Scouts are an integral part of the vehicle’s employment

capabilities (Flynn, 2009).

Military Occupational Specialties

The Marine Corps uses the Marine Corps Occupational System (MCOS) to

identify and code ability requirements for the service. The MCOS allows classification

and documentation of individual skill prerequisites for the human resource development

process to establish and support active and reserve personnel management (Murray,

2013).

The human resource development process uses the MOS classification system to

organize personnel within the Tables of Organization (T/O) (Murray, 2013).

Numerically arranged by the MCOS, MOS codes are codes that describe the individual

skill requirements by units. MOS codes help the Marine Corps’ Manpower and Reserve

Affairs office to create and support the necessary structure of providing qualified Marines

in the active and reserve forces. The MCOS is a tightly controlled process designed to

maintain throughput of highly capable Marines to individual units needing a particular

MOS (Murray, 2013).

The MCOS uses a four-digit code based on the foundation that similar military

jobs have same knowledge requirements, skillsets, and functions. The initial two

numbers of the four-digit MOS code are the description of the technical designation field

(OccFld) (e.g., 03—Infantry). The OccFld represents a group of associated MOSs. The

MOS is completed by two additional numbers describing the tasks and duties that cover

similar OccFlds (e.g., 0313—LAV Crewman). In other words, MOS 0313 represents an

4
infantryman (03) who has the specialty of a light armored crewman (13) and who has

completed driver training at the LAVTC. The use of the MOS system provides effective

and efficient classification, consignment, and utilization of Marine Corps

personnel(Murray, 2013).

The Light Armored Vehicle Training Course

The LAVTC at Camp Pendleton, California is the only Marine Corps

environment that offers future 0313s (the MOS for LAV crewmen) with LAV training

(Light Armored Reconnaissance Training Company, 2016). The basic Crewman’s

Course is a six-week period of instruction that teaches training and education to entry

level 0313s and lateral-movers that will serve as Light Armored Vehicle Drivers within a

Light Armored Reconnaissance platoon/company. Upon completion of the course,

students will possess the technical skills requisite of a 0313 Driver as well as basic

knowledge regarding vehicle operation and maintenance (Light Armored Reconnaissance

Training Company, 2016). Graduates of the LAVTC will receive the MOS of 0313 -

LAR Marine and will be issued an LAV operator’s permit. Not included in initial training

at the LAVTC are intermediate gunnery and vehicle commander tactics.

The methodology of the LAVTC driver’s course provides detailed instruction on

1st echelon maintenance, driving techniques, LAV turret operations, and preparation for

water operations (Light Armored Reconnaissance Training Company, 2016). Through a

combination of lecture, demonstration, practical application, and field training, the course

prepares students to operate and maintain an LAV-25. To become certified LAV

operators, all students must pass intermediate swim qualification, MOS specific physical

standards testing which consists of a 155lb deadlift and 115lb clean and press, the driver

5
skills test, and execute an on-base road march as part of a unit(Light Armored

Reconnaissance Training Company, 2016).

LAV Marines attend the LAVTC through three pipelines. First, entry-level

training at the LAVTC is through the Crewman’s Course. After graduating from the

School of Infantry, junior Marines train at the LAVTC as privates and learn to execute all

orders and directives given to them concerning the employment and function of the LAV.

Second, noncommissioned officers (NCOs) moving laterally from another MOS

will attend the Vehicle Commanders Course, which places no emphasis on driving, but

rather refines a Marine’s skill in commanding an LAV. Lastly, officers attend the

LAVTC straight from their version of the enlistedman’s school of Infantry, Infantry

Officers Course (IOC). Officers attend the LAVTC to learn minimal driving and gunnery

skills. Their training is in preparation for becoming a platoon commander of four LAVs.

Each course at the LAVTC uses mission essential tasks (METs) as templates to

train prospective students. METs come with core competencies that each Marine must

meet before graduation (HQMC, 2011). At the creation of the LAV MOS, subject matter

expertsvalued72 core competencies as essential, seven as important, four as useful, and

one as unnecessary (Moranville & Paulson, 1989).No other, more recent information on

current core competencies exists.

Marine Corps Learning and Instruction

The LAVTC is one of many schools in the Marine Corps that provide entry-level

training to students who are primarily accustomed to regular classroom instruction and

testing. Whereas most individuals who enter the Marine Corps have attended traditional

lecture-based classes at a university campus with no immediate or direct practical

6
application to a real-life setting (e.g., a college chemistry course). The LAVTC students

are instructed through a combination of lecture, demonstration, and practical application

(Vandergriff, 2006).

The method of instructing new Marines may differ from their prior learning

experiences and may be challenging to both students and instructors. However, in some

ways Marines learn just as they did before joining the military. They adapt to managing

their duties, studies, and personal time. In spite of this, students enrolled in a military

course have a much closer association between their work, learning, and living

environments. Class schedules, personal time, and contractual requirements are among

the challenges that can influence an individual’s learning experience.

Exploring adult learning theories that may affect how students identify and obtain

an understanding of their learning experiences is necessary for knowledge retention and

later practical application (Clapper, 2010). Malcolm Knowles’s adult education theory is

relevant in explaining how students learn outside the traditional learning environment

(Knowles, 1990). Griffin, Kocher, & Stocker (2011) noted that adult learners have an

intense desire to employ what they have learned and to have their training validated

through an application. For the Marine Corps, validation comes when a Marine has

graduated from his or her MOS school and begins to employ his or hers skills within their

first unit.

Background of the Problem

The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have redirected the attention of curriculum

developers to create short-term, purposeful programs designed for immediate deployment

against kinetic threats on the battlefield (Chiarelli & Michaelis, 2005). Training and

7
operating environments have forced LAR units to assume that individual training

standards (ITSs) are sufficient to enable newer drivers to work successfully within their

battalions. Taught at the LAVTC are the core competencies an LAV driver needs to be

effective in an LAR unit, while taught within the individual LAR battalions are

subsequent training or skills that drivers may need to perform their duties after graduation

(Nakonieczny, 2010).

To prevent inconsistencies between doctrine and the LAVTC, curriculum

developers seek to ensure standardized training of individual driver skills through

Training and Readiness (T&R) and Marine Corps Warfighting Publications (MCWP)

Manuals (Nakonieczny, 2010). The T&R and MCWP transmit training procedures,

standards, and policies for LAR units. Each particular MOS within the Marine Corps has

its associated T&R manual to provide guidance on how to train individuals and groups

effectively. However, the operational rhythm of LAR units, the demands placed on the

LAVTC, and financial and political considerations have prevented the efficient use of

both the T&R and MCWPs (Nakonieczny, 2010).

According to Nakonieczny (2010, p. 10):

In theory, the guidance and direction provided in Marine Corps Order 5600.20P

should ensure the LAR related MCWPs receive regular updates. The reality is

this process rarely works. Proof of this statement becomes evident by the fact that

[LAR’s] MCWP 3-14, although recently re-published on Sept 2009, was last

updated on August 28, 1992. The outdated MCWP 3-14 failed to update the

doctrine validated from the initial invasion of Iraq [2003] and the subsequent

8
 lessons learned through the employment of LAR Battalions in the

Counterinsurgency phases of the same war.

To fill the doctrinal void, a disjointed cadre of LAVTC instructors and a small

selection of officers from the LAR battalions periodically assemble to make any

necessary changes to the LAR’s MCWP. However, “The historical results have been a

substandard product not comprehensive enough to ensure standardization of component

training (namely driver training) throughout the LAVTC’s numerous instructional

programs” (Nakonieczny, 2010, p. 42).

Also problematic are senior Marines who have been in the Marine community for

decades and have become roadblocks to education reform (Vandergriff, 2006).

Traditional thinking and logic governing training and education standards have slowed

the development and implementation of improved education standards, such as

experiential teaching and differentiated instruction (Pope, 2012).

Nakonieczny (2010) suggested that because of the lack of guidance, individual

LAR unit commanders (some of whom have little or no operational LAR experience)

must create free training, with the result that the quality of this training is dependent on

the preferences and proficiency of the commanders themselves. Because of the wide

latitude afforded to LAR battalion commanders to train their Marines, significant

differences in training standards often exist between battalions (Nakonieczny, 2010).

Statement of the Problem

On October 21, 2014, Lance Corporal Samuel Roberts, 24, became the second

Marine killed due to a seat malfunction while operating an LAV. Lance Corporal

Roberts died after he inadvertently activated the seat’s pneumatic lever, causing it to rise

9
with significant pressure and crushing his esophagus between the top of the seat and the

roof of the vehicle. The official cause of death was traumatic asphyxiation. However,

the incident report also found a contributing cause of death was partly due to insufficient

training on proper pneumatic seat operation (Alford & Bango, 2015).

The underlying general problem was the Marine Corps’ vague guidance on

curriculum development, instruction, and assessment for driver training of the Light

armored Vehicle (LAV) (Fitzgerald, 2011). There is no single regulation on curriculum-

related procedures, development, implementation, instruction, and assessment. With

particular reference to the LAVTC, the specific problem is it is unknown how LAV

drivers perceive the effectiveness of their driver training (Laing, 2011).

Lance Corporal Roberts was not the only Marine to have had unfortunate

encounters with his seat; nearly two dozen others have reported malfunctions with the

seat mechanism that caused them to become trapped (Alford & Bango, 2015). The other

fatality was Lance Corporal John Johnston, 19, also killed by traumatic asphyxiation. For

the purpose of this study, pseudonyms replace the names of incident Marines.

In the aftermath of these two Marine deaths and numerous other events with LAV

seat malfunctions, the Marine Corps instituted modification devices designed to shield

the pneumatic seat lever. However, other than the addition of seven slides in a class

PowerPoint and the distribution of a cautionary letter to all LAR units. There were no

dedicated attempts at a Corps-wide training program on proper seat handling and safety.

To prevent operational mishaps, the Marine Corps continues to deliver significant

combat skills training. However, additional training specifications could assist in

identifying direct training requirements (Skills, 2010). More accurate and detailed

10
training and education guidance could ensure that all Marine Corps units fully

incorporate standard and necessary requirements to improve the effectiveness of their

training commands. While one unit may issue specific training tasks in addition to the

Corps’ training needs, another may come up with completely separate functions, even

though in reality both units have similar training and education requirements. The

existence of such compartmentalized training and teaching standards by commanding

officers at Marine Corps training centers is common (Nakonieczny, 2010).

When compartmentalized training and assessment become standard practice, the

instruction is inconsistent and subjective opinions begin to influence training standards.

In the absence of standardization, subjectively individual unit commanders and course

instructors begin to interpret the training requirements. “Consequently, some students

receive thorough training whereas others only observe a demonstration of the task

without ever mastering it” (Skills, 2010, p. 26).

Service and joint publications provide the tactics, techniques, and procedures for

generalized training. While improved training programs, doctrine updates, and release

modifications are necessary to provide adequate education to the LAVTC’s students.

Giving limited attention to these issues increases the likelihood of unfulfilled service

goals, training readiness will diminish, and further accidental mishaps could occur

(Bango & Alford, 2015).

Purpose of the Study

Following the accidental deaths of Lance Corporal Roberts and Lance Corporal

Johnston, students at the LAVTC stated that instructors taught lessons at a rapid pace

with little concern for whether students retained the information (Alford & Bango, 2015).

11
The incident report obtained from the Department of Defense and through the Freedom

of Information Act on the death of Lance Corporal Roberts found that training at the

LAVTC was inadequate and that drivers specifically cited shortcomings in training on the

operation of the pneumatic seat (Alford & Bango, 2015).

The purpose of this qualitative descriptive narrative study was to collect

participants’ perceptions on the effectiveness of the LAVTC’s driver training program.

The applied research methodology was to determine the overall validity and effectiveness

of the LAVTC’s driver curriculum. This goal was achieved through interviews with

former LAV drivers and was expected to strengthen the LAVTC’s curriculum,

instructional quality, and assessment procedures, and thus its reputation and effectiveness

as the Marine Corps’ sole LAV training course.

The qualitative narrative method offered a convenient approach for investigating

and comprehending the participants’ insights into the LAVTC’s driver training

curriculum. Purposely intended, this qualitative study was to:

1. Validate the competency of driver training at the LAVTC.

2. Identify shortcomings with training procedures, requirements, support, and

explaining possible reasons for these deficiencies.

3. Identify methods of resolving challenges confronted in the development and

delivery of the curriculum.

4. Identify whether and how the problems encountered in curriculum delivery

have affected students’ proficiency.

The qualitative methodology featured presenting 10 open-ended questions in

telephone interviews to 20 former LAV drivers now retired or discharged from the

12
Marine Corps. Interviews began with a general focus and narrowed to questions that

were more specific.

Significance of the Study

Fundamentally, any educational organization must deal with three basic

questions: what should be taught, what should be expected of graduates, and who should

teach? To answer these issues within a military education environment, the experiences

of the students are significant. Gaining student input requires knowledgeable individuals

asking questions about the course under review and how participants feel about their

training (Kelley & Johnson-Freese, 2013).

Historically, the military education system has not taken the brunt of downsizing

during periods of shrinking defense budgets (Kelley & Johnson-Freese, 2013). The

widespread perception was that if the armed forces had to be smaller, it should at least be

smarter. The military embraced this policy between World Wars I and II, after Vietnam,

and after the Cold War. However, current civilian and uniformed leaders seem less

inclined to guard the military’s professional education system from budgetary cuts

(Kelley & Johnson-Freese, 2013).

At the command levels of U.S. military education, war and staff colleges have

already begun to cut faculty and scale back resources. With this trend, the future of the

U.S. military may be not only smaller but also less informed and ill prepared to do their

jobs (Kelley & Johnson-Freese, 2013). The challenge is to identify the point at which a

less educated LAV driver means risk and danger to Marines, to operational success, and

to the Marine Corps as a whole.

13
 Significance of the Study to Leadership

Some military leaders are quite blunt in their contempt for professional academics

and may even exhibit an open anti-intellectualism (Kelley & Johnson-Freese, 2013).

Leaders such as retired Army Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Peters refer to the military’s

professional academics as ‘‘theory poisoned and indecisive” (Downs & Murtazashvili,

2012, p. 83). While the Department of Defense has acknowledged that lowering defense

funding will continue to cause near-term gaps in training and readiness (U.S. Defense

Department Comptroller, 2016).

As important as curriculum and instruction are, they are irrelevant constructs of

importance if those leaders who function as reviewers and approvers of curriculum

consider military education unnecessary and undeserving of increased attention and

funding (Allen, 2010). To assess the importance of military education from a different

angle, this research investigates observations and perceptions of the LAVTC driver

curriculum from the perspective of graduates, thereby collecting independent, unbiased

views from those who have experienced the training. The study could have both

immediate and long-range effects. One possible direct application of the findings would

be the improvement of the LAVTC driver curriculum and the graduation of competently

trained drivers.

As the LAVTC prepares students for the requirements of active service by

identifying specific deficiencies and initiating the required changes, cost-effective

improvement of training is crucial (Ferren, 2013). Other Marine Corps courses may

provide training similar to that of the LAVTC, but they do not have the same mission

14
statement. Therefore, obtaining information specific to the LAVTC’s driver curriculum

is important, as this is the Marine Corps’ only LAV school (Flynn, 2011).

The effectiveness of driver training curriculum and the LAV drivers’ ability to

apply what they have learned upon graduating from the LAVTC are the focus of this

study. The study does not directly address student-learning practices but rather

concentrates on the participants’ beliefs and understanding regarding the LAVTC’s driver

training curriculum. Indirectly, this study addresses instructional strategies and methods

that may affect how LAV drivers perceive their training.

No existing literature, within or outside the Marine Corps, has determined

standard characteristics for driver curriculum or its effectiveness in training LAV drivers.

Quality curriculum programs for LAV drivers are critical to the mission of the LAR

battalions. Driver training at the LAVTC provides the foundation for LAV driver

operations (Training and Education Command, 2011); therefore, this study encourages

leaders of the LAVTC to focus on the efficient development and application of driver

curriculum and training, and not just on the standardization of curriculum design and

assessments. All stakeholders, including curriculum developers, Marine Corps leaders,

and the entire LAR population, may profit from the conclusions of this research by

reviewing and monitoring curriculum programs and procedures to ensure the alignment

of course goals with curricular objectives while supporting student learning.

Nature of the Study

There are three main approaches to conducting research. First, a quantitative

study allows for the testing of a theory based off measurable data. Second, qualitative

research investigates the understanding of a social or individual problem from various

15
perspectives and third, mixed methods is an amalgamation of quantitative and qualitative

research (Creswell, 2013). The current research used a qualitative descriptive method

that explored the feelings of the participants as told through narratives.

Qualitative Study

Qualitative research is a process of empirical investigation that includes various

strategies, such as inductive methods that emphasize participant perspectives (Creswell,

2005). The use of qualitative data collection techniques reveals patterns in the

participants’ experiences (Creswell, 2005). In contrast, quantitative research would

describe trends or explain the relationship between variables, using numerical data

(Creswell, 2005). This study did not collect quantitative data.

The use of a qualitative methodological approached to the problem statement

allows for a general perspective to the phenomenon. Qualitative research allows for the

study of human behavior in the participants’ natural environment and where data is

gathered through words, categories, and themes (Creswell, 2013).

Descriptive Narrative

The descriptive narrative design explores topics that may emerge from an

individual’s recollection of an event (Mann & Willis, 2000). A detailed narrative story

vividly describes an individual, place, or event in such a way that the audience can

envision the theme and enter into the author’s experience. Unlike a stand-alone narrative,

which outlines the topic of a story, a descriptive narrative does not have to have a plot but

must be easy for the reader to imagine.

A qualitative descriptive narrative is easy to carry out because narratives pervade

our everyday life. Humans interact through narratives to make sense of their

16
environment and to bring order to their experiences (Murray, 2015). Through the design

of a descriptive narrative, participants are able to define their experiences as individual or

shared.

The intent behind this study’s detailed narrative methodology was to describe the

perceptions of participants in such vivid detail that the audience could learn lessons or

gain insight. The descriptive narrative design allowed participants to interpret the

problem statement through a storied design. Semi-structured, recorded, telephone

interviews were used to allow participants to descriptively narrate their opinions

regarding driver training at the LAVTC.

Research Question

Arguing for an individual opinion or perspective is the intent of writing and

defining a research question (Bredmar, 2013). Establishing a valid research question

requires the suspension of predeterminations to prevent biased conclusions (Hendry,

McLafferty, & Pringle, 2011). The practical research question of this study highlights the

focus of the purpose statement, which guides the participants to voice their experiences,

perceptions, and understandings regarding LAVTC’s driver training.

There were no hypotheses or predictions. Instead, the research explored the

thoughts and opinions of LAV drivers interpreting driver training at the LAVTC. The

single research question was as follows:

RQ1. What are the participants’ perceptions of the effectiveness of the Light

Armored Vehicle Training Course driver curriculum?

Corbin and Strauss (2008) explained that research questions in a qualitative study

are broad, include assumptions, identify the subject, and may lead the researcher into new

17
areas of exploration. The research question met these criteria as it recognizes the subject

(driver curriculum) and is adequate in scope to broaden this topic’s field of inquiry for

follow-up by future researchers. The research question embodied the first commitment to

understanding the personal opinions of LAV drivers. The single research question also

addressed compensatory actions that drivers might take to overcome any shortfalls in

their training.

The research question was the basis for developing the initial interview probes for

the study and emphasized the focus on the perceptions of LAV drivers. Through their

responses to open-ended questions, participants had the opportunity to express their

experiences (Krauss & Peredaryenko, 2013). Answers to the research question may

provide ways for curriculum developers to implement higher-quality driver training.

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework in this research study was the foundation on which all

information was constructed. The theoretical structure functioned as a support for the

justification of the study, the problem and purpose statements, the study’s significance,

and the research question. The theoretical framework also provided the foundation for

the literature review, methods, and analysis (Grant & Osanloo, 2011).

No independently identified process for development, instruction, and assessment

of driver curriculum exists at the LAVTC outside internal curriculum review boards.

Therefore, the theoretical framework of this study centered on the Marine Corps’ use of

Systems Approach to Training (SAT),curriculum development, and training.

18
Systems Approach Training

Implementing reforms of the existing curriculum development procedures of the

Marine Corps is challenging. The Marine Corps uses SAT as a comprehensive approach

to planning, developing, analyzing, applying, and assessing the process of enabling

Marines to achieve learning objectives so that they can support task performance in the

operating forces (Flynn, 2011). SAT follows an organized approach involving

investigation and analysis to collect relevant information so that curriculum developers

can make informed decisions on curriculum design, implementation, and (if necessary)

reform. SAT is the Marine Corps’ backstop in ensuring that all courses and organizations

have appropriate standardized procedures, which will facilitate achieving their identified

tasks and objectives (Flynn, 2011).

SAT is a consistent process for verifying the instructed tasks what, where, when,

and how(Flynn, 2011). SAT consists of five unified stages established around the

ADDIE model: analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation (Flynn,

2011). SAT, along with the ADDIE model, provides strategies for designing,

developing, and implementing instruction. The ADDIE model reduces subjectivity in the

decision-making processes of course designers.

The organizational structure for training and education in the Marine Corps is

essential to the continuous development of professional training and education across all

Marine Corps training units. The LAVTC currently lacks such an organizational

structure and clear theoretical framework for driver training at the LAVTC

(Nakonieczny, 2010).

19
 In contrast, other courses taught at the LAVTC have undergone successive

iterations of a redesign, development, and reconceptualization. The outcomes of these

course reviews, however, have had little or no impact on the elaboration of a working

theoretical model for driver training.

Curriculum Development

Marine Corps curriculum development is divided into training and education

objectives. Training standards establish the foundation for instruction within all Marine

Corps formal schools and courses. Education objectives determine the base for

professional military education (PME) within Marine Corps courses. Connected at all

levels of career development, the two supplement each other (Flynn, 2011). During the

beginning of a Marine’s career, foundational training is the emphasis, with education

governing the later stages.

Traditionally, Marine Corps curriculum has been subject-based, but in recent

years, learning institutions have begun introducing competency-based approaches

(Cutrer, Robert, & Ramsay, 2010). The goal of Marine Corps curriculum is to produce

positive outcomes in performance-based assessments and seek applicability of

information learned and not just retention of knowledge. The curriculum must be

transferable from referenced instruction to practical applicability. Two key goals of

curriculum development are effectiveness and efficiency: effective curriculum creates

positive outcomes, while efficient curriculum uses existing resources with lower cost.

One way to identify how to make curriculum effective and efficient is through a

needs assessment. Through systematically collecting information and analyzing the

needs of the Marine Corps, such an evaluation helps curriculum designers to fill the space

20
between what is and what should be learned (McCallum, 2008). In addition, a course

curriculum needs assessment should be instituted as a starting point in the reform process.

Training

Instruction, self-control, and drill are hallmarks of training. Marine Corps

training instills knowledge and procedures through continuous repetition of tasks, the

outcomes of which are skill and proficiency development (Pratt, 1996). The repetition

and reinforcement give students time to adjust, to understand, and to interpret the

knowledge.

By following standardized curricula, Marine Corps training methods ensure

training for every Marine is the same; initially achieved through Marine Corps boot

camp. A typical boot camp cycle (the first professional training that a Marine undergoes)

lasts 13 weeks and separates into three distinct phases. Phase 1 disorients recruits and

exposes them to a new way of learning. Phase 2 scaffolds from phase one and instills

drill along with unit cohesion. Phase 3 is transformational; at this point, Marines

graduate from entry-level training and are ready to proceed to their respective MOS

schools.

The Marine Corps’ training standards are intended to assess training through

outcome-based assessments, which highlight students’ ability to apply the information

learned as opposed to rote memorization. The purpose of this framework for education is

not primarily to acquire information or knowledge of course content. Instead, it is to

show the Marines that they can use the information in practical situations.

21
 Definition of Terms

To ensure accurate understanding, explaining some terms and their uses within

the military environment is important. The terms defined in this section do not have

suitable descriptions or explanations in the literature and maybe unclear to readers

outside the military.

Individual Training Standards (ITS). ITSs are training requirements designed for

specific Military Occupational Specialties (MOSs) or billet assignments. ITSs provide a

base from which unit leaders and course designers can construct training programs for

Marines as part of individual or collective unit training strategies or formal courses of

instruction (TECOM, 2004).

Training and Education Command (TECOM). TECOM implements policies that

create Training and Readiness (T&R) programs and maintains publications through its

instructional divisions, the Aviation and Ground Training Divisions (AGTD) (Flynn,

2011).

Training and Readiness Standards. The Marine Corps uses two Training and

Readiness (T&R) approaches. Aviation and ground combat manuals. Centered on

operational requirements of the force and based on performance standards, T&R manuals

are intended to certify unit effectiveness in basic warfighting skills. T&R manuals

specify procedures and directions for the development, design, and standardization of all

Marine Corps courses (Flynn, 2011).

Assumptions

This descriptive qualitative narrative study was based on four implicit

assumptions. The first presumed participants were willing volunteers, who volunteered

22
without coercion or under false pretenses. The second assumption was that participants

would answer all questions truthfully and objectively. Marines are generally passionate

about being Marines. However, non-Marine Corps affiliated polls show that morale

within the Corps has dropped. The continuous training operations with no real-time

mission and small pay increases – to name two reasons – have affected Marines who see

themselves as ‘out of the beltway Marines’ (Forsling, 2014). I assume that some of the

participant responses may not be fully objective but personal in venting their frustration

with higher leaders who they may see as out of touch and detached.

The third assumption was that participants would provide their honest personal

perspectives on various issues on improving driver curriculum. The confidential nature

of the Marines Corps and the culture of loyalty within the Marines could have caused

some participants to be less open and honest. Each participant was ensured of their

confidentially within the study and were encouraged to be as open and candid as they felt

comfortable

The fourth assumption was to ensure that data collection and interpretation

accurately reflected each participants’ beliefs. Taking into account the previous

assumptions, assumption four was collected on faith that the data I was collecting was

substantive, thoughtful, and would add to the conversation. These assumptions rely on

participants’ commitment, enthusiasm, and genuine desire to assist in improving the

LAVTC driver curriculum.

23
 Scope, Limitations, and Delimitations

Scope

According to Simon (2011), the scope of the research paper determines the

confines of the study. The scope of the current qualitative descriptive narrative study was

to describe the effect of driver training on a Marine’s ability to perform his duties through

capturing narrative expressions. This goal was achieved by conducting interviews of 20

participants who have served across all four LAR battalions, graduated from the LAVTC

between December 20, 2010, and October 1, 2014, and are retired or have been

discharged.

Limitations

Qualitative descriptive narrative studies are frequently subjected to criticism

regarding procedural rigor, researcher bias, and external validity (Yin, 2003); although

some have argued that a descriptive narrative study excuses the researcher from most

procedural considerations (Bennett & Elman, 2007; Yin, 2003). Yin (2009) stated that

conducting a descriptive narrative study could raise concerns because of the relative lack

of systematic guidelines.

Furthermore, limitations are possible problems that the researcher sees as inherent

within the study (Creswell, 2005). Simon (2011) suggested that factors and events

beyond the investigator’s control constitute possible research limitations. As the

first comprehensive investigation of driver curriculum at the LAVTC, this study is

limited. The following are limitations of the current research.

First, the responses represent participants’ beliefs and may be subjective in nature.

The interview script allowed participants to share their views of driver training freely.

24
Narrative research focuses on the storied disposition of the self and traditionally attempts

to induce interviewees to provide information that conforms to the structure of stories

(Adler, 2012). Some participants could have failed to respond to the questions with

answers rich in narrative quality (Adler, 2012).

A second potential limitation was that the weaknesses of LAV driver training

could represent a larger problem existing across other MOSs. Third, the present

qualitative study relied on the narratives of a relatively small sample of LAV drivers.

External validity or generalizability may be of concern with such a limited sample size,

and even more so since snowball sampling was used to attract the desired number of

participants (Noy, 2008). This approach could obtain samples that do not represent the

whole population and could thereby introduce biases (Bastos, Boni, Pechansky, Silva, &

Vasconcellos, 2012). Representativeness of the sample may not have been precise; the

researcher could have been blind to the actual distribution of the population and sample.

Therefore, there was no guarantee that the sample studied might be more or less critical

of the LAVTC than the overall population.

Fourth, telephone interviews were possible limitations. Geographically dispersed,

the only practical way to gain information from respondents was through telephone

interviews. Telephone interviews are helpful in accessing participants who otherwise

would not be readily available, but they do not provide the nonverbal cues available in

face-to-face (FTF) interaction. Browning and Kee (2013, p. 6) explained:

The lack of nonverbal cues makes both the participant and the researcher perform

to full articulation, which produces richer text for subsequent analysis. Therefore,

25
 individual meanings communicated through nonverbal cues in a FTF setting are

explicitly included in the interview conversations, leading to richer text and data.

The reliance on interviews to the exclusion of other qualitative approaches such as

observations, documentary analysis, and ethnography is a fifth limitation of this study.

Like all research methods, a narrative methodology has limitations. Difficulties in

narrative research may also arise from moral or ethical considerations. Conducting a

field test with SMEs should have helped to ensure comprehensibility of the questions, but

may not have eliminated sources of bias.

Delimitations

Delimitations are the restrictions of scope, within the researcher’s control, that the

investigator imposes on the study (Leedy & Ormrod, 2011). The first delimitation of this

study was the problem statement. Curriculum and training inconsistencies may exist in

other academic environments within the Marine Corps, but the present study was

delimited to the LAVTC, covered only the driver-training curriculum, and ignored other

course within the LAVTC.

A second delimitation was the use of a qualitative descriptive narrative design that

afforded participants the opportunity to narrate their experiences in sequential order as

events in an evolving story (Adler, 2012). For example, one participant explained that

his former unit did not use him as an active driver due to their lack of faith in his abilities.

The sensitivity of personal accounts coupled with the performance expectations of the

military environment could create awkwardness for some participants. Conducting

confidential phone interviews eased the interviewees into being more forthcoming in

their narration.

26
 Third, carrying out telephone interviews of former LAV drivers across all four

LAR battalions was a delimitation of convenience, even though it prevented the

researcher from identifying a participant’s body language, which could have been a

source of extra information (Chapman, Uggerslev, & Webster, 2003). Telephone

interviews were most suitable for this study due to considerations of time efficiency,

geographical reach, schedule flexibility, and an increased feeling of confidentiality and

privacy. Telephone interviews also reduced any tendency, by the reviewer, to develop

biases for or against the responses of particular interviewees (Browning & Kee, 2013).

A fourth delimitation was the requirement that all participants must have been

LAV drivers. There are more drivers in the 0313 MOS than vehicle commanders or

gunners, so this sample should have sufficiently represented the population.

Finally, the use of a larger sample size, in-person interviews, multiple types of

information-gathering technologies, and an additional researcher to assist in data

collection were foregone in favor of the present methodology. These ancillary steps

could support future longitudinal studies.

Summary

The purpose of this qualitative descriptive narrative study was to collect

participants’ perceptions on the effectiveness of the LAVTC’s driver training program.

Previous operations have not captured and applied to the LAVTC driver training the

perceptions of LAV drivers on the course’s effectiveness. Therefore, this research was

appropriate to address the problem from a descripted narrated point of view.

The investigation carried out in this study represented one part of a holistic

solution for military education reform. It may influence how the U.S. Marine Corps

27
designs its curriculum and standardizes its instructional programs. The Marines carry a

great responsibility in protecting U.S. interests and maintaining world order, and

practical, well-defined education and curriculum policies are essential to their success.

Chapter 1 has provided background information on the Light Armored

Reconnaissance Battalion, military occupational specialties, light armored vehicle

training requirements, and a description of the Marine Corps learning and instructional

methods. Also addressed were the background of the problem, problem statement, the

purpose of the study, the significance of the study, and its importance to Marine Corps

leadership. In addition, Chapter 1 covered the nature of the study and its one research

question, the theoretical framework, definition of terms, assumptions, scope, limitations,

and delimitations.

Chapter 2 will present the importance of educational delivery and will analyze the

LAVTC with regard to(a) curriculum and student achievement, (b) learner-centered

teaching, (c) differentiated instruction, (d) authentic assessments, (e) education

taxonomies, (f) LAVTC educational strategies, (g) Marine Corps course development, (h)

experiential education, (i) and the literature gap. The exploration of these subjects will

underlie the effort to gauge the nature and effectiveness of the LAVTC’s driver

curriculum.

28
 Chapter 2

Literature Review

Global conflicts have pressed many countries to modernize their armies and to

develop military capabilities across a range of battlefields (Farrell, 2010). Federal

internal control standards state that decision makers need visibility over a program’s

financial data and purpose to determine whether the program is meeting the department’s

goals and effectively using resources. Without better information between training

performance and effective applicability, the Marine Corps lacks the information needed

to make more fully informed decisions regarding the optimal mix of training and how

best to target future training investments, including improving curriculum based training

standards(Ferren, 2013).

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have caused the LAVTC to rethink its

techniques, tactics, and procedures (TTPs), but only minimal changes have occurred in

the core structure of its training curriculum, i.e., updating existing education and training

routines to keep pace with current combat operations, with no emphasis on post-combat

training and implementation.

Until recently, academic military research has focused on the requirements for

and development of significant military change, specifically equipment improvement.

Although technological innovations are essential for an efficient fighting unit, equipment

improvements are neither required nor sufficient conditions for success in combat

(Farrell, 2010). Mission accomplishment in combat requires that the LAVTC adapt to

the operational environment, in real time, while preparing its students for individual

success and challenges in the operating forces through education and training updates.

29
 The relationship between curriculum development, instruction, and student

achievement is well documented (Jebson & Moses, 2012). The curriculum contains

identified lessons in appropriate forms and sequences to permit real teaching (Lunenburg,

2011). Instruction is an important practice of reviewing events and previously learned

concepts (Rosenshine, 2012). Assessment, an essential aspect of the curriculum, involves

determining whether the intentions of the curriculum standards are being or have been

achieved (Allen, Frey, & Schmitt, 2012).

The purpose of this literature review was to identify knowledge from the fields of

curriculum development, learning, and instructional techniques to increase the value and

effectiveness of LAV driver education. Additionally, the literature review references

adult education theories and instructional strategies and techniques to bolsters possible

courses of actions Marine Corps curriculum developers may take in improving upon

existing curricula(Bauman, Redman, & Milat, 2015). Therefore, the focus of this

literature review was about alternative curriculum designs and instructional techniques,

as they may work alongside the Marine Corps systems approach to training.

Chapter 2 reviews existing literature on curriculum development, considering not

only issues of curriculum design and implementation but also how students interact with

the information. The application of this information includes analysis made from the

perspectives of Bloom and Fink’s learning taxonomies, experiential education,

differentiated instruction, and authentic assessments with the purpose of laying the

groundwork for a reexamination of the curriculum design methods used at the LAVTC.

30
 Documentation

Used in this literature review were traditional and electronic data sources. Search

sources included the Internet, public and university libraries, Google Scholar, dissertation

abstracts, Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) databases, and professional

military education resources. University of Phoenix online sources consisted of

ProQuest, EBSCOhost, ProQuest Digital Dissertations, and Sage Publications. Primary

information searches consisted of words that addressed the topics of curriculum design

and development, standards-based curriculum, and the responsibility for curriculum in

training. In addition, a secondary keyword search covered words and categories

including:

 education and curriculum resources

 experiential learning

 differentiated instruction

 authentic assessments

 military education and training

 training methods

 transfer of learning

Marine Corps Course Development

The Marine Corps uses numerous Training and Readiness (T&R) doctrinal

publications, all derived from either the aviation or ground combat manuals (Flynn,

2011). Founded on operational requirements of the force and based on performance

standards, T&R manuals certify unit effectiveness in basic warfighting skills (Flynn,

2011). Collectively, all course programs provide T&R standards for individual MOS

31
requirements that support a commander’s intent to achieve and sustain combat skills at

the unit and individual levels. T&R manuals specify procedures and direction for the

development, design, and standardization of all Marine Corps courses (Flynn, 2011).

The LAVTC designs and develops courses based on the T&R manual for LAR,

which is MCWP 3-14 (Flynn, 2009). The Marine Corps’ Training and Education

Command (TECOM) updates this publication as necessary to support existing and

applicable training standards to commanders. However, although the Marine Corps

republished an up-to-date MCWP 3-14 in 2009, significant work is still needed

(Nakonieczny, 2010).

Rotherham and Willingham (2009) have stated that efforts to reorganize

curriculum design and development require three primary functions. First, educators

and curriculum developers must ensure that the instructional programs are complete and

that the information enables more than a temporary acquisition of skills. Second, course

developers and instructors must reevaluate their approach to their students - in

particular, to be more flexible in changing environments. Finally, needed are newer

assessments that can accurately measure learning of more complex tasks over time. For

future graduates of the LAVTC to be effective, leaders should consider these three

elements as part of the curriculum design process.

The Alignment of Curriculum Design and Student Achievement

Curriculum alignment research has evolved to show the connection between three

curriculum alignment classifications: “the taught curriculum, the tested curriculum, and

the written curriculum” (Squires, 2012, p. 2).The written curriculum is typically the

manuals or standards. The taught curriculum is the instructed curriculum by the teacher,

32
and the assessed curriculum is from standardized testing. Associations between

educational standards to the curriculum and assessment requirements are necessary for

developing a successful curriculum design (Squires, 2012).

According to English (1987), to address curriculum alignment to student

achievement first, the taught curriculum must ensure that the content and context of the

written curriculum aligns to the school’s established curricula. Second, is between the

tested and the taught curriculum. Research has proven that there is a relationship

between standardized testing and information learning. Third, easily found in current

written curriculum is the tested information (textbooks or manuals). Fourth, the testing

environment represents the manuals and effective teaching strategies developed to

compensate for any discrepancies. When the curriculum and the instruction are aligned

both the low and high performing students have been reported to score greater than

normal (Squires, 2012).

Aligning curriculum design to student success also requires a look at the

leadership that governs the curriculum standards, oversees the taught curriculum, and

implements the testing procedures. A transformational approach where the institution’s

vision, mission, objectives, and accountability are shared can be more successful than a

transactional model of individual experts administered by a single leader. A

transformative approach to curriculum alignment may engage persons in the design

process and impart an awareness of accountability for their areas of expertise, and for the

elevation of their students through standardized curriculum testing (Lotrecchiano &

Ekmekci, 2014).

33
 According to Lotrecchiano & Ekmekci (2014), subsequently creating a

transdisciplinary curriculum that aligns with student achievement is harder than designing

curriculum structured within a single discipline. Therefore, to ensure student

achievement based on curriculum alignment, developers must make sure that all

transdisciplinary parties align to the intent of the curriculum.

First, the complexity of creating an active alignment of student achievement and

curriculum from various disciplines is involved (Biggs, 2014). “Designers of curriculum

may not be given sufficient time or access to thoroughly examine or reflect on how the

courses they are designing corresponds to the general content of the curriculum in which

it is placed and how learning objectives, content, activities, and graded assignments align

with one another”(Lotrecchiano & Ekmekci, 2014, p. 2)

Second, Lotrecchiano & Ekmekci (2014) suggests, as an alternative to curriculum

developers being responsible for developing a course exclusively on their own, a

collaborative approach to curriculum design may permit the collective group to

investigate the content of every course. A team-oriented approach to curriculum design

can positively affect a student’s approach by demonstrating the very ethos to

collaborative and transdisciplinary learning and partnership. As well as, understanding

each course’s contribution to the overall program outcomes and developing a learning

experience for students that build on and balance each course’s influence to the program

of study.

The routine of curriculum development and its effects on students at the LAVTC

are norms, guidelines, and procedures classified in doctrinal publications and training

manuals, and that frame organizational perceptions, decisions, and future actions as to

34
how to teach the information (Hull, 2005). Hull (2005) purposes that institutions such as

the LAVTC can adapt the alignment of curriculum design and student achievement by

first, exploiting core competencies and redefining or adjusting existing training

procedures. Second, byexploring newer capabilitiesand developing contemporary

methods of curriculum design and assessment procedures, such as constructive

alignment.

According to Squires (2012), course development and evaluation may appear

simple to align, yet many curriculum developers fail to implement, effectively,

curriculum-to-assessment alignment into course designs. This failure creates gaps

between the written curriculum, the taught curriculum, and the tested curriculum

(McNeary, Snell, & Lederhaus, 2014). Although it is often unpopular to state that

assessment drives learning, the benefit of aligning course development and evaluation is

supported by evidence indicating that if the course design is not effectively aligned with

student achievement, then what is taught is not learned (Reeves, 2006).

Finally, Lotrecchiano & Ekmekci (2014) suggest two considerations that

influence course design are first, constructive alignment between course outcomes,

program-learning objectives, concepts offered within the course, events where students

participate, and graded assessment tasks within the students’ understanding of the lesson.

Second, within organizational guidelines that create uniform habits and procedures not

just in each course, but also across all courses within the program of study.

Learner-Centered: Constructive Alignment and Inductive Approach

Contemporary learning institutions have shifted from the customary teacher-

oriented instruction to a constructive alignment. Performed through lectures

35
communicated by a teacher to a passive audience is the traditional teaching

method(Mascolo, 2009). However, present-day learning theories suggest teachers should

focus on the expected outcomes a student is to achieve and assist them in achieving those

goals, which means something other than talking for an hour while the students take

notes (Biggs, 2014).

Constructive alignment is a curriculum design that creates an expected

environment for students to learn and where learning outcomes that students are intended

to achieve are defined before teaching occurs (Biggs, 2014). Specified before the start of

a lesson, constructive alignment then allows a teacher to create their instructional

approach designed to engage students in learning activities with the intent of optimizing

their chances of achieving the outcomes of the course (Biggs, 2014). Whatsmore,

constructive alignment occurs as students actively process information to construct

solutions to problems.

Constructive alignment in teaching offers consistency and reliability throughout

the system(Prosser & Trigwell, 2014). The written curriculum is not a listing of trained

subjects and content but is a framework of clear objectives that students are required to

understand. Biggs (2014) identified that previous forms of teacher-centered instruction

were constructed around the generalizability model for teaching almost any subject.

Teacher-centered instruction is not a form of constructive alignment.

Teaching methods using constructive alignment recognize that teachers have an

obligation to encourage students to learn the written curriculum and pass the standardize

testing (Delgado, 2015). Within constructive alignment, all elements of the system,

written, taught, and assessed curriculum, are supportive of each other; therefore,

36
‘entrapping’ the students in an environment of academic consistency from course designs

to material testing (Prosser & Trigwell, 2014). Additionally, a constructive alignment of

the written curriculum and taught curriculum recognize students do not immediately

understand the knowledge; rather, learners must create individual interpretations of the

information (Mascolo, 2009).

Relative to a constructive alignment on knowledge acquisition through the written

and taught curricula’s, the learner-centered method uses inductive reasoning, which

begins when learners use observations and firsthand information to explore, simplify, and

then discover methods to apply their inferences to solving real-world problems (Prince &

Felder, 2006). By using constructive alignment and an inductive approach, teachers can

determine a learner’s preconceived knowledge of the curriculum and use that information

to shape lesson plans. Additionally, instructors who use constructive alignment and

inductive approaches can identify with learners by encouraging students to ask questions.

The significance of constructive alignment is to define what students are supposed to be

able to do with the information they have learned, apart from reporting in their own

words what they had been taught (Biggs, 2014).

Szabo (2006) asked students preliminary questions to gauge their understanding

of their curriculum and found that most were more motivated to learn when they were

involved in the learning beforehand. If the teacher began with an exercise that engaged

the class instead of first teaching with PowerPoint, learners who received a copy of the

method and media beforehand and who were encouraged to ask questions about the

instructional methodology were more willing and able to modify their mental models of

the curriculum (Szabo, 2006). Therefore, teachers must learn to recognize learner-

37
centered approaches of curriculum design and instruction and to develop methods of

classroom communication that involve a constructive alignment of the written

curriculum, taught curriculum, and assessed curriculum (Szabo, 2006).

Differentiated Instruction

Differentiated instruction involves strategies that effectively integrate teaching

and practice to improve the experience, familiarity, and applied abilities required for

learners to adjust to increased demands of information understanding. Models of

learning suggest that students learn differently due to their individual preferences

regarding instructional styles, and teaching methods should respond to this fact with

diverse learning techniques designed to maximize student education (Dunn, 2000).

Differentiating instruction offers students varying pathways to understanding and

processing content and to consider what is applicable given an individual’s profile of

strengths, interests, and styles (Dixon, Hardin, McConnell, & Yssel, 2014).

Students learn differently, and their perception of the information may create

dissimilarities between similar groups. Therefore, because students learn in various

ways, there is no right way to teach. Development and improvement rates may vary

amongst a similar “group because of differences in individual student mental

development, teaching methods, and instructional materials that all have an impact on

academic performance” (Huong, 2012, p. 13).Consequently, teaching in schools has

become more difficult as students are more socially, culturally, and intellectually diverse.

The function of complex instruction is to stimulate a strong understanding of

knowledge that helps learners to prepare for careers after graduation (Huong, 2012).

Differentiated instruction offers students the opportunity to discover new insights and to

38
identify with that information through independent learning (Hall, 2002). Through semi-

student autonomy, differentiated instruction focuses on a partnership between teachers

and students.

Differentiated instruction allows teachers to teach the curriculum with associated

experiments and performance standards through experiential education (Gardner, 1999).

Dixon, (et.al., 2014) suggested that this is possible because experiential education

explains the exchange between learner and teacher not simply as an interaction, but as a

process in which the instructor and student both add context to the learning process.

Instructors and students not only cooperate but also substitute each other’s knowledge

schemas for their own. Students learn from teachers and teachers learn from students.

The strategy of differentiated instruction calls for adaptability in the way teachers

approach varying instructional methods to match their students learning abilities, rather

than requiring learners to adjust to the syllabus. Schoolroom differentiated instruction is

a balance of the learning process (Dixon, et.al., 2014). Differentiated Instruction is an

instructional technique centered on the idea that teaching methods must differ and be

adaptable relative to the individual and diversity of the classrooms (Hall, 2002).

One-size-fits-all approaches to instruction are ineffective due to student

differences in learning, previous experiences, and age. As students’ learning styles vary

and can even change, it becomes apparent that there are no objectively correct or

obligatory ways to teach or learn (Huong, 2012). Designing differentiated instructional

strategies is an effective approach to teaching that identifies ways in which learners learn

best, constructed on experiential forms of education, and that parallel the student learning

styles.

39
 Bjork, McDaniel, Pashler, & Rohrer (2008) explained that considering how to

make use of students’ prior instruction and knowledge is critical in determining what

level and methods of instruction are appropriate for that student. However, strictly

developing learning competencies based on individual preferences is not ideal (Huong,

2010). Differentiated instruction can go only so far due to some inherent learning

concepts to the curriculum that cannot be changed.

Any particular instructional strategy may be useful for some students, but not for

all. An approach that helps one student to develop learning, knowledge retention, and

skills application may be ineffective for another due to their dissimilar learning

preferences. If students experience a preferred learning environment and instruction,

their satisfaction in learning may rise (Huong, 2012). Therefore, differentiated

instruction involves responsive, adaptable teaching that addresses student diversity

(Huong, 2012).

Little, McCoach, and Reis (2014) found that teachers who eliminated whole-

group instruction for three hours a week, replacing it with differentiated instruction,

achieved higher reading scores and similar comprehension scores than control groups

taught with traditional instructional techniques. The purpose of differentiating instruction

is to extend the individual students development and successes by meeting each learner

where he or she is, and assisting in the learning process (Hall, 2002). The successful uses

of the differentiation are not a separate issue. The insert of student engagements and their

personal understanding of the information makes differentiated instruction successful

(Hall, 2002).

40
 A teacher who knows where he or she wants her students to arrive at the

conclusion of a lesson and where his or students are at any given time during that lesson

is most successful using differentiated instruction (Hall, 2002). Teachers using

differentiated instruction can successfully guide students as he or she varies his or her

instructional strategies to suit the learning stages of each student. Lastly, teachers who

demonstrate a practical use of differentiation does so without the need to amass data on

testing scores and evaluations, but rather through the constructing of understanding, by

their students, of the information.

The change in how learners think about their learning has caused greater use of

differentiated instruction to focus on strategies that will maximize the desired learning

outcomes. When applied to the standardized of SAT used by the LAVTC, differentiated

instruction seeks to address a wider range of learners without compromising the integrity

of the standards-based curriculum (Hall, 2002).

Differentiated Instruction in Standards-Based Curriculum

Differentiated instruction recognizes and supports students’ individual learning

abilities. Instructors who incorporate differentiated instruction into standards-based

curriculum realize the benefits that each student may gain from diverse instructional and

learning methods and through support structures. The use of differentiated instruction in

a standards-based curriculum is an appropriate balance of challenges and successes

(Lawrence-Brown, 2004).

The use of differentiated instruction in military learning may assist teachers in

creating comprehensive learning environments. In contrast from mainstream standards-

based environments, the differentiated instruction does not embarrass or single out

41
students who are unable to keep up without significant support (Lawrence-Brown, 2004).

Therefore, the implementation of differentiated instruction into standards-based

curriculum programs is necessary, especially in a military environment where the

immediate objective is for all students to understand the learning objectives of a course.

If students in a military learning environment are to reach high standards of achievement,

the learning environment must teach the standards-based curriculum program of

instruction with continued higher levels of instructional expectations.

Research has shown that the incorporation of differentiated instruction into a

general standards-based curriculum is manageable using an instructional planning

strategy (Lawrence-Brown, 2004). Doing so has two broad objectives. The first is to

ensure that all students complete the course-level general curriculum requirements and

meet the standards. The use of differentiated instruction is an important approach for

ensuring individual knowledge retention and understanding by providing added support

to struggling students and enabling them to keep up. Without this aid, many students

may fail the curriculum or may barely pass with only a limited level of knowledge. This

situation is noticeable in environments, such as special education, where students who

have not had differentiated support in learning but remain in standards-based classrooms

struggle to keep up (Lawrence-Brown, 2004).

The second purpose is to deliver modified curriculum for learners in need without

altering the objectives and standards of the course. For example, a differentiated

instruction can enable students who best learn kinesthetically to progress at the same pace

and with the same efficiency as students who learn through auditory means. In a

structured environment such as the LAVTC, differentiated instruction when applied to

42
standards based curriculum must take into account learner abilities without compromising

the standards-based curriculum and instruction.

Lawrence-Brown (2004) noted that for some students, learning in a standards-

based environment is relatively easy. These students may understand and interpret the

information by using notes, learn by studying and reviewing in advance of examinations,

and connect what they have learned to the traditional paper-and-pencil tests. However,

other students who do not have these abilities are in untenable situations of standards-

based learning with no injection of differentiated instruction. Lawrence-Brown (2004)

pointed out that when these students have trouble, it is not because they cannot learn or

are not smart enough to retain the information, but instead because they cannot learn or

retain instructed information in its current format.

Judging the effectiveness of differentiated instruction as applied in a military

standards-based curriculum requires support from useful data on student learning. Within

most learning environments, current curriculum assessment information may provide

those data. However, within a military education environment, additional data specific to

a course’s objective may be required.

To validate differentiated instruction in a standards-based curriculum format,

according to Halverson and Neary (2001), data collection methods should be simple,

appropriate, and pragmatic for classroom consistency. The use of data-driven

differentiated instruction within a standards-based curriculum may support the learning

environment, deliver appropriate supports, and provide the desired benefits of high

retention and useful application of knowledge upon graduation. Augmented with

authentic assessments to support the assessment needs of the LAVTC’s use of SAT,

43
differentiated instruction is be a modification of, but not a substitute for, high-quality

curriculum and instruction. As cited by (Tomlinson, 2000):

By definition, differentiation is cautious of approaches to teaching and learning

that standardize. Standard-issue students are rare, and educational approaches

that ignore academic diversity in favor of standardization are likely to be

counterproductive in reaching the full range of learners (p. 7)

Authentic Assessments

Learning organizations are gradually being required to empirically demonstrate

that students are successfully developing the understanding and the abilities needed to

apply the learned information (Eddy, 2013). Investors - including firms, government, and

private agencies, authorizing organizations, administrators, teachers, and learners

themselves have increasingly forced academic institutions to deliver confirmation of

instructive effectiveness by investigating what learners absorb rather than how and what

students are taught (Eddy, 2013). The U.S. Marine Corps’ training institutions should be

no exception.

Authentic assessment involves asking students to perform real-world tasks based

on the knowledge and information he or she has learned in the classroom and evaluating

him or her through four stages. Alone the application of any single stage is sufficient in

creating a real-world assessment opportunity that is learner-centered (Eddy, 2013);

however, together these stages contribute to creating an authentic assessment.

First, assessment is a process. Authentic assessment supports evaluation as an

enduring process instead of a static occurrence (Campbell 2000). Second, assessing

students through experiential learning and authentic assessment affixes into the learners’

44
experience. Third, using multiple evaluators, outcomes of authentic assessment have the

possibility of being recognized by various assessors, to include self-assessment for the

student, evaluation by the teacher, and by a prospective evaluator such as a potential

employer (Eddy, 2013). Fourth, authentic assessment offers more student choices that

present additional options for students to choose their mental means or educational

processes for learning assignments; thus, creating a more appropriate assessment (Taras

2010).

When Authentic Assessment is balanced to the SAT procedures of the LAVTC,

there are glaring complications. For example, two months prior to a review to change

context with the LAR T&R manual, subject matter experts are encouraged to create a

preliminary report summarizing the result of evaluations associated with every course

identification (Flynn, 2011). Once produced, this report is intended to benefit the T&R

Conference on changes, and would assist SMEs in reviewing individual training events

and assessments in the light of the results contained in the FLCER report. However, as

Nakonieczny (2010) previously stated, “The historical results have been a substandard

product not comprehensive enough to ensure standardization of component training

(namely driver training) throughout the LAVTC’s numerous instructional programs”(p.

42).

In addition, the SAT doctrine as discussed by Flynn (2011) should use

preliminary evaluations to predetermine action for future assessment and course

development and redesign. This is problematic, however, as there has been no

empirically approached, longitudinal or otherwise, studies done on the value of the

LAVTCs driver curriculum as approached from graduate effectiveness. Education

45
taxonomies, instructional techniques, and instructional methods have not, as of yet, been

empirically validated as effective in measuring student performance through current SAT

approaches to assessment, as found in the results of this study.

Through the assistance of instructional methods such as differentiated instruction

and with the access of technology into classrooms, contemporary teaching methods are

allowing newer opportunities to produce environments that permit for authentic

assessment options (Scalise & Wilson, 2011). The use of differentiated forms of

assessments and technological advances in the classroom may assist in furthering to

implement authentic assessment.

Shifting to authentic assessment shows the proof of learning through practice.

Innovated lessons beginning from theories and end in practice; allowing students the

opportunity to engage a working environment with his or her knowledge (Eddy, 2013).

By assessing students in replicated and realistic settings, teachers also develop learners’

self-assurance to complete learned assignments on their own and within similar future

conditions(Whitlock & Nanavati, 2013). Finally, utilizing authentic assessment supports

student investment in his or her academic development by making the conclusions

relevant and meaningful (Brooks, Bowles, Ghosh, & Ranmuthugala, 2016).

Education Taxonomies

The significance of curriculum design and its effect on learning become apparent

when one examines the relationship between the structure of curriculum design,

assessment techniques, effective teaching, student learning, and student expectations

(Pope, 2012). Previous approaches relevant to this study’s curriculum design process and

military education are the identifiable outcomes of Bloom’s taxonomy on education

46
(1956), Dee Fink’s taxonomy of significant learning (2013), U.S. Army doctrine (2003),

the Marine Corps SAT manual (Flynn, 2011) and the ADDIE model. Many curriculum

developers and teachers are seeking to promote active classroom dialogues that stimulate

analytical thinking and increase information retention. However, “Research shows that

course designs relying on content-driven lectures and written examinations do not

promote significant learning among adult learners” (Marrocco, 2014, p. 1).

Social constructionists and organizational theorists have specified that the long-

term success of any organization rest on its newer members(Tevis, 2010). Nevertheless,

the use of scenario and planning practices within curriculum development is likely to

highlight a reactionary environment by emphasizing situations to which the organization

must react. The difficulty in circumventing current military policies and procedures may

make it difficult for LAVTC curriculum developers to react to needed changes and

should be addressed in follow-on studies.

However, the use of education taxonomies within the LAVTC could support a

creative and prudent approach to future curriculum development by aligning learning and

education taxonomies, assessment methods, and instructional techniques. With goal-

oriented curriculum development, the LAVTC could focus on the short-term curriculum

and prepare for future scaffolding purposes of that course’s curricula. Validating through

effective evaluations that inquire about the effectiveness of the training as perceived by

the students are, learning and education taxonomies.

Bloom’s Education Taxonomy

Bloom (1956) proposed a taxonomy of educational objectives that assists students

in understanding specific goals and provides administrators with a blueprint to organize

47
their learning environment. The learning environment in which new students at the

LAVTC find themselves may be significantly different from high school and college.

Bloom's work, which has been central to instructional design across many fields,

translates into the military education environment as an outline for constructing course

goals and as a framework for future student evaluations (Marrocco, 2014).

Historically, the military has referenced Bloom’s learning taxonomy to fit its

educational goals, focus on curriculum development, and develop effective and efficient

teacher-to-student learning models (Pope, 2012). However, Bloom’s theory is not

without critics. The military has recently turned away from this model because it gives

instructors the freedom to determine “how much knowledge should be required learning”

(Bloom, 1956, p. 36, as cited by Pope, 2012). Bloom’s theory specified that instructors

should take a middle position between covering all the knowledge that a student might

plausibly obtain in a subject and only that information which is most necessary to that

course (Pope, 2012). Conversely, this form of instruction is difficult to implement into

the LAVTC doctrine and curriculum design because of the Corps’ standardized approach

to training, assessment, and instruction; however, should be considered when paired with

Differentiated Instruction and Authentic Assessment techniques.

In curriculum development, Bloom (1956) specified that academic institutions

should emphasize the skills of exploration, synthesis, and assessment, as he inferred that

students at this level should already know basic concepts prior to the course. For Bloom,

the “justification for teaching knowledge is that it is quite frequently regarded as

necessary to all the other ends or purposes of education” (1956, p. 33). Therefore, Bloom

hypothesized that “problem-solving or thinking could not be carried on in a vacuum, but

48
must be based upon knowledge of some of the realities” (i.e., previous academic

knowledge to contextualize the information) (Bloom, 1956, p. 33).

Bloom’s taxonomy clearly indicates that increase in basic understanding is a

prerequisite for higher levels of learning to take place. However, in a controlled and

collective learning environment, such as the LAVTC, his taxonomy may provide little

opportunity to investigate and assess students’ opinions about their education and its

application of knowledge outside the traditional learning environment (Griffin, Kocher,

& Stocker, 2011).

Bloom (1956) encouraged the “crawl, walk, run” approach (Pope, 2012). He

suggested gradually introducing new information, allowing for ease of individual

comprehension and applicability before progressing to sophisticated methods of teaching

(Pope, 2012). Although this approach would be harder to align with the assembly-line

production of students educated within the LAVTC, as later described in themes by the

participants of this study.

Fink’s Education Taxonomy

Fink's approach to learning has gone beyond Bloom’s objective-based taxonomy

in situations where one is presenting information to prepare students for written

examinations, instead of designing courses that focus on general understanding

(Marrocco, 2014). In Bloom’s taxonomy of educational ideas, learning develops from the

information (Bloom, 1956, p. 30), whereas Fink (2003) suggested the importance of an

innovative and wider interpretation of learning taxonomy and curriculum design.

Fink (2003) contended that for learning to occur, a change within the pupil must

occur first. Education identifies the change that without is assumed learning has not

49
occurred (Fink, 2003, p. 30). Thus, Fink (2003) developed a learning taxonomy

containing six important learning objectives: foundational knowledge, application,

integration, human dimension, caring, and learning to learn (Pope, 2012). These

objectives help to fill in items that many curriculum developers may omit.

In contrast to Bloom’s hierarchical taxonomy, Fink (2003) also pointed out the

significance of connecting and incorporating numerous forms of learning in order to

complete a meaningful modification of the learner’s perception of the information (Pope,

2012). Fink (2003) stated that “teaching is no longer a zero-sum game” through which an

instructor may prioritize one form of learning over another, as Bloom had proposed

(Fink, 2003, p. 32). “When a course or learning experience can promote all six kinds of

learning, the learner has had a learning experience that can be deemed significant” (Fink,

2003, p. 32).

The driver curriculum at the LAVTC uses SAT as its related method for

investigating and analyzing information used as decision points for curriculum design,

implementation, and, if necessary, reform. LAVTC uses SAT as the educational

taxonomy backstop to ensure the standardization of its courses. However, Laing (2011)

pointed out that unless a more precise interpretation of realistic and purposeful training

(outside the constraints of SAT) is completed, the LAR community will run the risk of

being woefully undertrained and unprepared for future events. The present research

seeks to investigate Laing’s proposal by understanding how the LAVTC students

interpret their training and its effectiveness.

Consistent with Laing, Fink argued that learning should be applicable and not just

in the abstract. In contrast, Bloom’s learning taxonomy did not ultimately define the

50
significance of learning additional subjects such as “learning how to learn, acquiring

leadership and interpersonal skills, ethics, communications skills, character, tolerance,

and the ability to adapt to change” (Fink, 2003, p. 29); these ancillary methods of

education are also ignored by the LAVTCs use of the SAT. Ultimately, curriculum

developers at the LAVTC may need to reconsider course goals based on Bloom's

taxonomy (1956) and embrace new approaches designed on performance-based

assessments as discussed by Fink (Marrocco, 2014).

Bloom and Fink’s taxonomies on education are relevant to this qualitative

descriptive narrative study because they offer empirically validated civilian approaches to

curriculum reform that could avoid the institutional biases often present in the military

setting. However, academic theories for curriculum design, development,

implementation, and assessment are not always easily transferable to the military

environment. Complexities in the military rank structure, procurement, advisement, and

assessment all present obstacles to curriculum reform. Furthermore, another difficulty

facing the LAVTC and other Marine courses concerning the use of education taxonomies

is the lack of effort to empirically codify the training effects or lessons learned from the

experiences of former students.

The Light Armored Vehicle Training Course: Educational Strategies

“The goal of Marine Corps instruction is to develop performance-based, criterion-

referenced instruction that promotes student transfer of learning from the instructional

setting to the job” (TECOM, 2004, p. ii). The conduct of the training mission is guided

by the SAT manual and its processes and procedures of instruction.

51
 Training is an essential routine that centers on what to think, whereas education is

about developing an individual’s intellectual curiosity through an emphasis on why and

how to think. The U.S. Marine Corps views training, education, development, and

learning as essential to the force’s structure and future (TECOM, 2004). The LAVTC

defines training and education as a requirement to fill manpower gaps in the operating

forces.

The purpose of the LAVTC is to deliver training and education to entry-level

0313s who will serve as LAV drivers within an LAR platoon or company. At the

conclusion of the training, students should possess the technical skills requisite of a 0313

driver as well as basic knowledge regarding vehicle operation and maintenance.

Graduates of the LAV Crewmen Course have attained the MOS of 0313 LAV Crewmen

and are issued an LAV operator’s permit (School of Infantry, 2013).

The LAVTC uses standardized, systematic, and similar approaches to training

each class, with no effort to distinguish one class from another based on the time of year

when students leave boot camp, when they enter the school, how long students have been

idly waiting to get into the school, or the instructor-to-student ratio. According to

Rotherham and Willingham (2009), it is important that all students master varying kinds

of information, ranging from facts to multiple analytical capacities. By acknowledging

this range of demands, curriculum developers at the LAVTC could more clearly perceive

how to overhaul current methods of content delivery. Student input may provide

baselines for LAVTC curriculum developers to incorporate critical approaches,

collaboration, and problem solving between classes (Rotherham& Willingham, 2009).

52
 Experiential Education

For beginning students,research indicates that straight forwardtraining is more

effective than rigid instruction (Pope, 2012). The U.S. Army War College agrees that

experiential education can be a thoughtful and systematic approach to interactions or

experiences; however, it recognizes that experiential learning and logical outcomes are

not mutually exclusive (Brightman & Dewey, 2014). Experiential education strategies

must be designed to follow the experiential cycle instead of allowing the cycle to occur

spontaneously (U.S. Army War College, 2011).

Experiential education uses preestablished knowledge to affect a student’s ability

to learn. However,merely providing an experience, whetherthrough technology or

otherwise, in itself is insufficient to guarantee that the teaching will lead to an efficient

learning outcome. Therefore, the structure of experiential education should be developed

so that the accessibility of information, the circumstances of the learning environment,

and the order and timing of events provide the preferred structure for mindful

engagement within the learning cycle (Brightman & Dewey, 2014).

Abilities and informational knowledge are not isolated but interconnected. In

many instances, experiencefamiliarity assists students in identifying the core structure of

a problem (Rotherham & Willingham, 2009). For example, any cognitively aware child

understands that acting up in an environment in which he or she is supposed to display

proper manners will earn placement in timeout. Thus, a child who sees a peer in timeout

can deduce that the other child has done something wrong to warrant such a punishment.

In contrast, not having a properbaseline of knowledge may stunt an individual’s learning

relative to those who already have a pre-established awareness of the information.

53
Instructors at the LAVT are at least 8 year veternes of the U.S. Marines. Their

experiential knowledge to the learning environment could prove beneficial when

delivered outside the controls of the course’s structred learning environment.

Nontraditional forms of learning such as experiential education have a high rate of

attrition (Kenner & Weinerman, 2011). One reason for higher dropout rates

betweenunconventionaland traditional forms of learning is the lack of incorporating

nontraditional teachers into the progressive environment (Kenner & Weinerman, 2011).

Educators and curriculum developers must have an “awareness of the opposing learning

styles of adults, framing learning strategies in immediately useful ways, and using

competition and repetition”(Kenner & Weinerman, 2011, p. 91).

Literature Gap

There is sufficient literature to support the benefits of experiential education,

differentiating instruction, and authentic assessment based on student learning. However,

the research gap is that there have been no studies on graduates of the LAVTC and

therefore leaders do not know whether these desired approaches are lacking or could be

helpful. Although the LAVTC’s use of instructed initiatives call for evaluations before

curriculum review (Flynn, 2011). No such empirically credible evaluation on how

graduates of the LAVTC perceive the efficiency of driver training has been conducted.

This study is germinal in the specific area of evaluating the LAVTC’s driver course

effectiveness through the beliefs and perceptions of former students.

Dyer & Schaefer (2012) discovered that there were considerable gaps between the

academic curricula within Army courses and their practical settings. Army curricula and

attending soldiers also varied noticeably from any previously written literature. The

54
intent of this study was to determine if graduates of the LAVTC felt their training was

effectiveness in preparing them for fleet operations.

The U.S. military uses the five stages of A.D.D.I.E. complimented with systems

approach to training. However, not publically known are the gaps between A.D.D.I.E.,

SAT, and curriculum implementation; thus, creating a credible and substantial gap

analysis difficult to undertake.

According to Harris (2013) in a report on the U.S. Army education processes,

formalized and credible gap analysis is conducted, “…when a curricula developer

compares the product of topic analysis to the product of target audience analysis to

determine not only what to teach, but also how much to teach in a given lesson (p. 3).

“Without this consideration, curricula developers risk generating curriculum that is

“…beyond student capability and neither advances learning nor sustains interest (Harris,

2013, p. 3).

To manage and organize a proper gap analysis on the current problem statement,

first an analysis of what will be taught must be conducted from the target audience.

Second, a through refinement from step one, the results of this analysis should provide

the data needed to compose learning objectives established in the design phase (Harris,

2013). Thirdly, a thorough analysis of the list with respect to the lesson objectives must

be conducted. Questions asked are, “Do all the topics actually support the lesson

objectives and are the topics critical for accomplishing the lessons goals” (Harris, 2013,

p. 3). Recourse analysis identifying resource constraints, developing a practical

evaluation plan, milestone planning, writing of learning objectives, creating lesson plans,

55
and creating an assessment plan are other implementation procedures that should be

addressed when reviewing gap analysis of the problem statement addressed in this study.

Summary

The Marine Corps does not prescribe to individualize training; however, the

literature suggests that adult learners have specific requirements for learning and that

curriculum developers should consider these details when developing programs of

military instruction. Burts, DiCarlo, Gioe, Laird, & Ota (2006) explained that the

combination of adult learning techniques and strategies might help curriculum developers

and instructors to create training events that will augment participants’ individual learning

styles while maintaining the integrity of the collective training process.

In addition, military curriculum developers could support the development of

qualified Marine instructors through increased training with other forms of learning and

applicable standards. This approach could permit military academic institutions to stay

ahead of changes in education and learning by undertaking curriculum redesign

initiatives, not through reactive policies and procedures, but through experiential designs

and methods.

The investigation of existing literature on curriculum design in this chapter

addressed methods and techniques related to not only curriculum development and

implementation, but to the Marine Corps’ course development procedures. With the

premise of upholding the integrity of the LAVTC’s standards-based curriculum,

differentiated instruction, experiential education, and authentic assessment would

complement the Marine Corps’ SAT manual based on the determination of evidence that

alignment of instructional delivery with student achievement is effective.

56
 Chapter 2covered education and instructional learning taxonomies and discussed

the relationship between the theories of Bloom and Fink and the educational strategy of

the Marine Corps. Finally, conducted was a literature examination on the effectiveness

of experiential education, differentiated instruction, and authentic assessments.

57
 Chapter 3

Methods

The purpose of this qualitative descriptive narrative study was to collect

participants’ perceptions on the effectiveness of the LAVTC’s driver training program.

The study’s results may begin to add to the, at present, negligible knowledge and

understanding of the effectiveness of the LAVTC’s driver curriculum. A qualitative

descriptive narrative research design was appropriate because there are no clearly defined

statistical models, hypotheses, or theories about the problem statement. Also, little to no

significant scholarly research exists regarding the problem statement (Blum &Muirhead,

2005).

Chapter 3 describes the research method and design appropriateness, the

population and sample, geographic location, data collection techniques and instruments,

the role of the researcher in data collection, and data analysis. Chapter 3 also addresses

the validity and reliability of the data collection procedures, along with the field test of

the interview script and its results.

Research Method and Design Appropriateness

The selected research method and design provided the most useful interpretation

of the experiences under examination (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2007). In the

present study, a qualitative method facilitated the collection of information from a group

of individuals and provided an understanding of their reality as it related to the problem

statement (Cohen et al., 2007). The qualitative method of this study was the outline that

guided the descriptive narrative design (Wellington, 2000). The subsequent sections will

58
describe how the qualitative research method and the descriptive narrative design were

uniform with the purpose of this study.

The Qualitative Research Method

The choice of a qualitative method was a flexible approach not rooted in statistical

data, but worked well when used to investigate human behavior and personal

interpretations (Creswell, 2013; Lawrence & Tar, 2013). Qualitative research developed

an understanding of the topic to support future research questions and explanations of

complex behavior. In contrast, quantitative methods would not have had the high

tolerance for ambiguity that qualitative investigators were expecting (Creswell, 2013).

To identify variability between the participants and other subjects through

evaluating the datasets, researchers may pre-test an instrument to confirm that the

participants could understand the possible measures that will be used (Creswell, 2013).

In contrast, a qualitative researcher might have asked what “guaranteed promise” means

to the participants and how it made them feel. Some studies can effectively merge

quantitative and qualitative methods (Mertens, 2005), supplementing statistical results

with individual beliefs through a narrative explanation.

During this qualitative study, the link between the observer and the data was

significantly different from that in quantitative research, where the investigator stands

outside the considered events (Crabtree & Dicicco-Bloom, 2006). Within a quantitative

study design, broad generalizations are made regarding a particular population, whereas

qualitative research emphasizes the information gathered from a smaller, more accurate

population (Patton, 2002). Quantitative analysis of this study began with an abstract

theory, explored the idea by employing specific processes, and provided statistical

59
information at its conclusion. Lastly, the quantitative method was deductive (Creswell,

2012). As the present study was not relying on quantifiable statistical data, a quantitative

design was inappropriate for the goal of this research.

Furthermore, a quantitative methodology was inapplicable for this study because

the participants’ beliefs and interpretations were collected through interviews that were

then analyzed to find commonalities in respondents’ views related to the problem

statement (Laurence, 2011). With no need to quantify an independent or dependent

variable, the participants’ involvement in the research method was satisfactory to validate

the significance of the study (Brod, Christensen, & Tesler, 2009; Diehl, Guion, &

McDonald, 2011). Consequently, a qualitative design was appropriate for this study

because it allowed the researcher to choose participants using a focused approach, ask

extensive questions, and investigate participants’ assumptions on an individual level

(Fontana & Prokos, 2007).

The Design: A Descriptive Narrative

According to Murray (2015), humans develop in a storied environment where

individual lives are told through the creation of descriptive narratives. Descriptive

narratives are difficult to write, but a good narrative is told as a construct through

knowledge telling (Lang, 2003). Narratives communicated through detailed description

can argue, can reveal, or can explain (Lang, 2003).

The focus of this study was consistent with a qualitative methodology that used

recorded, transcribed interviews and a protocol of open-ended questions to elicit

descriptive storytelling from the participants.NVivo10 software was used for data

analysis. The descriptive narrative design method was effective because it enabled data

60
collection and analysis that provided a “description of the possible solution to address the

identified problem” (Poggenpoel & Myburgh, 2005, p. 305).

The descriptive narrative centered on studying participants, collecting information

through the gathering of descriptions, commenting on personal familiarities and

experiences, and discussing their meanings (Nassaji, 2015). In this instance, the narrative

design offered participants a platform to explain how they perceive the effectiveness of

driver training at the LAVTC. The expression of personal beliefs regarding the problem

was an important characteristic of this descriptive narrative study and was chosen over

other methods, such as case studies, which offer less generalizability (Dopson &

Fitzgerald, 2009).

The participants ’narratives cannot fully be understood by a single interpretation

but must be experienced; this fact gives automatic validity to the individual providing the

verbal account (Diehl, Guion, & McDonald, 2011; Magilvy & Thomas, 2011). The use

of open-ended questions allowed participants the opportunity to explain their

understanding of the problem without restraint and to express their story in a personalized

way. Their narratives may have many linked phases and sequences of events, and even if

the respondent sometimes digressed into discussions that were off the intended topic, the

probing of personal beliefs through detailed accounts was extremely beneficial. A

narrative design was appropriate for this qualitative study because the participants were

voluntarily explaining their own beliefs about the LAVTC’s driver training.

The use of a narrative design allowed for the examination of the participants’

familiarities with the problem statement through a collection of historical events,

transcripts, and recordings that assisted the investigator in explaining the process as it

61
developed (Corbin & Strauss, 2008; Creswell, 2005). Other scientific approaches of

establishing a detailed understanding of an individual’s experience of reality were more

complex and were disregarded in favor of the selected approach.

Population and Sampling

Unlike a quantitative method, a qualitative design did not require a vast amount of

participants for data collection (Patton, 2002). The sampling of the population included

in this study was participants who could add credibility to the study and who could

directly relate to the problem statements through recollections and narrative experiences.

Although the sample was small, it was believed to representative of the population by

including participants who had severed in all four Marine Corps LAR Battalions.

The population for this study consisted of approximately 1,100 active duty and

200 reserve LAV crewmen (MOS 0313) spread across four LAR battalions within the

continental United States. Invited to participate were 20 previously active duty Marines.

Each participant was asked to review the introductory letter (Appendix A) and, if willing

to participate, to sign the consent release form (Appendix B). The consent release form

provided a voluntary description of the study and indicated the rights of participants,

including their right not to answer questions with which they may feel uncomfortable or

to end the interview at any time.

Sampling Frame

This study used purposeful sampling where the participants had complete

information that the investigator could use to understand the event and where the

respondents’ comments would serve as a voice for those not included (Creswell, 2005).

The use of purposeful sampling is common within qualitative studies (Creswell, 2005;

62
Dilek, 2009; Wellington, 2000). With a purposeful sample, the number of participants

interviewed was less important than the criteria used to select them (Wilmot, 2005).

Corresponding to the assumptions of qualitative research, as a rule, the sample size

should be sufficient to achieve saturation or the point when the addition of new

participants would not add additional information to the event under investigation

(Mason, 2010).

The present descriptive narrative design used a purposeful sample frame to

achieve the recruitment of 20 former LAV drivers. Solicited were participants using

nonrandom snowball sampling (Creswell, 2005; Noy, 2008). Not recruited were active-

duty Marines because of operational commitments to the Marine Corps.

Using former Marines benefited the data collection process because participants

were more at ease in communicating with the researcher without the fear of confidential

breaches, as an active Marine may have been. On the topic of LAVTC instructional

quality, this approach garnered views that were more candid, as identified through the

results of this study.

Drawn from Marines who had served across the four LAR battalions, the sample

was a broad cross-section of participants with a similar experience, i.e., possessing the

0313 MOS and having been an LAV driver. Sampling participants who have served in

all four LAR battalions allowed for greater coverage of the population and greater

internal validity of the narrative data analysis.

All participants were male, as this study examined an infantry unit where females

do not serve. There were no restrictions on participation other than that participants must

have graduated from the LAVTC between December 20, 2010, to October 1, 2014, and

63
served as a LAV driver. These dates were chosen because the last curriculum review for

driver training at the LAVTC was conducted in December 2010. Therefore, participants

who had exited active duty after that date could still comment on the current driver

curriculum at the LAVTC.

Recruitment

A recruitment approach is an exact strategy for recognizing and assembling

volunteers for an investigative study (Marshall, 2003). Due to the restrictive nature of the

military environment, the researcher did not seek assistance from the individual active or

reserve LAR battalions in identifying and recruiting potential participants for the study.

Instead, recruitment was anonymous via direct contact and the snowball method.

Due to the distance between the researcher and the participants, recruitment was

through e-mail or cellular contact. The research began by contacting Marine LAV

drivers’ no longer on active duty with whom the researcher was personally acquainted.

However, to avoid research bias, these Marines were not included in the study. Rather,

they gave suggestions of other potential participants, thus beginning the snowballing

process.

Sent to potential interviewees were personalized invitational e-mails, addressed

appropriately with participants’ previous billeted titles and rank. The objective was to

make prospective participants feel valued, thus increasing the likelihood that they would

respond favorably. Before admission into the study, all participants completed an

informed consent form. Invitational e-mails explained the problem statement, the

purpose of the study, the significance of the study, and the participants’ role in the

research.

64
Snowball Sampling

As noted, the population of 0313s in the Marine Corps consists of roughly1,100

active duty and 200 reserve LAV crewmen. Considered for relatively small populations,

snowball sampling is an effective method in investigative, qualitative, and expressive

narrative research, especially in studies with relatively few participants or where a high

level of trust is required to recruit(Baltar & Brunet, 2012).

Frequently, snowballing accompanies studies with susceptible or stigmatized

populations who are hesitant to participate using traditional research methods (Baltar &

Brunet, 2012). The use of the snowball method could also reach individuals who

otherwise would not have been directly informed of the study, thus enabling inclusion of

participants with varying experience levels, dates of graduation from the LAVTC, and

ranks.

The snowball sampling method was effective in facilitating recruitment of

individuals through private communication among persons acquainted with each other,

which was also appropriate for the sensitive military environment. Snowballing is more

useful to reach participants and has a higher response rate than traditional forms of

sampling, i.e., electronic mail, pamphlets, or flyers(Baltar & Brunet, 2012).Furthermore,

the use of snowball sampling can be useful when the population is scattered or difficult to

assemble (Denzin & Lincoln, 2003). The snowball sampling strategy in qualitative

inquiry collects a chain of people who share a commonality (Creswell, 2005).

Asked to suggest other former LAV drivers during the recruitment phase,

individuals known to the researcher assisted in recommending other possible participants.

After this step, when some of these people agreed to participate, the snowballing

65
approach continued by asking these secondary contacts for additional prospective

participants. This recruitment continued until attainment of the sample size. The process

secured participants with whom the researcher was not personally acquainted prior to the

study, thus limiting potential researcher bias.

Informed Consent

Patton (2002) stated that in qualitative studies, the researcher must keep ethical

considerations in mind so as to safeguard the rights of participants. In the present study,

all participation was voluntary. Approval to conduct this study was granted by the

University of Phoenix’s Institutional Review Board. The IRB found the review of this

study exempt based on applicable institutional policies and federal regulations.

After first prospective participants received, via e-mail, an informed consent

document explaining the study and the participants’ role (see Appendix B). The form

also described the right to leave the study without consequence and clearly expressed that

recipients were under no obligation to participate (Creswell, 2013). Participants could

exit the study at any time by e-mailing or phoning the researcher. No participant

withdrew after initially agreeing to participate.

Those electing not to participate were not required to sign the consent form or

participate in the interviewing process. Recipients willing to participate returned a

signed, scanned, copy of the form to the researcher. Each individual was required to sign

a consent form before enrollment into the study.

Both the introductory letter and the informed consent form included the purpose

and significance of the study, how the information was to be used, how it would be

collected and analyzed, how the responses would be evaluated, and the benefits and risks

66
to the participants. The participants also received an explanation of the coding system

used to analyze their responses during the interviewing process. Participants were

welcome to ask any additional questions about the study before signing the informed

consent form.

Confidentiality

Due to the sensitive nature of the U.S. military, confidentiality was critical in this

research study (Crabtree & Dicicco-Bloom, 2006). Qualitative research depended on the

promise of trust and confidentiality (Pollock, 2012). Confidentiality was a principal

means of shielding participants from any negative penalties of their participation

(Crabtree & Dicicco-Bloom, 2006). Confidentially was especially important within this

study to ensure honest and open responses, because Marine Corps curriculum developers

and leaders could negatively view participation in this study, even among former

Marines.

Confidentiality is also a requirement in critical investigations of challenging and

complex areas of human activity and understanding; particularly those involving limited

or censured groups (Reardon, 2008). The introductory letter and informed consent forms

were the first steps taken to ensure confidentiality.

Researchers should follow the standard of non-maleficence (Pollock, 2012),

which states that investigators should conduct research in ways that will not harm others.

In particular, the research or data collection should not cause avoidable or intentional

harm. In inviting Marines to openly scrutinize a Marine Corps education program, this

study could touch on sensitive issues and arouse friction. No access was granted to

anyone other than the individual interviewee to secure participant confidentiality and no

67
access was given to personally identifiable data (PID), including names, military

identification numbers, and contact information. Participants were assigned an

identification code (e.g., LAV-D1, LAV-D2, LAV-D3), used throughout the interview

process and to report on all data analysis, to ensure confidentiality.

Each interview began with an explanation of the problem statement, the purpose

of the study, informed consent form, and confidentiality provisions. All data (written

notes, audio recordings, and transcripts) derived from interviews were kept in a locked

filing cabinet in the researcher’s office. Moreover, the use of unobtrusive phone

interviews rather than in-person interviews lessened participants’ apprehensions

regarding a possible breach of confidentiality. The information will be retained for three

years following completion of the study and will be destroyed and shredded after that

time.

The informed consent form contained an explanation of the privacy controls (see

Appendix B) and reviewed the procedures used to protect participants’ privacy.

Participants may receive an electronic copy of the final study upon request as proof of the

protection of respondent confidentiality (Charles, Crow, & Wiles, 2008).

Geographic Location

The data for this research study covered participants who served in one of the

Marine Corps’ three active-duty and one-reserve LAR battalions. Each battalion has four

infantry companies and one headquarters and Support Company with approximately 60

LAV drivers. The participants were located in various cities throughout the United

States, while the researcher performed the interview from his private California

68
residence. Due to the distance between most interviewees and the researcher, all

interviews were conducted by phone.

Data Collection

A qualitative research study involves synchronized data collection and analysis

methods that produce developing themes and patterns associated with the study’s

principal problem statement (Creswell, 2005). The present study used recorded phone

interviews as the primary source of data collection (Patton, 2002). Due to the geographic

distance between the researcher and most participants’ not used were face-to-face

interviews.

According to Gratton and O'Donnell (2011), the advantage of time efficiency in

conducting telephone interviews is particularly evident when the interviewer and

interviewee are separated by significant time and space. Telephone interviews have

become increasingly common among researchers, although some believe that the lack of

nonverbal cues in telephone interviews may inhibit contextual understanding of the

participants’ answers to the interview questions (Niehaus, Taylor, & Turgeon, 2014;

Novick, 2008).

Telephone interviews provide an opportunity to expand qualitative interviewing

beyond the confines of traditional geographic proximity (Browning & Kee, 2013). Little

evidence that telephone interviews produce lower-quality data than other forms of data

collection exists (Novick, 2008) and “The quality of interview data collected via

telephone may not be compromised simply because it is not FTF [face-to-face], and in

some situations, it may be superior to the FTF interview method” (Browning &Kee,

2013, p. 1).

69
 The absence of nonverbal cues throughout the interview could have provided a

challenge to the researcher (Harvey, 2011). However, in the telephone interviews,

participants felt secure enough to fully tell their story and provide honest, complete, and

less acquiescent responses (Holt, 2010).The use of a telephone interview also increased

participants’ comfort levels, especially in a military environment where confidentiality is

a serious concern.

To ensure accuracy and reliability of the data collection instrument, participants

were provided the opportunity to review their answers. All interviews were recorded,

transcribed, and transcripts e-mailed to the respondents to verify accuracy. Data

collection relied on notes taken from the interview transcripts and analyzed with the

NVivo10 software program, which assisted with the grouping, organizing, and coding of

information.

The Interview Process

After the recruitment and selection of participants were complete, participants

were contacted by telephone or e-mail to arrange a phone interview. The dispersed

locations of the participants across the United States made in-person interviews

impossible; therefore, telephone interviews were the logical choice. Not considered were

Skype or virtual teleconference calls, because not every participant had ready access to

such technology. Each interview lasted approximately 60 minutes.

To ensure suitable rigor and research quality, the inquiry process was meticulous

and treated the data collection and data analysis as one complete process covered by the

same underlying theory of social-science research (Crabtree & Dicicco-Bloom, 2006;

Englander, 2012). The interview process was the primary data collection method for this

70
qualitative human exploratory research (Englander, 2012). The establishment of a

methodical data procedure that included data recording and interview protocols helped to

lay the groundwork for data collection, grouping, and analysis (Creswell, 2012).

However, as Kvale (1996) observed, “No common procedure for interview research exist.

If well carried out, interview research can become an art” (p. 13).

The interview process involved a series of intentionally sequenced steps with

appropriate management and organization:

1. Clarify Ambiguity. After the initial salutations, the researcher asked each

participant if he had any questions before the start of the interview.

2. Build Trust and Document Consent. The researcher began by allowing time

for participants to ask questions about the interview, e.g. if they wanted to review

the intent of the study. During this period, the researcher also requested

permission to activate the voice recorder, pointing out that this verbal consent was

documented by the prior signing of the consent form (Appendix B). Once the

voice recorder was activated, the researcher stated, “[ID code, e.g., LAV-Driver

1], you are now on speakerphone and the audio recorder is running, can you hear

me alright?” This initial exchange confirmed the interviewee’s awareness of and

verbal consent to being audio-recorded.

3. Biography. The researcher briefly summarized his biography to give each

participant the opportunity to know a little about him and to build trust,

commonality, and rapport.

4. Scripted questions. Prepared questions were used to ensure that all

participants were exposed to the same line of questioning and given the same

71
 allotted time to respond. The interview questions were not only a set of questions,

but also a practical guide for directing the researcher through the interview

process. The use of scripted questions assisted the researcher in avoiding

improvisation or personalizing the interview questions based on time limitations

or other factors. When time became an issue, the interviewer asked the

interviewee’s permission to go beyond the agreed-upon one hour to finish the

interview or offered to complete the protocol in a follow-up interview as

explained in Appendix A.

5. Narrative Surprises. Although the researcher followed a pre-established

protocol of questions, free-flowing responses were occasionally encouraged to

further clarify or expand on comments by the interviewee. After completing the

questions, the researcher said something like, “A lot of issues were covered in this

interview. Before we finish, are there questions or issues that you think might

have come up during the interview but that were not asked?” This question was

intended to prompt participants to offer any other potentially helpful information

not previously shared.

6. Conclusion. Each interviewee was thanked and explained that upon

completion of the research, the findings would be available for review. The

researcher also restated those interview transcripts would be shared with the

participants so that they could review them and revise the transcript if necessary.

Instrumentation

In this study, the researcher was the principal instrument in collecting and

analyzing the data (Creswell, 2005). The researcher prepared for the interviews by

72
understanding various interviewing techniques and reviewing proper interview protocol.

The NVivo10 software program also assisted research efforts to group, organize, and

code the data collected. NVivo10 is a computer program designed to aid the

interpretation of texts and recordings and the identification of thematic codes.

Manual completion of data analysis discontinued in favor of computer-based

software. Content analysis through computer-generated programs could be more

accurate, thorough, and customized to the precise research setting. Manually analyzing

data would have caused difficulty in replicating the study’s results due to the subjectivity

in the coding process, whereas the use of a computer-based analysis system improved the

generalizability of the research and contributed to the planning of follow-up research (Li,

2010).

Interview Script

The interview script (Appendix C) for this study consisted of 10 open-ended

questions, as is common in qualitative research (Creswell, 2005). Interview scripts

provide reliable information when participants are willingly taking part in a study (Yin,

2003). The rationale behind the interview script was to probe the participants’ beliefs,

interpretations, and experiences on the problem in a consistent manner. The use of open-

ended questions facilitated respondents in expounding on their answers, thereby

providing fuller data.

In contrast to using closed-ended questions that can only result in yes or no

answers. The purpose of a descriptive qualitative research is to expose as much about the

participants and their situations as possible (Jacob & Furgerson, 2012). Yes or no

questions inhibit the participant from expounding on his answers through a formal

73
narrative. Closed-ended questions do not allow the respondent to offer the researcher any

additional information other than yes or no (O'Donnell & O'Donnell, 2015).

Field Test

The researcher initially field-tested the interview script with individuals who were

not involved in the study but who were part of the population. Designed to evaluate and

confirm the validity and reliability of the questions used in the study was the field test.

The field test was conducted by telephone and recorded in the same manner as the main

study and was designed to assist in discovering grouping and sorting concerns that might

develop during the investigation.

The primary reason for conducting a field test of the interview script was to

ensure that the participants would understand the questions and interpret them in a

consistent fashion. Additionally, a field test examined the reliability of the interview

script and the validity of the responses. The field test validated the questions and thus

improved the reliability of participant responses in the primary study.

Distributed through e-mail to each of the three-field test participants were the

interview questions. Each one had more than 10 years of experience in the Marine

Corps, working with light armored vehicles, and 3 – 5 years in educational strategies and

military instruction. The examination of the interview script began with participants

examining the proposed questions for transparency (see Appendix C).

Following receipt of answers to the interview questions, each response was

reviewed closely to check that the participants understood the questions and that

sufficient similarity between the goal of the study and the interview script were met. The

goal was to identify any necessary improvements to the research instrument, thereby

74
reducing error in the measurement process (Kimberlin & Winterstein, 2008).Each SME

suggested changes in the interview questions to make them coincide better with the

purpose statement and elicit more robust narratives from the participants. After

reviewing the field test results, the researcher implemented the suggested changes to

ensure the interview script was asking for anecdotal opinions from the participants. This

study was approved by the University of Phoenix’s IRB as ‘Exempt’ and no additional

changes to the interview script were suggested.

The Researcher’s Role

The role of the researcher was not limited to the actual interactions with

participants in the interview process (Pascal, 2010). An interpretivist approach was

applied to understand behavior from the participants’ point of view (Gerring, 2007). The

researcher also avoided using subjective words that could have been construed as biased.

MacKenzie, Podsakoff, and Podsakoff (2012) suggested that the risk of researcher bias is

minimal when the proper controls are in place.

Unlike the participants who are no longer serving within the armed services, the

researcher is still an active duty Marine who understands that his position within this

study and its results may not be viewed favorably by Marine Corps superiors or

authorities. This understanding was caveat enough for the researcher to ensure his

interactions with the participants were minimal and kept to a level of indifferent

professionalism.

However, he has never served as an LAV driver and therefore did not enter the

study with pre-established views as to the effectiveness of the LAVTC’s driver training.

This position of indifference to the problem should reduce concerns about potential

75
researcher bias. In addition, using the snowball method for recruitment ensured that none

of the participants was previously acquainted with the researcher, thus limiting any bias

that could have resulted from prior personal relationships.

The possibility of researcher bias remains since the researcher could not be

considered an inactive participant; even in a quantitative research study, there are no

entirely neutral observers (Pascal, 2010). The researcher’s experiences and beliefs were

inherent in the selection of questions and the research design (Pascal, 2010).

In this qualitative study, the researcher’s role was to investigate from an

outsider’s perspective in a observational way (Simon, 2011) – posing probing questions,

listening carefully, and then asking more questions to delve more deeply into the

participants’ narrative. The researcher then sought to deconstruct the story into usable

data by using various forms of evidence collection and analysis, assisted by the NVivo10

software.

Data Analysis

A descriptive narrative study is not just a description of the event but an

“interpretive process” (Creswell, 2013, p. 253). Common tools used for a qualitative

descriptive narrative study are grounded conjectural inquiry (Burbles & Phillips, 2000;

Creswell, 2013) and extensive narrative interviews; however, these are not necessarily

synonymous with a descriptive narrative study (Creswell, 2013). The dissimilarity is a

theoretical one.

Yin (2009) noted that effective data analysis in a qualitative study requires several

steps of examination and categorization to discover patterns and create classifications that

will aid in analyzing the data. The data for the present study consisted of descriptive

76
information that addressed the research question, in contrast to quantitative data analysis,

which relies on statistical data. The analysis of qualitative data for this study was easier

to manage when the data was actually elicited; documented, coded, summarized, and

linked any correlative structures (Smyth, 2006).

Twenty participants volunteered to take part in this descriptive narrative study

between May 2016 and June 2016.Interviews took place via telephone at the scheduled

convenience of the participant. Each participant agreed to have their interview recorded

for later transcription and recall.

After each interview, recorded transcriptions were reviewed manually three times

and transcribed notes were compared to those of other interview participants to identify

initial themes. To further the accuracy of proposed themes, the corresponding

recordings, transcriptions, and notes were uploaded into the NVivo10 software for

thematic identification.

Green & Thorogood (2009) indicated that most qualitative studies include 20

eligible participants who have experience with the research problem. A sample of 20

participants allowed the results of this study to reach the point where new data would not

have offered new insights, i.e., the point of saturation. With the assistance of NVivo10

qualitative software, when new issues did not emerge in the data by the 20th interview,

the researcher was satisfied that data saturation had been reached.

NVivo10 qualitative software analyzed the data, enabling (a) collect unexpected

data and place the data into themes, (b) record and incorporate interpretations of the data,

and (c) collect data in categories and topics (Smyth, 2006, p. 5). Qualitative researchers

to assist in the collection, categorization, and interpretation of information and to gain an

77
understanding of participants’ responses use the computer-assisted qualitative data

analysis software (CAQDAS). NVivo10 software (Bergin, 2011) was the primary data

analysis tool used to assist in handling and coding the complex information provided in

this study. In addition, NVivo10 permitted the researcher to save the results of coding

and analysis and to print reports as needed.

NVivo10 helped to identify relevant information from interview transcripts by

carrying out text search queries on each of the words in the transcripts, showing the

researcher the number and identity of the participants who mentioned that particular item.

Based on the connections found in the texts of the interviews through a text search

inquiry, the researcher then assigned representative codes; however, because not all

queried words were relevant to the research questions, this review also ensured that only

appropriate expressions were included in the analysis. Thus, the use of NVivo10

software assisted the researcher in identifying common assumptions and beliefs by

organizing the data collection process (Stein, 2013).

Validity and Consistency

To ensure rigor and lack of bias in the interview process, it was essential to adhere

to specific data collection techniques and apply them systematically. As a system of

measurement, the interview process conformed to the same standards of validity and

reliability as standardized tests and other measures (Creswell, 2012). Rigor and validity

were just as important in this social science study as in any other sciences. Significant

results were achieved by applying similar procedures across a set of conditions so that

any subsequent variations in the findings could be interpreted as indicating differences in

what was being measured.

78
Validity

In qualitative research, validity implies that the outcome of a study is accurate and

reliable, indicating that the research findings correctly reflect the problem statement and

giving reasons for confidence that the evidence substantiates the research findings

(Creswell, 2012). Validation for this research was achievable when the study presented a

correct account or analysis of personal familiarities that others who have shared the same

experiences could immediately recognize (Magilvy & Thomas, 2011).

Validity also involved the degree to which the method was applied consistently as

a measurement tool within the study (Mackey & Gass, 2005). The use of an interview

script enhanced validity regarding “the extent to which one can generalize from a

particular collection of items to all possible elements in a broader domain of that item”

(Brod, Christensen, &Tesler, 2009, p. 1263).

Internal validity. Internal validity is a measure that establishes a cause-and-

effect connection between the behavior and identified outcome (Draugalis & Slack,

2001). Compromised by subject variability, the size of the population, the length of the

study, and research bias is internal validity. Therefore, first, this study addressed internal

validity by opening up recruitment to respondents who have served in any LAR battalion,

thereby maximizing coverage of the population and reducing the risk of skewed data.

Second, thematic coding with NVivo10 software used to analyze the interview

texts, recognize themes, and collect examples of themes from the text. Careful

transcription and review of participant interviews also contributed to the validation

process. Internal validity reinforced through the collection of phrases obtained from the

79
data (Stein, 2013). Achievement of internal validity of the design was if the conclusions

of the study were consistent with the themes identified in the interviews.

Lastly, internal validity was achieved through the administration of a field test

and through receiving feedback from participants in both the field test and the primary

study. Transcribing and reviewing the interviews from the main study’s 20 participants

assisted in the validation process by enabling close comparisons between participants’

responses.

Asked to read carefully through their interview transcripts, interviewees were

validating or raising any concerns about their narratives. This was a time-consuming

process, but a necessary one to ensure internal validity; accordingly, the researcher

allotted ample time for participants to review their transcripts.

External validity. External validity applies to both theoretical and conceptual

investigations (Creswell, 2013). External validity involves the degree to which the

findings of one study may be applied to another, or how generalizable the results

obtained from the study may be (Creswell, 2005). Evidence of the lack of external

validity might indicate that the results cannot be compared across varying environments,

e.g., to other branches of the military service.

External validity is the transferability of the study’s findings to similar conditions

(Stein, 2013). Established through a comprehensive report on the circumstances under

investigation and the participants’ comments was the extent of transferability in this

qualitative descriptive narrative study. These descriptions could help to indicate whether

the findings apply to similar courses at the LAVTC. The researcher sought to identify

what specific factors of the LAVTC curriculum were viewed as related to the course’s

80
perceived effectiveness or ineffectiveness; nevertheless, appropriate caution was needed

in considering the possible applicability of the findings to other courses with similar

features.

Consistency

Credibility, confirmation, and dependability are as necessary to the validity in

qualitative research (Cooper & Schindler, 2003). Most academic journals must pass

through a peer review process, whereby independent examiners scrutinize and approve

content before publishing. Individuals generally make decisions based on what is

printed; therefore, credibility in research is important based on information, evidence of

authenticity, and reliability.

Credibility. In research, credibility is discussed as informational truth of the

contributor’s beliefs and the understanding and explanation of them by the researcher

(Cope, 2014). Announcements or declarations spoken in the name of a group have

usually been seen and approved by the public. However, notice the difference between,

“Carla, an employee working for the Regional Transit Authority, stated that services are

the best they have been in ten years,” and “The Regional Transit Authority, has stated that

services are the best they have been in ten years.” Carla is speaking for herself, whereas

an announcement coming from the Regional Transit Authority represents an official

position. Considered credible, a qualitative study should represent the similarities of the

participants experiences (Sandelowski, 1986) and be able to identify the descriptions of

that experience.

Conformability. Conformability represents the researcher’s ability to prove that

the collected data reflects the participants’ responses and not the researcher’s partialities

81
or beliefs(Beck & Beck, 2012). Conformability in this study was accomplished by using

NVivo10 data analyzing software that omitted the researcher’s involvement in

discovering reoccurring themes within the participant’s responses. The researcher

demonstrated conformability by utilizing a descriptive narrative design for this study. A

descriptive narrative allowed for the emergence of themes describing how opinions and

beliefs were formed and, illustrated that the results originated directly from the data.

Dependability. Dependability in research represents data consistency among

similar environments. Dependability was achieved in this research when one

participant’s responses concurred with those of other contributors. Through the

researcher’s procedures and descriptions, this study was considered dependable because

the findings were replicated with similar participants in similar conditions (Koch, 2006).

However, future researchers may strengthen this study’s dependability through a more

rigors investigation.

Reliability. Reliability means that methods are free from error and therefore

produce consistent results (Kimberlin & Winterstein, 2008; Lakshmi & Mohideen, 2013).

Considered reliable if a measurement instrument or method consistently gives the same

value to an individual over time (Kimberlin & Winterstein, 2008). Reliability includes

the consistency or reproducibility of scores within the degree to which the researcher can

expect a deviation of data across assessment situations with the same or equivalent

testing instruments.

Researchers have various understandings of the meaning of reliability within

social research. Some reliability issues concerning measurement may not be relevant to

qualitative research (Stenbacka, 2001). To ensure the reliability of the interview protocol

82
of this study first, afield test permitted SMEs to review the collection instrument for

accuracy and understanding. Furthermore, upon completion of data collection in the

actual study, participants were allowed to review their answers and ensure the accuracy

of their responses.

Summary

Chapter 3 has described the research method and design appropriateness, the

population sample, geographic location, data collection techniques, the researcher’s role

in data collection, and data analysis. The chapter has also addressed the validity and

reliability of the instrumentation, the field test study, and the NVivo10 qualitative

computer software application used to analyze and code the data. Chapter 4 will provide

a discussion of the demographics and characteristics of the sample, data collection

process, qualitative data analysis, field test results, review of the interview questions,

themes from interviews, outliers, and summary.

83
 Chapter 4

Findings and Data Analysis

Chapter 4 presents the results of the analysis of the participants' interviews

following the descriptive narrative methodology outlined in Chapter 3. The purpose of

this qualitative descriptive narrative study was to collect participants’ perceptions on the

effectiveness of the LAVTC’s driver training program. Interviewed were 20 participants,

through the snowball sampling method, who met the requirement of having the 0313

MOS and had been an LAV driver. Prerequisites for inclusion into this study were

having attended and graduated from the LAVTC between December 20, 2010, and

October 1, 2014, and no longer serving in the active or reserve forces.

The 20 participants answered ten open-ended questions in a semi-structured

interview process, indicating their perceptions of the effectiveness of the LAVTC’s driver

training. Interviews were audio-recorded for data analysis; no participant objected to the

use of this method. After each interview, participants received transcripts of their

narrative for review and reflection. Once participants were satisfied that their

transcriptions reflected their personal beliefs, thereby validating their narrative, the

researcher included their accounts in the analysis.

The use of NVivo10 software assisted in analyzing the data collected. The

theoretical framework served as an interim developmental outline that could help future

curriculum developers to improve the LAVTC’s driver training by reevaluating the SAT

process for LAV training. The theoretical framework for this study was based around the

LAVTC’s use of SAT for instructions, curriculum design, and assessment procedures.

84
 The qualitative research method enabled the collection of information from a

group of individuals and an understanding of peoples’ reality as it related to the problem

statement; for this reason, the methodology was appropriate to investigate the problem

(Cohen et al., 2007). Therefore, interviewed was a purposefully selected sample of 20

LAV drivers to obtain information relevant to this study’s single research question: What

are the participants’ perceptions of the effectiveness of the Light Armored Vehicle

Training Course’s driver curriculum?

Chapter 4 includes a presentation of the study findings. The information contains

a complete summary of the results from the participants’ responses to the interview

questions, to establish the connection of the findings to the research question. Chapter 4

includes the final identification of core themes revealed in the data from this qualitative

descriptive narrative study. Chapter 4 also covers the demographics and characteristics

of the sample, the data collection process, qualitative data analysis, field test results,

review of the interview questions, themes from interviews, and outliers.

Population and Sample Demographics

Population Demographics

Categorized as aspects of a group of two or more individuals that indicate the

differences between those people on any significant dimension is diversity(Colella, Hitt,

& Miller, 2005). Diversity has several dimensions, such as race, sex, religion, and sexual

orientation to name a few. This study did not focus exclusively on any one particular

dimension of diversity.

Diversity within research is important to prevent discrimination. Discrimination

can be deliberate or accidental (Colella, Hitt, & Miller, 2005). The United States Marine

85
Corps has 182,100 active duty members, and roughly, 1,200 are in the LAR MOS (U.S.

Department of Defense, 2015). This study looks only at the LAR MOS; however, is

aware of possible discrimination against similar MOSs that may face the same problem

statement.

Sample Demographics

Twenty graduates of the LAVTC constituted this study’s research sample.

Participants were males who had graduated between the dates of December 20, 2010, and

October 1, 2014, and who were no longer serving in the active or reserve forces. Neither

rank nor billet was a determining influence in selecting the sample because at the time of

graduation from the LAVTC all students hold the rank of Private First Class or Lance

Corporal, and graduate as LAV drivers. Therefore, there was no need to distinguish

participants in grade or billet years after graduation, since the event was at the same rank

and billet description. No exclusion of potential participants based on any other personal

characteristic occurred; however, all participants were male Marines because LAV driver

is a male only military occupational specialty.

Review of Data Collection Procedures

The qualitative descriptive narrative design of this study was constructed to

understand better how graduates of the LAVTC perceived the course’s driver training.

The study analyzed 20 individual interviews that took place between May and June 2016.

The interview script used specific questions to draw out the needed information and

permitted participants to present a thorough narrative explanation.

The recruited participants expressed willingness to discuss their experience of the

LAVTC’s driver training. The scheduled interviews were confirmed by e-mail

86
correspondence and took place by phone. The researcher was able to assure interviewees

that their participation in this study was confidential and to create a relaxed environment

without controls or restrictions.

To ensure confidentiality. Participants were assigned study identification codes in

place of their personal information (e.g., LAV-D1, LAV-D2, LAV-D3). At the

beginning of each interview, participants were asked if they had a chance to review the

interview questions (Appendix C) beforehand and if they were ready to discuss their

answers. Each acknowledged that he had examined the interview questions before the

start of the meeting and was ready to proceed.

After participants had acknowledged their understanding of the interview script

and protocol, the researcher explained that there were no defined correct or incorrect

answers to the questions and that at any time the interview could be terminated without

consequence. Participants were also reminded that this study’s results might be published

after the completion of the data analysis and that they had the right to verify their answers

and to ensure the accuracy of their responses before publication.

All interviews were recorded to ensure accurate representation of the participants’

views. The use of recorded in-depth interviews, organized through NVivo10 software,

allowed the researcher to accurately construct interview summaries, look for common

issues, and build a set of the most significant themes.

Qualitative Data Analysis

Data was inductively analyzed to allow for the expression of “insights and

generalizations” (Neuman, 2006, p. 137) by the participants concerning how they

perceived the effectiveness of driver training at the LAVTC. Chapter 4 presents their

87
personal accounts through interviews that probed their experience with the LAVTC’s

driver curriculum, instruction, and assessment methods. To reduce the risk of imposing

meanings from one participant interview on the next interview, the researcher did not

delay formal analysis, stuck to the question protocol, and resisted the temptation to make

comments or ask leading follow-up questions that could have been affected by earlier

interviews.

Field Study Results

The interview script was field-tested before the start of the main study, using three

subject matter experts. The purpose of the field test was to evaluate the interview

questions for validity and reliability of the information collected. The reasons for

conducting a field test of the interview script were to focus on (a) the participants’

understanding of the questions; (b) how they interpreted some questions; and (c) how

they arrived at their answers.

Part one of the field test entailed receiving feedback regarding sentence structure,

clarity, and tone. The field-test participants suggested rephrasing the questions for the

study. The suggestions concerned clarifying the interview questions to eliminate

misinterpretations, and to add information to ensure full understanding of all questions.

For example, for interview question 2 (“Do you feel that the training you have received at

the LAVTC is in keeping with your definition of quality training?”). The participants

suggested rewording with either: (2a) “How do you characterize quality training?

Explain,” or (2b) “How would you perceive a quality education?” Among these

suggestions, interview question 2 was modified to the recommended2a reword structure.

88
 Interview Question 3 asked: “Have you had to adjust what you were taught at the

LAVTC to adapt to your operational unit? Explain. Follow-up: If so, could you explain

any specific actions you may have taken to address this deficiency? Explain.” The field-

test participants’ suggestions were to shorten and clarify the second question. They

suggested several possibilities: (3a) “Has your new unit had to adjust what you taught at

the LAVTC?” (3b) “Have you had to adjust what you were taught at LAVTC to adapt to

your operational unit?” (3c) “Have you had to relearn what you were taught at the

LAVTC after graduation?” Among these suggestions, (3b) was chosen as a modification

to interview question 3.

Interview Question 5 originally stated: “If you could change anything about your

training at the LAVTC, what would you change? Follow-up: Do you think the driver

curriculum at LAVTC could be improved?” The field-test participants recommended that

this question be shortened for clarification. Removed, as a result of recommendations,

was the follow-up question to question #5.

Corrections were made to reduce the vagueness of questions before

implementation. Field-testing the interview questions was critical to avoid collecting

biased data and enabled the researcher to feel confident that the questions were clear,

concise, and ready to be administered in the primary study.

Part two of the field-test allowed participants not included in the final study to be

interviewed. During the test interviews, the researcher sought to observe any

communication problems or other issues that suggested the need to rephrase questions or

revise any procedure. The researcher also evaluated the questions carefully to consider

whether any of them required a high rate of probing. Through these practice skills, the

89
researcher became familiar and comfortable with the interview format, recording

procedures, and allowable probes so that the interview could be conducted without

hesitation. Appendix C is the final version of the ten interview questions.

Findings and Interpretations: Themes from Interviews

The complexity of the data analysis required the compilation of elaborate

narrative data. Analysis of the 20 participants’ experiences identified common themes

and patterns, with the help of the NVivo10 data analyzing software. Also, a practical

assessment process of inductive reasoning was applied to the responses so as to develop

distinct summary accounts of each participant’s narrative.

The analysis of the 20 interviews revealed six core themes: (1) heavy reliance on

PowerPoint, (2) instructors rushing through the course, (3) low instructor motivation, (4)

minimal driving time, (5) highly standardized instruction, and (6) the need for an

extended course.

Theme 1: Heavy Reliance on PowerPoint

Fifteen of the respondents believed that PowerPoint was an unsuccessful tool in

teaching the driver’s curriculum. Several participants stated that PowerPoint use was

inefficient because of its standardized approach to teaching a complex subject. For

example, LAV-D1:

PowerPoint was used too much. The instructors would spend several minutes at

the beginning of the class just trying to preparing their PowerPoint lessons. It seemed too

complicated for a class that may have only been 8 slides long. The PowerPoint became

the lesson and it seemed as though the instructors could not teach without it.

90
 LAV-D2said: Anyone can stand up in front of a class and deliver the material via

a PowerPoint presentation, but it does not have the same impact as actually

getting into the vehicle and working/learning the components. Hands-on training

will always help someone learn at a more accelerated rate than sitting and looking

at a PowerPoint screen. The Marines as a whole need to stop using the

PowerPoint as a crutch to teach and go back to the basics of teaching primary

MOS skills, especially in a practical MOS such as LAR.

LAV-D3, “I don’t think you need a lot of fancy equipment or high tech

PowerPoint slides in order to have high-quality training. As long as the students are

engaged, learning and retaining the knowledge then you have high-quality training.”

LAV-D4: My instructor would explain to us that PowerPoint was just a tool and

that he was real instrument to understanding. At the time I did not understand

what he meant, but as I became more aware in my first unit. I began to realize that

he was implying that PowerPoint was no replacement for a passionate instructor.

LAV-D5 commented, “PowerPoint is hard to follow and appeared to be Chinese

to a student who, until two months ago, had never heard of an LAV.” LAV-D6 said,

“This training was not difficult at all. The only requirement seemed that we had to

memorize PowerPoint slides to graduate.”

LAV-D6, “Nothing about the training was difficult. I would not consider what we

learned as quality. It was more about how an instructor could stand up in front of the

class and repeat what he was reading from the PowerPoint. Dissapointing.”

LAV- D10 noted that the LAVTC’s way of teaching was outdated and ineffective.

This respondent indicated that since the primary method of instruction was PowerPoint,

91
the slides could be delivered to each LAR battalion where senior Marines in that unit

could more efficiently train newer drivers based on the PowerPoint. “Get rid of LAVTC

and let us graduate from ITB and go straight to our units. Since all that seems necessary

to learn this MOS is are PowerPoint slides and a projector. They should just give each

unit the PowerPoints and let them train their own drivers.”

LAV-D11: If there was anything I would have change about the training, it would

have been PowerPoint. We did so much classroom time and little on the vehicle.

The classes that were taught seemed useless compared to what we could have

learned on the vehicles. There needed to be more hands-on training. Sitting in a

classroom listening to PowerPoint for 8 hours a day was not helpful in teaching us

how to become good drivers. I do not think the curriculum at the schoolhouse

was very good based on what I saw with the PowerPoint heavy lectures. Most

instructors did not seem to know the information without using PowerPoint as a

script they could read – not reference– but read in order to teach.

LAV-D14’s comments were revealing to the study because they brought out not

only the participant’s uneasiness with PowerPoint, but also how the lessons had no

practical value, “Most of our training was in the classroom listening to a lesson that

seemed to not blend together other longwinded and uninteresting slides. Then we would

go out to the vehicles but with no instructors.”

LAV-D15: The major complaint I had was the amount of classes taught with

PowerPoint. Death by PowerPoint. The school was not long enough. The amount

of information they crammed into 6 weeks was too much. I am not sure how they

92
 expected us to remember so much when most of what we were taught was from

the dry drones of unmotivated instructors reading from PowerPoint.

When probed if how the lessons were taught was what LAV-D16 was accustomed

too? LAV-D16 responded:

Yes, I was used to learning from PowerPoint from high school. What I learned in

the LAVTC was very basic to that. Listening to PowerPoint meant all I had to do

was follow the orders of my instructor as he read from the slides and nothing

more. As students, it seemed we were not allowed to think much outside of what

we was on the screen and I believe that is also how the instructors felt. They

seemed like they could only teach what was prescribed in the PowerPoint and

nothing more. So when questions came up that deviated from the slides, the

instructor would redirect the students back to the slides.

The researched noticed that LAV-D17’s response to the classroom environment

not only reflected those from other participants, issues with PowerPoint, but also with the

physical environment itself.

LAV-D17: Training days were long. Most days we would sit in long classes

where the temperature made it difficult to stay awake. Add to this listening to an

instructor reading from PowerPoint was enough to put half the class to sleep.

Most students would stand up and by the end of the class, 10 of us would be

standing in the back. However, somehow not even this seemed to register to the

instructors that the heat and lectures of from PowerPoint were not working to

keep us focused.

93
 LAV-D18:“We were always watched by the instructors and had very little time to

relax and digest the information, not even during breaks. Everything seemed fast

and chaotic. Class, after class, after class, after class; and then right when we

thought we would get some practical time on the vehicles. It was usually cut short

so we could spend more time cleaning the area around the vehicles. PowerPoint

was difficult to learn from and so was just cleaning with no practical purpose to

what our jobs would be once we graduated.

LAV-D19 was agitated when the conversation seemed to turn toward lessons and

allocation of time spent in class. “The LAVTC is a Marine factory. It exists to push out

as many Marines as possible, trained or untrained. PowerPoint was just the most efficient

way to do this.”

At this point of the interview process and by identifying a trend in PowerPoint.

The researcher guided the last interviewee to express his feelings toward how the classes

were taught. No mention was given about PowerPoint. LAV- D20’s response, “Death by

PowerPoint. I spent more time trying to stay awake than I did actually paying attention

to the classes.”

Only 25%of the respondents believed that PowerPoint was an effective teaching

tool. Among these, LAV- D7, “I enjoyed the lessons. The instructors used PowerPoint

and demonstration aides to assist us with visualizing what they were teaching.”

LAV-D8, I felt that out of all my training, from boot camp, to ITB, to LAVTC. I

absorbed the most amount of knowledge in the shortest period at the LAVTC.

Although some did not like sitting in long classes. I did not mind the lessons

because listening to classes on the screen [PowerPoint] was how I learned best.

94
 LAV-D9 said, “I learn by reading; therefore, PowerPoint made it easier to take

what I read, interpret it, and apply the information.”LAV-D12 stated:

I am not mechanically skillful, and PowerPoint was the most effective way for me

to learn. Reading the screen allowed me to come up with practical ideas of th e

class in my head, which then aided me in creating a mental picture on how to

apply the information once I was on the LAV.

LAV-D13 explained, “The classes were well structured and taught. PowerPoint

did not affect how I learned, instead it helped me visually understand the practical

application portion of each class.”

Theme 2: Instructors Rushing through the Course

Eighty percent of the respondents believed that instructors rushed through their

lessons. Most notably, even those participants who supported the effective use of

PowerPointstill remarked the hurried speed at which the classes were taught.

LAV-D1: My instructor rushed through the lessons so quickly that at the end of

the six-week course I was still unfamiliar with how to turn on the LAV’s

headlights. I think his attitude to rush was partly the school’s doing in making the

instructors adhere to an unbreakable timeline and partly because he would spend

the first 10 minutes of a 60 minuet class trying to get the PowerPoint to work.

LAV-D3 stated, “The classes were a challenge to understand and it was difficult

to memorize significant amounts of new information in a small amount of time. The

courses could have been taught slower to ensure student understanding.” Other responses

were similar:

95
Overall, I do not think the instructors understood how their fast-paced teaching

affected the students’ learning. From my perception, most of the LAVTC courses

were pushed through with minimal effort to ensure a quality of student

understanding. Finally, I think the entire course was too rushed (LAV- D4).

LAV-D5: I believe many of the instructors at crewmen’s course were instructing

the driver training appropriately within the restrictions of time and school

policies. However, the biggest obstacle I think existed with instructors in driver

training was their impatience with the students. It felt as though we were being

pushed into the driver’s seat and told to learn even though what we were taught in

class made little sense on the vehicle without proper instruction. The training was

too fast all around. I admit that I was a much less confident compared to my peers

but it seemed the instructors were telling us “you’re going to screw up, I’m going

to yell at you, and then we’ll keep going.”

LAV-D6: Crewman’s course needs to be longer. Learning was like being force

to drink through a firehose. I could remember some of the information getting in

but most would not. It was a force-fed course.

LAV-D8: I found the expectations of this entire course to be a challenge, given

the short time between tests and the speed with which instructors moved through

the lessons. The instructors would teach a 60-minute class in 30 minutes and then

expect us to be proficient. This was problematic, especially when it came to the

most technical classes such as Drive the LAV and LAV Gunnery.

LAV-D9: The classes were quicker then I was used too, but I did not mind since

most of them were long. The instructors would not tell us how one class fit into

96
the other and so each class was like learning in a bubble apart from the whole of

the information. Adding this to the pace with which the instructors taught and I

could hardly keep up.

LAV-D10: After basic infantry school I thought the training would get harder.

Training at the schoolhouse [LAVTC] was not difficult as it was tedious.

Instructors would preach study, study, study but when it came time to test us, they

would just pass everyone. Even the guys who barely studied. So the quality of

training we received was small I think.

LAV-D11: If there was more practical application, the course would have been

better. When we graduated most students felt they were ready for the fleet, but

when we arrived at our units we all quickly realized the schoolhouse did not

prepare us very well. What we learned was so basic that it was not even basic

enough to give us the proper understanding of the vehicle outside of turning it on

and driving it. My only thought was that we were force-fed such generic classes,

that no real time was taken to make sure we [the students] were understanding the

information correctly.

LAV- D14: After we would have a class, that usually felt rushed, we would go

outside and sit by our vehicles and wait. The training in the classroom was fast

paced as if the practical application was an absolute must to accomplish. But

when it came time for the practical application of the lesson, the instructors never

seem to care if the students understood the information or not. It was as if the

instructors just wanted to hurry through the lessons and be done for the day.

97
 LAV-D15, “I remember scribbling notes in class that after I re-read them were

incomprehensible. It felt pointless to take notes because instructors would not teach slow

enough for us to digest the information.”

LAV-D20, “The classes always felt rushed. From the first class of the day to the

last, we seemed to be herded like cattle from one class to the next. I tried to tell my

instructor that I was having trouble keeping up in class and his response was to read the

LAV’s technical manual and that this would fill in the gaps in what I wasn’t

understanding.

Not all students took issue with the speed of the lessons. Four respondents felt

that the courses at the LAVTC were sufficient, given the short time frame of the course.

LAV-D2 seemed the most familiar with the restrictions and peculiarities of running and

teaching a Marine course. “I found the LAVTC driver course was informative and in-

depth. I will say that I wish we had the chance to experience the aquatic capabilities of

the LAV, but due to an incident where LAVs were lost during a training exercise, I

understand why classes in this course were no rushed.”

LAV-D7 noted that the instructors were professional and understood that they had

a timeline to follow. They were careful not to go over their allotted time so as to not over

step into the next instructor’s class.LAV-D12, “The pace of the course was good. I never

felt rushed to learn and felt more comfortable learning in the classroom than on the

vehicles.” LAV-D13 said, “The instructors taught with humor and were always generous

with the extra attention given to their lessons.”

98
Theme 3: Low Instructor Motivation

Seventy-five percent of the participants believed that the LAVTC instructors

lacked genuine motivation for instructing. LAV-D2stated, “The LAVTC instructors

seemed only faintly enthusiastic to be teaching entry-level students. Anyone can stand up

in front of a class and deliver the material via a PowerPoint presentation, but enthusiasm

and motivation create an excellent learning environment.” LAV-D3 commented that the

instructors often seemed less enthusiastic when it was their turn to teach and less so if

they were the only instructor assigned to stay after class to assist struggling students.

LAV-D3: A few of the instructors seemed concerned about what they were

teaching the students, but generally most seemed indifferent. My instructor

seemed disappointed in his billet as a Basic Crewman Instructor that he would

barely teach us and then disappear to take care of personal errands. He would tell

us that what we did not learn at the LAVTC, someone would teach us later when

we arrived at our first units.

LAV-D4 generally suggested that with a few exceptions most LAVTC instructors

did not seem motivated to engage with the students beyond their individual daily tasks.

LAV-D5 said, “My particular instructor was notably disinterested with his job and

wasn’t always available, which made it harder to understand what I was learning.”

LAV-D6 was passionate about his instructor experience. When asked by the

researcher, “If you could change anything about your training at the LAVTC, what would

you change?” LAV-D6 steadfastly stated:

I would change the selection process of the instructors. It appeared many took

that position so they can have a break from the fleet with little outward desire to

99
 be really good instructors. Their lack as a Marine in turn created a whole

generation of poorly trained, poorly motivated new Marines.

LAV-D16 indicated that although he could tell that most instructors were not

motivated to be teaching, they did their jobs well enough.

When asked “Do you think enough emphasis was placed on the driver training

over other LAVTC courses?’ LAV-D17 responded, “No, which is why I think instructor

morale was low. It was obvious to me that many of the instructors did not appreciate the

way they were treated over other senior course instructors.”

LAV-D19: My instructor was ok but he would tell us how he was eager to leave

the schoolhouse [LAVTC] and how he wanted to leave because he was not able to

teach feely. He saw the LAVTC as a conveyer-belt system where no matter what,

everyone graduated.

LAV-D20 suggested, “The quality of the instructors seemed sub-par and less

passionate. When I asked my instructor for help, he responded with, ‘You need to learn

on your own. I will not always be here to baby you.”

Five of the respondents felt either that the instructors were enthusiastic about their

billet assignment as LAVTC instructors or did not comment on instructor attitudes.

LAV-D7 admired his instructor but cautiously praised others, “I believe the instructors

did a fair enough job. They pushed us hard and made us test each other. I believe this

kept us honest, and failure was not an option for them. Every instructor was different

though and I think mine was the exception.

100
 LAV-D8 narrated, “The instructors were all highly knowledgeable and motivated,

despite the shortcomings of the time available for hands on experience with the M242

[main gun]. Overall, my experience with the instructors was good.”

Due to the use of open-ended questions, the narrative communication between the

researcher and the participants’ was fluid and without restrictions to what the participants

could discuss. When the subject of instructors was approached. LAV-D9 easily stated,

"I think the instructors were very good. They seemed knowledgeable and most had

combat experience.”

LAV-D11 said that his instructor’s performance was satisfactory and that he had

no preconceived expectations to compare his performance too.LAV-D14 said, “My

instructor seemed motivated and willing to teach more than he had to.”

In the interviews, the researcher did not openly ask participants for their feelings

as to how satisfied their instructor seemed with teaching at the LAVTC. However,

question 7,‘How do you feel the instructors at the LAVTC instructed the driver training

course?’ was aimed at stimulating further discussion on instructor effectiveness, which

implicitly included their desire to instruct.

Theme 4: Minimal Drive Time

Minimal driving time was cited by 90% of the respondents as a factor

contributing to the course’s inefficiency and inadequacy.

LAV- D1: No, not enough time was spent on driver training. In an example, I

noticed turning on the vehicles headlights was never thoroughly explained or

taught. If a person was second or third to drive the vehicle the lights were already

on and so he was never asked nor checked to see if he understood how to operate

101
 them. Potentially a person could go the entire course without ever having to turn

on the vehicles headlights

LAV-D2: For a course that was 6 weeks in length, I think we only spent 3 days,

genuinely, behind the wheel in a field setting. The rest of the time was sitting

through PowerPoint or cleaning the vehicles. The main objection to this course

was why we had 2 full weeks of inspection/maintenance preparation but I only

drove three times throughout the entire course. Take one of those weeks and

make a 2-4 day field exercise where the students are able to see and feel what an

LAV and its crew are capable of.

LAV-D3: From my experience at the schoolhouse [LAVTC] and in the fleet.

When getting newer drivers there does not seem to be a big focus on being a

driver. The focus seemed to be on being a gunner. I do not think new crewmen

should spend as much time learning about the gun as they do. Not that I do not

want them to learn about the weapon or aspire to be gunners. I think they need to

focus more on being drivers and learn all aspects of that billet first.

When the research asked LAV-D3 for more amplifying information, “Do you

think enough emphasis was placed on the importance of driver training over other

LAVTC curriculum programs?” LAV-D3’s response was:

No I do not. Drive week was a joke. We drove in a circle for the most part and

only some of the drivers were able to put the vehicle through the ropes. Back on

the ramp, as I have stated a few times now, it was dependent on who was in

charge of you. The Facility Advisor on the vehicle next to mine would go in-

102
 depth on what a driver needed to do and look for, while mine would show us how

to turn it on and then go and take care of personal things.

LAV-D5 was another participant who showed an ability to understand the

idiosyncrasies’ of a Marine Corps formal school:

I do not recall a ton of hands on time behind the wheel due to having to let a crew

of 7 or so fight over drive time. Because of this, I do not feel like my driver

training was very authentic or in-depth, which caused the first time I drove in the

fleet to be a disaster. I had trouble remembering all of the controls and processes

to the before and after operating procedures. I was not a very capable driver and

my crew was bounced around a lot. I felt as if I had spent more time driving in a

learning environment, going from learning to the operating forces would have

been easier.

The narrative from LAV-D5 was so constructive to the investigation of this study,

the researcher asked him to expound on his driving experience both at the LAVTC and

upon graduation. When asked, “How do you think the LAVTC believes its driver

curriculum is doing?”

LAV- D5 responded: I think realistically they do not believe it is 100% fleet

preparation effective. They know they have so much time to train 50-some-odd

students and they know they have had so many cycles prior to and so many cycles

left that the repeating and impersonal instruction is just “what they have always

done.” Additionally, the SOPs established have so little breathing room in the

perception of most; however, no one dares attempt to question the effectiveness of

it based on end of course comments from graduates. I think the staff at the

103
 LAVTC has confidence that curriculum is meeting the standard requirement from

the Marines Corps, and it is enough to train a Marine to probably not run over

another Marine once in the fleet.

LAV- D6 stated, “We spent more time memorizing the vehicle’s nomenclature

than we did driving. I do not recall a moment during the course where I was every fully

comfortable driving the LAV.”

LAV- D10: Driving was always difficult in the fleet. I was never a good driver

and I knew it was from my training at the LAVTC. I had gotten sick halfway

through the course and was unable to drive until a day before the driver’s test.

Instead of dropping me to a follow-on course, my instructor told me not to worry,

that everyone passes. So by the time I graduated, I had only driven twice. Once

in the field and once for the driver’s test. I was never comfortable at driving and

was sure I would fail, but when I passed; it only confirmed that anyone could pass

this course. I do not even think the grades mean anything so long as the school

meets their quotas of graduating as many students as possible.

LAV-D15 said, “We had only one week of driving at the LAVTC, which was split

between seven other students and me. By course’s end, I had approximately five daylight

hours and one hour of nighttime driving total.”

LAV-D17, “We needed more drive time but driving seemed less of a priority to

the school. By the end [of the course] we all knew that we were just numbers.” When

asked to elaborate on being “just numbers.” LAV-D17 responded, “It was clear it did not

matter if you could drive well or if at all. There was a war going on and the fleet units

needed drivers. End of story.”

104
 LAV-D18 agreed, “Practical application training was good until it came to

driving. We would learn everything about the LAV except how to drive it.”

LAV-D19: As students, we did not physically drive as much as we sat in class and

learned how to maintain the vehicle. My instructor told me it was because there

were not enough instructors, and so with eight to nine students per instructor, it

was hard to ensure that everyone got equal and enough drive time.

LAV-D20, “We shoul d have driven more. We did not drive enough. Throughout

the entire course, I only drove on four occasions. At no time did I feel confident as an

LAV driver.”

The researcher discovered that not all participants felt the course needed more

drive time. Ten percent of the participants felt the allotted drive time was more than

sufficient for a new Marine to become familiar and confident behind the wheel of an

LAV. LAV-D7 stated simply, “I felt that we had received sufficient driver’s training at

the LAVTC.”

LAV-D8: I found most of my driver training to be thorough and in-depth. I

graduated with a very good understanding of the basic capabilities of the LAV-25.

I understand the course was only 6-weeks;there just was not enough time to teach

us everything about driving the vehicle. As far as driving for me went, I felt the

instructor’s maximized what time they had to teach us how to drive the vehicle.

Theme 5: Highly Standardized Instruction

Sixteen of the twenty participants felt that the LAVTC’s driver curriculum was

highly standardized and left little room for improvisation by the staff.

105
 LAV-D2: The way in which I learned at the LAVTC was similar to how I learned

in high school. There was structure and discipline in the classrooms but there was

no real purpose other than to learn to take a test. The course did not feel rushed,

although I think two more weeks could have been added. Overall, the course felt

like it was a script generated by a think-tank of former Marines on how they

learned to drive and so this was the only way all generations should learn.

The researcher asked LAV-D2 to explain on how he felt “former Marines”

had anything to do with the LAVTC’s driver training. His response:

It was never a secret within the LAR community on who controlled how we

learned, trained, and fought. The silverbacks [older generations of Marines]

learned to operate the vehicle one-way when they were newer drivers over 20

years ago and so it appeared they assumed we all should be learning the same

way. People do not learn the way they learned. It is time for them to realize this

and adapt the training for a newer generation of thinking Marines.

Recognizing that LAV-D2’s comments are in keeping with theme 2. The

researcher asked LAV-D2 to expand on what he meant by “thinking Marines.” LAV-D2:

Marines are more critical thinkers than when the older generations were our age.

We do not blindly follow orders or accept that what they are teaching us is the

only way it should be taught. I do not think the LAV community has learned to

fully understand this fact and incorporate it into how drivers are trained. And in

my opinion, the proof is in how badly most newer drivers are once they graduate

and enter the fleet

106
 LAV-D5 explained in detail: My characterization of quality training would be a

curriculum that strives to teach the same subject using several different methods,

which would be followed by high repetition under direct and supportive

supervision to master tasks organic to what the student will do upon starting their

particular position. An example would be following the PowerPoint lecture on

how to “Drive the LAV,” which would then lead to a generous amount of time in a

driver’s trainer, progressing from basic to advanced driving skills. Added to this,

I would include informal guided discussions with the instructors to discuss topics

on being an LAV driver and encourage students to ask questions outside the

larger class. However, I believe the standardized way of training at the LAVTC is

inflexible to accommodate students who learn differently.

When probed further LAV-D5 stated: Not all students learn in a bubble. The

schoolhouse cannot just assume that PowerPoint and a small amount drive time

will create qualified drivers. Although I do believe this is exactly what they

[LAVTC curriculum developers] think.

LAV-D5’s narrative was consistent with the observations made in the literature

review on experiential education and differentiated instruction.

LAV-D6, had similar comments: The classes were so poorly taught that I felt as

though I were in high school. The instructors clearly did not know how to teach

other than reading PowerPoint, which I felt made the classes harder to follow.

The overemphasis on regimented training seemed to cripple the instructors’ ability

to critically think about what they were teaching and present it in a nonconformist

and nontraditional way.

107
 LAV-D10 suggested that the methods used by the LAVTC were copied from the

private education system.

LAV-D11 said, “The classes were robotic to the point that the lectures had no

practical connection to the information.” LAV-D12 suggested that the standardized way

in which classes were taught at the LAVTC left little room for instructors to teach

different variants of the LAV that were not a part of the curriculum. LAV-D1 gave an

illustration that supported LAV-D12’s narrative:

LAV-D1: The overall structure of the course did not seem to fit well with the

requirements of what a new driver needed to know once in the fleet. When I

entered my first unit, I became an LAV driver for the recovery-variant. Although

the controls were relatively similar to the LAV-25, which was the only variant we

were trained on at the [schoolhouse] LAVTC, there were differences that I was

never taught. Learning this new variant in the fleet and not at the LAVTC caused

me to make several mistakes. Had the instructors been authorized to conduct in-

course changes where they noticed deficiencies in the training, I believe I would

have learned this variant and been better prepared.

LAV-D13 attended the LAVTC and graduated as a qualified driver, but because

of manpower shortages with his unit’s infantry. He spent his entire career as a scout;

never again driving the LAV after graduating the LAVTC. LAV-D13 commented:

The school [LAVTC] knows some students will not be drivers and yet the

program is set up to oversaturate the LAR community with more drivers then is

needed. I would give the students more experience as scouts or at least let the

Marines know that they may be scouts in the fleet and prepare them for that

108
 position. The driver program needs to be more realistic to all the environments

newer driver face once they reach their first unit.

LAV-D14: The classes seemed drafted to the point where it appeared there was

little room for instructors to teach outside the PowerPoint slides. My friends and I

had to work together to accomplish a single task that should have taken only one

person. However if any of us tried to do a task alone, it never worked out because

neither of us had all the knowledge to do what needed to be done. Therefore, we

had to work together and share knowledge because that is how we were taught.

No one knew everything and everyone’s base of information learned at the

LAVTC was different. There was just no uniformity among any of us upon

graduation.

LAV-D17: The LAVTC driver program seemed to be a good program, it just

didn’t seem to be taken as serious as other LAVTC courses. We knew we were

the junior course at the school and as such were treated with less respect and

taken less seriously. The program seemed that it could have been a good one if

the staff was professionally invested to see it through.

Twenty percent of the participants felt that the LAVTC’s standardized method of

instruction was well organized and comparable to the academic instruction with which

they were familiar.

LAV-D7, “The way in which the LAVTC instructed matched with how I prefer to

be taught. The training at the LAVTC mirrored the civilian education system by having

the lecture first, followed by tests to check for what was learned.”

109
 LAV-D8, “I felt that out of all my basic training from boot camp, to ITB to

LAVTC. I absorbed the most amount of knowledge in the shortest period of time at

LAVTC.”

LAV-D9, “I believe the course was well put together. No course is ever going to

be 100%. For a military course the LAVTC was good.”

LAV-D12 reported that, most of what we were supposed to be learning was done

in the classroom. However, my instructor would take us outside and explain the

lectures in more detail. The overall flexibility of my instructor made sense to the

lessons and made them relevantto the vehicle.

Theme 6: Need for a Longer Course

All 20 participants agreed that the LAVTC driver’s course needed to be extended.

LAV-D1, “Six weeks was not nearly enough time to learn the mechanics of the vehicle

before sending students to the fleet.”

LAV-D2 added: Even those six weeks were not productive in learning to drive the

vehicle, outside learning how to clean and maintain it. My chief complaint was

that two weeks at the end of the course was set aside for exhaustive cleaning and

preparing the vehicles for inspection. Two weeks lost that could have been spent

driving.

LAV-D5 stated: I would increase the course’s length by double to introduce other

LAV variants and weapons systems, such as armor identification, the LAV-

Recovery, and mortar variants, which is just as important to drivers as the

Advanced Gunnery Training System (AGTS) is to LAV gunners. New LAV

110
 drivers are expected to learn the AGTS both at the LAVTC and in their first unit

but are not required to show mastery of over-terrain driving of the LAV.

LAV-D6, “If the school was longer, I do not think there would a need for this

study.”

LAV-D8: When I went through the LAVTC the Marine Corps was still engaged

in the wars overseas. So I accepted that everything would be rushed. However,

when I became an older Marine I realized the quality of Marines coming from the

LAVTC was poor. They were poorly motivated and inadequately trained. The

driver’s course needs to be lengthened to accommodate more drive time.

LAV-D15: The school was not long enough. The amount of information they

crammed into 6 weeks was too much. I am not sure how they expected us to

remember so much when most of what we were taught was from the dry drones of

unmotivated instructors reading from PowerPoint

LAV-D17 reported that his six-week training felt as though the course should

have been eight weeks long but was forced into six. LAV-D18, “The driving section of

the course was one week long, while the maintenance phase was two weeks. LAVTC

was a driver’s course but we paid more attention to maintaining the vehicle than we did

learning how to drive it.”

The summary of the core themes discovered that despite some disagreements

between respondents, the identified core issues were constant.

Outliers

Found in the data analysis were two significant outliers(i.e., themes expressed by

a smaller number of respondents). First, four participants indicated that the LAVTC

111
should place more emphasis on learning the vehicle’s weapons systems. LAV- D7

suggested, “The course had more than enough classroom instruction on maintenance of

the vehicle, driving the vehicle, and even covering the vehicle’s weapon systems. But

little focus was placed on learning how to employ the weapon’s outside a fam-fire

[familiarization shoot].”

LAV- D8 stated: The course should have involved in-depth training on the M242

[main gun] with live fire ranges that require the students to become more familiar

with the functions and employment of this weapon systems. When new drivers

came to my unit, they knew almost nothing about the M242, and as a result, we

senior Marines had to teach them what they should have already learned at the

LAVTC.

LAV-D10 said, “I would place more emphasis on teaching newer drivers the main

gun.” Finally, LAV-D11 reported that the weapon systems on other LAV variants were

different from what was taught at the schoolhouse, and so more attention should have

been paid to learning about those systems.

This outlier is a challenge to implement for the LAVTC driver’s course because

the focus is on driving. Learning and understanding the main gun and its ancillary

weapons are not relevant to training a successful driver. The participants were not

informed that beyond the LAVTC’s driver’s course, there was a separate Master Gunners

course dedicated to the training of LAV gunners.

A second significant outlier addressed how the course did not place sufficient

emphasis on maintenance. LAV-D1 said, “The drivers should learn more about the

vehicle’s maintenance so they do not have to rely solely on the mechanics.” LAV-D11

112
commented, “In the fleet, it was expected that newer drivers will know a great deal about

the vehicle’s maintenance. I would change the course to accommodate more maintenance

periods to meet this expectation.”

These comments were contrary to the 90% of respondents who suggested that

there was too little drive time and too much non-driving instruction (including

maintenance). The views presented by these two participants suggest that they may have

been placed in a unit where maintenance was more heavily emphasized compared to

driving.

Summary

The present qualitative descriptive narrative study was conducted to determine

whether participants perceived driver training at the LAVTC to be effective. Digitally

recorded telephone interviews were analyzed using NVivo10 qualitative data analysis

software. Twenty LAVTC graduates participated voluntarily in these interviews. The

10-item interview protocol was designed to answer the study’s primary research question:

What are the participants’ perceptions of the effectiveness of the Light Armored Vehicle

Training Course’s driver curriculum?

Identified were six predominant themes with regard to the LAV drivers’

perception of LAVTC driver training: (1) heavy reliance on PowerPoint, (2) instructors

rushing through the course, (3) low instructor motivation, (4) minimal driving time, (5)

highly standardized instruction, and (6) the need for an extended course.

Chapter 4 has described the reported experiences of 20 former LAVTC graduates

concerning the school’s driver training. Chapter 4 included detailed information on data

collection and analysis, interview questions, and findings. Chapter 5 summarizes the

113
findings and includes conclusions, implications, discussion, and recommendations for

future research.

114
 Chapter 5

Conclusions and Recommendations

Although Content Curriculum Review Boards have been implemented by

members of the Marine Corps’ Training and Education Command and curriculum

developers at the LAVTC. Results of this qualitative descriptive narrative study show

that neither group has made the connection between the LAVTC’s driver curriculum and

poorly performing LAV drivers. This lack of awareness can be understood, and now

qualitatively defined, as a direct result of the ineffective way in which drivers are trained,

instructed, and assessed.

Through the compartmentalization of training and assessment, training of LAV

drivers have become inconsistent with subjective opinions that are beginning to influence

practice standards. Therefore, the degree of graduate preparedness has declined as

individual unit commanders and course instructors have started to individually interpret

the training requirements for LAV drivers. Consequently, some students at the LAVTC

receive thorough training whereas others may observe only a demonstration of the task

without ever mastering it (Skills, 2010).

The general problem underlying this situation is the Marine Corps’ vague

guidance on curriculum development, instruction, and assessment for the LAVTC’s

driver training course (Fitzgerald, 2011). There is no single regulation on curriculum-

related procedures, development, implementation, instruction, and assessment. With

particular reference to the LAVTC, the specific problem is it is unknown how LAV

drivers perceive the effectiveness of their driver training (Laing, 2011).

115
 Service and joint publications provide the tactics, techniques, and procedures for

generalized training; however, improved training programs, doctrine updates, and release

modifications are necessary to provide adequate education to the LAVTC’s students.

Giving insufficient attention to these issues will increase the likelihood that service goals

will not be achieved, training readiness will diminish, and further accidental mishaps

could occur (Bango & Alford, 2015).

The purpose of this qualitative descriptive narrative study was to collect

participants’ perceptions on the effectiveness of the LAVTC’s driver training program.

The literature review highlighted fundamental prerequisites for effective curriculum and

instruction. The narratives of the 20 studied participants frequently reinforced findings

from the literature review. Chapter 5 reports the conclusions and recommendations that

have resulted from this research.

Implications

New Marines will always be confronted with challenges upon arriving at their

first duty assignment. There will always be the uncertainty of change and adaptations

required for a Marine to successfully accomplish his task. Formal military institutions,

such as the LAVTC, must anticipate these obstacles to graduates and formulate training

programs accordingly.

The Marine Corps and its formal schools cannot train graduates for every

situation they will encounter as Marines. Instead, the Marines should adapt training

programs to be specific enough while leaving room for on-the-spot adaptation as

problematic occurrences between the curriculum and the practical environment develop.

116
 Numerous programs exist within the Marine Corps to support the design,

development, and implementation of a curriculum (i.e., Marine Corps Curriculum

Developers School, Formal School Management, and train-the-trainer), yet the results of

this study’s data analysis show that most participants viewed driver training at the

LAVTC as ineffective in significant ways. Results of the literature review, data analysis

of participant interviews, and investigations of two accidental fatalities involving LAV

drivers all indicate that the driver training is subpar in preparing Marines for fleet

operations.

Implications to the findings of this study should warrant an assessment based on

the complete set of qualitative data describing potential shortfalls within the LATVC’s

driver curriculum. In addition, from the results of this study an identification and

examination of internal implications, to the Marine Corps, its programs, and the LAVTC,

should be considered. A planned solution to include current and future systems,

curricula, current operations, political, and short and long-term considerations should be

pursued.

Significant Findings and Interpretations

In Chapter 4, six themes were identified as result of interviews and through the

analysis of data from NVivo10 software: (1) heavy reliance on PowerPoint, (2)

instructors rushing through the course, (3) low instructor motivation, (4) minimal driving

time, (5) highly standardized instruction, and (6) the need for an extended course. The

following section is an overview of the research study results.

Theme 1: Heavy Reliance on PowerPoint

117
 Seventy-five percent of the respondents believed that PowerPoint was an

unsuccessful tool in teaching the curriculum. Designed around text and bullet points,

PowerPoint is as a lecture tool. D’Angelo and Woosley (2007) listed two major

criticisms of PowerPoint in the classroom: (1) it fails to communicate to students the

required class information, and (2) it leads to the loss of student-centered interaction in

classroom instruction. PowerPoint creators Robert Gaskins and Dennis Austin have also

lamented the use of PowerPoint, stating, “PowerPoint elevates format over content and

now grade-school children turn in book reports via PowerPoint” (as cited by Gomes,

2007, p. 1).

PowerPointis a primary presentation tool in thousands of teaching and learning at

institutions. However, researchers have discovered two disagreeing uses of PowerPoint,

the disposition of slide presentation and the ability of the presenter (Mollerup, 2014).

Participants explained that the use of PowerPoint demonstrated a lack of

individual preparedness on the part of the instructors. Participants felt that instructors

were regurgitating inherited slides from previous instructors, paying little personal

attention to developing each new presentation. Although lecturers favor PowerPoint,

students criticize it. The description of “death by PowerPoint” resonates with most

students (Harden, 2008).

In addition, participants felt that the overuse of PowerPoint took away from

content not found in the presentation. The exclusion of material caused breaks in their

understanding of the information when it came time to assessments. Although some

students were in favor of PowerPoint stating that it allowed them to read the information

118
at their own pace. Most exclaimed that PowerPoint seemed to distract the instructor and

cause him to shift from what was on the slides and in their handout to talking off topic.

Mollerup (2014) suggested that experienced PowerPoint users sometimes revert

to their personal knowledge to stray from the focus of a course. They can make

presentations subjective in the same way that expert lectures can sometimes present the

information in precise ways with impressive effect. Participants expressed that the

lecture method over PowerPoint was more effective in capturing their attention.

PowerPoint stole their attention away from the instructor and onto the screen where they

felt their tasks was to copy what was written and pay little attention to what was being

said.

Designed to assist the instructor in formulating a professional period of

instruction into an oral presentation (Harden, 2008), PowerPoint often resulted in endless

streams of bulleted slides, with animations that confused rather than simplified the

purpose of the presentation (LAV- D5). Participants responded that PowerPoint was

ineffective in presenting complex information of the LAV’s weapon systems, targeting

computer, electronics, and satellite radios. Tufte (2003) argues the weakness of

PowerPoint in presenting technical data by relating to the Columbia Space Shuttle

disaster.

Tufte (2003) pointed out that NASA had been so reliant on presenting complex

information through PowerPoint. That after examination of the impact to the space

shuttle Columbia and before its fatal return to Earth. Engineers presented their

conclusions in an unclear PowerPoint presentation so convoluted with random bullet

119
points that it was practically impossible fora senior manager to interpret as a life-

threatening situation.

Theme 1 interpretations of the results are that instructors should implement break-

slides that allow the students to focus their attention from the screen to the lecture. Omit

erroneous information from slides, slides should focus on one point, and avoid the

mistake of reading the slides to the audience.

Theme 2: Instructors Rushing through the Course

Eighty percent of this study’s participants believed that instructors rushed through

their lessons. Respondents not only felt that the instructors’ pace was quicker when he

seemed unfamiliar with the PowerPoint presentation or lesson plans, but when he lost

track of time, got bored with teaching, or saw how inattentive the students were. Some

participants also attributed technical error with the computer system, causing instructors

to make up for lost time by rushing.

Instructing too quickly is a common teaching behavior that can reduce an

instructor’s communication effectiveness. Teaching too fast can make comprehending

the information difficult, thus, creating the potential for miscommunication, lost learning

opportunities, or a decrease in instructor credibility (Yurtbasi, 2015). Instructors who are

disposed to having a fast rate of speech may face communication problems with their

students: perceived as nervous and less confident, may appear unorganized and poorly

prepared, and may find it difficult to arrange thoughts and ideas while speaking

(Peterson, 2009). The participants in this study contributed their lack of understanding of

the information to the rushed nature of the instructor.

120
 Although each instructor must learn the implementation of teaching through the

systems approach to training at the Marine Corps’ Formal Schools Instructor Course

(FSCI), 16 out of 20 participants felt the instructors’ overall ability to prepare, instruct,

and conduct post lesson management were contributing factors to his inability to teach at

an unhurried and deliberate pace. Unable to organize the information into schemes, the

learners cited confusion with how the instructors taught.

Slowing rates of speech by the instructors may not have been necessary for

student comprehension, but a break in speech would have allowed students to formulate

the information into conceptual illustrations of the knowledge. Therefore, as the

students’ familiarity with the subject would grow, his thought processes would become

faster and the instructors’ tone and rate of speech would become clearer and more logical.

Instructors trying to teach information to newer students should apply a similar logic with

slowing their speech to allow students time to process the information at an individual

pace.

Similarly, when teachers become overconfident in their lessons, they may teach at

a pace that they feel is acceptable for all students and “teach the way they were taught”

(Hora & Oleson, 2014, p. 30).However, this perception is incomplete. The allegation that

instructors would teach based on instructor experience has little empirical backing (Hora

& Oleson, 2014). The comments made by participants may be casual assumptions of a

direct relationship between previous experiences and current behaviors, and ignore other

causes of an instructor teaching style. Instead, other influences such as organizational

culture may relate to shape how an instructor teaches, to include at a hurried pace.

121
 Although the comments of faculty using personal experiences to instruct is not a

standalone source for why a teacher teaches at a quickened pace. These observations

may contribute to the LAVTC’s knowledge on how students identify with the

instructional methods of the course and provide insight into possible other areas of

instructional reform at the LAVTC. In the near term, participants encourage leadership at

the LAVTC to adopt teaching practices grounded in empirical evidence. Particularly in

ensuring complex instruction such as teaching the LAV does not come off as routine,

which can cause the hurried pace.

Theme 3: Low Instructor Motivation

Fifteen of 20 participants believed that the LAVTC instructors lacked genuine

motivation for teaching by observing voice inflection and body language. The narratives

of the participants indicated a noticeable discomfort of instructor satisfaction that seemed

to project into their daily routines as an LAV instructor. Research indicates that the level

of teacher motivation can negatively or positively affect student performance, and that

higher degrees of teacher motivation can actively and directly be associated with

significant improvement in student achievement (Rubin & Sutriyantono, 2013).

Over the last decade and a half, demands on teachers have increased leading to

teacher burnout. In general, burnout is an occurrence of dramatic importance in

education(Boluijt, Brouwers, & Tomic, 2011) where military instructors are at risk.

Characterized by the steady “wearing away” of an individual's emotional and physical

well-being, professional burnout is a well-documented occurrence causing several

negative job-related results (Grossman, Herrerll, Kok, West, & Wilk, 2015).

122
 Participants in this study narrated that the interest of the instructors seemed low,

and at times apathetic. LAV-D13 reported,

As new students, we were excited to get going and to learn our MOS; however,

after 30 minutes of waiting for the instructor to show up, he finally arrived and began by

saying ‘I know you all do not want to be here, nor do I. But we are stuck together for the

next few weeks so let’s just suck it up.’

Body language, rate of speech, volume, facial expressions, gestures, laughing,

smiling, and encouraging feedback are examples of an enthusiastic instructor. Positively

linked to student recall, student intrinsic motivation, test performance, and student

attitude towards learning are the connection between an enthusiastic instructor and

student achievement (Mitchell, 2013). The most effective way of engaging with military

students is for the instructor to be enthusiastically present, critically alert, and sincerely

open. Low teacher motivation may affect students’ ability to comprehend newer

information needed to gain familiarity with course material.

The environment, colleagues, and institutional support are also factors in the

enthusiasm of instructors. Instructors who feel support from their colleagues and the

organization demonstrate more motivation and less apathy toward their position than

teachers who feel neglected. Participants recognized that some of the LAVTC instructors

seemed out-casted and even ostracized by their peers and the institution.

The assumption is that a student would never know the reason for an instructors

indifference to teaching; however, LAV-D3 reported, “My instructor would constantly

tell us that he disliked the command, the unit, and his peers. He explained that they

123
would put him down because he showed too much interest in teaching and his nickname

became ‘PL – Private Lover.”

When pressed further, LAV-D3 stated that “A PL is a term given to instructors by

his peers when he shows too much interest in his students. The term identifies an

instructor as ‘that guy’ who invests more than he needs into the Marines and usually it is

a term not appreciated.” Therefore, as possible responses to interactive stressors (from

organization or colleagues), exploring the backgrounds of low motivated instructors

should be considered linked to institutional and colleague support.

Theme 4: Minimal Driving Time

Organizations need to produce students who are trained, experienced, and

prepared for their assigned tasks; however, 90% of respondents in this study identified

insufficient driving time as a reason why they felt untrained, unprepared, and

inexperienced upon graduation. No existing literature, within or outside the Marine

Corps, has determined standard characteristics for driver curriculum or its effectiveness

in training LAV drivers. The focus of the literature review in this study was on literature

about curriculum design, instructional and authentic assessment techniques, as they may

be relevant to the effectiveness of driver training at the LAVTC. This study focused on

former Marines who graduated from the LAVTC and addressed an area where previous

knowledge base was nonexistent.

Participants explained that LAV drive time was insufficient to the length of the

course and expressed disbelief in how the written information seemed to take priority

over the practical application of driving an LAV. In the current research, students

communicated that too much general information was taught. Several of respondents

124
conveyed a desire to change current curriculum where there are subjects that have no

connection to the practical application of the course (Bautum, Stan, & Zodieru, 2015).

Participants identified excessive theoretical information not correlated to practical

application as unnecessary.

Feeling disconnected, Bautum, Stan, &Zodieru (2015) observed 40% of those

studied stated practical application is of little importance to lectures, while 70% of

students want applications that are more practical after lectures. Studies show that

graduates desire an education that is in line with labor force expectations and are calling

on universities and academic institutions to establish partnerships with private agencies

that adapt general curriculum to workforce practical application (MacQueen, 2013).

Manufacturing, commerce, and trade organizations are seeking graduates with a

high degree of knowledge and practical skills that would usually take years of experience

to master. Journeyman programs completed under the tutelage of a trainer are no longer

the norm. Industries are looking for employees who can work almost at an artisan level

before their first day of work (MacQueen, 2013).

The training of a journeyman generally requires five to six years and a

certification assessment to complete (MacQueen, 2013). However, with the economy as

it is, industries can no longer afford to train newer graduates and thus are expecting

students to graduate from a trade or academic institution already functioning at the level

of an experienced worker. For educational institutions to meet this demand, schools such

as the LAVTC must teach conceptual and functional skills to the equivalent of about four

years of working and learning without sacrificing essential core concepts. Theme 3

answered the RQ question: What are the participants’ perceptions of the effectiveness of

125
the Light Armored Vehicle Training Course driver curriculum, by stating that students

feel unfulfilled with the LAVTC’s driver training curriculum, most specifically with its

practical application.

Theme 5: Highly Standardized Instruction

Eighty percent of participants felt that the LAVTC’s driver curriculum was highly

standardized and left little room for improvisation by the staff. Researchers and

curriculum developers have described the concept of standardized curriculum as

outwardly imposed standards of achievement or student outcomes (Droege, Ferguson,

Lester, Sampson, & Williams, 2001). Standards-based training contains the expectation

that students will perform required assignments at various intervals in their academic

education. The standards are converted into defined lessons (usually organized in

textbooks) and the organization is required to identify and communicate the standards to

the students in the form of common curricular goals, curricular aims, performance

outcomes, and benchmarks (Droege et al., 2001).

Participants noted that the LAVTC’s leadership promoted centrally determined

standardized instructional and administrative practices against the glaring disparity

between students who graduated and students who were competently performing in the

fleet. However, without evidentiary data to substantiate these claims, numerous

participants acknowledge that Marine Corps leaders must have known about the

inadequacies of the course’s driver-training program but acted with minimal intrusion.

Noddings (2013) observed that in some institutions the current emphasis on

curriculum standards contrast with three critical objectives of 21st-century education:

126
collaboration, critical thinking, and originality. The imposition of overly prescriptive

curriculum standards undermines efforts to develop creative environments and outcomes.

Some researchers believe that rather than abandoning current standards, creative

instructors must fulfill their responsibilities as teachers. Furthermore, to stimulate

curriculum creativity, it is important for academic institutions to encourage originality

among teachers and assist them in developing differentiated teaching styles in an

experiential environment.

Instructors and learners not only cooperate, but they also substitute each other’s

knowledge schemas for their own. Students learn from instructors and instructors learn

from students. In addition, students learn by interacting with their old environment.

The relationship between regular education programs and progressive education

movements, such as experiential education, is well documented. Viewpoints in support

of experiential teaching and experiential learning dominate contemporary debates on

education reform and demonstrate how experiential education is theoretically paired with

progressive education.

Furthermore, succeeding a non-standardized experiential education program using

community-service and journey-based programs, research has found that significant

changes can occur in a learner’s beliefs, behaviors, and attitudes (Beightol, Crawford,

Seaman, & Shirilla, 2010). These findings suggest that experiential education programs

are a viable approach to diversifying education in non-standardized settings, e.g.,

teaching the technical skills of LAV driving.

127
Theme 6: Need for an Extended Course

In this study, each participant agreed to an extension of the LAVTC driver’s

course. However, little empirical information exist on the effects of lengthening a course

to satisfy the learning needs of students. The potential positive or negative effects of

broadening the course are unknown. Existing research from advanced and middle-

income nations suggest that although increasing in-course times have noteworthy and

encouraging results on achievement scores. The effects are insignificant in scale (Carr-

Hill, 2010).

The complexity of optimizing the student learning experience involves multiple

dimensions when changes in one phase can have differing effects depending on the

values of the other phases(Mason & Watts, 2012). Due to the lack of rigorous evidence

to support claims involving the connection between course length and student learning,

the proof in this case is mostly respondent-based. Participants’ concerns are perhaps

addressable in ways other than extending the course, which would have cost and

scheduling implications. In an unpublished report from Vietnam, if local schools moved

from partial to full days of over 7 hours, the financing and recurring cost required would

increase40 percent of the current spending and take 11 years to cover (Carr-Hill, 2010).

A published article reported that in 2011 Chicago spent approximately $10

million to fund the school day extension of 50 schools. In support, schools received up to

$150,000 to reimburse staff for the extension. In total, the school district paid $84

million to lengthen the school day. Additional research has shown that for a time

increase of 10 percent, it would be necessary for schools to increase their annual budgets

by 6 to 7 percent. Not including, added monetary resources required for facility

128
maintenance and other utility expenditures, which can be more challenging to forecast

and estimate (Anderson, 2012).

Challengers to the lengthening of courses argue the addition of more time is

simply not sufficient to improve student success. Longer courses do not necessarily

guarantee a higher quality of instruction or learning. Opponents argue that instead of

lengthening courses, organizations should implement alternative educational experiences

separate from the standardized way of teaching and learning. These initiatives may

upturn learner successes without the fiscalcharge of additional time added to a course.

Recommendations for Future Research

Recommendations Based on the Current Study’s Scope

Based on the limitations of the present qualitative descriptive narrative study,

further research is recommended. A pragmatic methodology is recommended to allow

future researchers to use whatever design seems applicable to further the research.

Pragmatism is complementary (Feilzer, 2010) and allows researchers to identify

limitations in other methods, while using their strengths(Brady, Byrne, & Doyle, 2009).

Within pragmatism, researchers can convert qualitative data into quantitative data and

vice versa. In addition, a pragmatic method will allow researchers to evaluate the validity

of their findings in real-world settings (Heurtin-Roberts, Gaglio, Glasgow, & Phillips,

2014).

This study focused only on former Marines who graduated from one Marine

Corps learning institution, the Light Armored Vehicle Training Course, and addresses an

area where there is no previous empirical research. One descriptive narrative study

cannot fully represent the depth of the circumstances surrounding the experiences of past

129
students in the LAV community let alone within other Marine Corps training institutions.

Further research is recommended not only on the LAVTC but also across other

educational components of the Marine Corps. In addition, recommendations for future

studies include varying the sample size, expanding eligibility for the study, and using a

different research design.

Recommendations for Marine Corps Leaders

Arranged on the six themes of this study, recommendations are suggested to

address the heavy use of PowerPoint in the classroom, instructor tempo during lessons,

low instructor motivation, the amount of drive time for students, a review of standardized

instruction, and an investigation of the effects of lengthening the LAVTC’s driver course.

The recommendations also draw from the literature review and the two investigations of

accidental fatalities suffered by Marines who were operating LAVs. Further research is

suggested to bring a depth of understanding in the areas discovered from this study’s data

analysis and literature review.

First, according to Henderson (2007), instructors should use PowerPoint as a

visual aid for presenters and not allow the slideshow to become the presentation itself.

Instructors should be reminded that PowerPoint does not connect the audience to the

information; only a knowledgeable presenter can do that. Henderson (2007)

recommended, “Instead of wasting time designing an overabundance of convoluted and

unnecessary slides, concentrate on using descriptive words, and let the audience's

imagination do the rest of the work” (p.2).

Further research could explore other effects of specific instructional strategies

using different instructional methods. Huong (2012) suggested that teachers should use

130
different methods of teaching and instructional strategies to maximize student

performance and to recognize ways in which students learn best and to develop

instructional methods that align with classroom and student requirements (Huong, 2012).

Second, about instructors who speed through their lessons, leaders at the LAVTC

can apply data collected from researchers such as Yurtbasi (2015), who have

demonstrated an association between instructor speech rates and how students learn.

Students who are new to a course have not yet formed informational schemes of the

knowledge and cannot easily comprehend the material. Therefore, instructors should

communicate to the students at speed commensurate with the students’ understanding and

comfort level. Studies have identified an optimal rate of 130 words a minute, with pauses

at meaningful phrases to check for understanding (Yurtbasi, 2015).

Third, when addressing low instructor morale, leaders at the LAVTC could

encourage a culture of quality instruction by supporting an environment for improved

teacher performance built on instructor motivation. Favorable classroom environments

where teachers are intrinsically motivated to instruct are associated with an effective

academic and institutional culture.

Fourth, meeting and comprehending the needs of the educational organization and

its students requires an understanding of how to allocate time and resources efficiently.

Resource allocation consists of planning and developing a sustainable budget, purchasing

effective training tools and aids, monitoring resource use, and reporting results (Fink,

2003).

Considered in three ways, the concept of the resource-supported curriculum

includes one, time allotted for the instruction of a subject (e.g., how much time should we

131
allocate to LAV driver training versus LAV gunnery training?). Two, personnel

allocations as reflected in and resulting from class size decisions (how many assistant

instructors are required if the average class is 65?). Three, the student handouts and other

learning materials provided for use in the classroom (can the course achieve the desired

goals by using previous handouts, or are new ones needed?) (Boschee & Boschee, 2015).

The traditional methods of education and training at the LAVTC ignore the

prerequisite that students must have a general basis of learning before entering a course.

The current programs and policies that support the standardized curriculum design and

development models are inflexible and thus may no longer be effective. However,

merely modifying the standards of teaching will be inadequate to prepare students for the

difficulty and ambiguity of their assignments upon graduation.

Leaders at the LAVTC must be aware of under-reporting, under-recognizing, and

under-estimating the effectiveness of driver training as an apparent problem, as well as of

the concerns expressed by drivers who believe that driver training at the LAVTC is

inadequate. One important source of information on these problems—now available for

the first time—is the present study’s documentation on student beliefs regarding their

satisfaction with the driver course. Malcolm Knowles suggested that curriculum leaders

and developers should “evaluate the quality of the learning experience and make as

needed adjustments while assessing needs for further learning” (Teal, 2011, p. 2).

Fifth, future research could compare several LAVTC courses delivered in a mixed

modality to investigate the effects of the variables identified in this study, but in a

broader, more diverse range of LAVTC curricula.

132
 Sixth, a course’s program of instruction (POI) specifies the organization,

constructs, subjects, and execution of a course. During the program development phase,

curriculum developers produce POIs using the Marine Corps Training Information

Management System (MCTIMS). For example, the LAVTC’s driver training is a six-

week period of instruction that encompasses 34 individual classes. Similarly, the Marine

Corps’ Amphibious Assault Vehicle School (AAV-S) has a POI of 63 training days and

51 separate classes. POIs are the result of the development of training and readiness

manuals, conferences, and Marine Corps standards. They are what the students see and

interpret as their training.

LAVTC leaders are recommended to convene regular conferences to conduct a

task analysis of course feasibility, including the “systematic process of identifying

specific tasks to be trained, and a detailed analysis of each of those tasks in terms of

frequency, difficulty, and importance” (Training and Education Command, 2004, p. 2-7).

Conferences should also be used to, now, explore the results of this study, set aside

hubristic intolerances, and make changes to the LAV driver program as necessary. In

addition, T&R conference members would discuss the collective and individual training

events taught at the LAVTC so as to maintain proficiency among Marines in the LAV

military occupational specialty. The intent of the T&R conference is to identify and

endorse collective and individual standards of training, set conditions for training,

identify supporting requirements, and to establish testing and assessment criteria

(Training and Education Command, 2011).

Lastly, statements taken from the official death of Lance Corporals Roberts and

Johnston illuminated the need for curriculum changes within the LAVTC. Curriculum

133
developers and LAVTC leaders should familiarize themselves with both incident reports

and determine whether a reevaluation of the school’s driver training program is

necessary.

Researcher Reflection

Researchers may obtain qualitative data information from analyzing open-ended

questions. Open-ended questions are more useful than surveys, which fail to consider or

represent the narrative accounts to the questions (O'Cathain & Thomas, 2004). The intent

of using open-ended questions in this study was to provide awareness, through narrative

description, of the participants’ responses and to identify contexts of importance to

respondents not easily discerned in surveys or close-ended questions (Catherine,

MacKenzie, McGuire, & Waller, 2014).

Although there may be bias disapproval with the use of open-ended

question responses (Burdett, Fear, Greenberg, Jones, & Wessely, 2011), the potential to

obtain a large number of diversified responses to the questions provided this study with

sufficient data. Establishing a valid study requires researchers to suspend any

predeterminations to prevent biased conclusions (Hendry, McLafferty, & Pringle, 2011).

Therefore, the researcher recognized personal expectations and assumptions before the

narrative questions are analyzed.

The absence of academic research, or even theoretically informed investigations,

and the ubiquitous existence of ineffective pragmatism within the LAVTC. The

researcher concludes that significant curriculum redesign, effective leadership

involvement, and an improved instructor cadre is needed to dramatically improve the

quality of driver training at the LAVTC.

134
 Summary

The purpose of this qualitative descriptive narrative study was to collect

participants’ perceptions on the effectiveness of the LAVTC’s driver training program.

Through the examination of a single research question: What are the participants’

perceptions of the effectiveness of the Light Armored Vehicle Training Course driver

curriculum? The findings clearly indicate that the LAVTC’s use of traditional learning

methods and its instructional and assessment procedures are obstructing the graduation of

fully trained and qualified LAV drivers.

The theoretical framework provided the structure of this study and when

combined with its literature review could influence and direct the LAVTC’s leadership in

creating a more efficient and effective course experience. The background of the Marine

Corps’ approach to training and education establishes the foundation for instruction

within all Marine Corps formal schools and courses. Educational objectives create the

base for professional military education (PME) within Marine Corps courses, whereas in

the beginning of a Marine’s career foundational training is the emphasis, with education

governing the later stages. However, no exploratory or experiential guidelines on

curriculum-related procedures, development, implementation, instruction, and assessment

exists outside the Corps use of SAT.

The knowledge gained from this study demonstrates the lack of a connection

between the Marine Corps’ theoretical approaches to training and the outcome of the

driver-training program at the LAVTC. Research findings presented in the literature

review also demonstrated the lack of explicit material on this subject. To fill the void

135
literature findings included topics on curriculum alignment to student achievement,

learner-centered teaching, education taxonomies, and experiential education.

The research sample consisted of 20 former LAVTC students who met the

conditions for admittance into the study. The participants expressed their experiences

with the LATVC’s driver training by answering 10 open-ended interview questions. The

report of the data was included in Chapter 4 – Findings and Interpretations: Theme from

Interviews.

Available data, including the findings described in this study, suggest several

ways in which the LAVTC could increase the likelihood that students who graduate from

the driver’s course can effectively transition to the Fleet Marine Force (FMF) and

become successful active members. Given an equal opportunity to succeed through an

appropriate curriculum structure and delivery, students have the potential to graduate

successfully from the LAVTC and have an immediate influence within their unit by

communicating newer viewpoints and practices that others in the fleet may be unaware of

or may have forgotten (Elliott & Naphan, 2015).

Accountable for the implementation and development of the academic

environment and preparing students for the operating forces begins with the instructors

and staff at the LAVTC. Leaders, curriculum developers, and instructors must consider

all factors that may affect students’ difficulties after graduation to determine what needs

to be changed (Wang, 2011). Curriculum developers and education leaders have found

that evolving into a fully functional learning organization is an essential competency for

improving overall group performance (Weldy& Gills, 2010).

136
 References

Adler, J. (2012). Living into the story: Agency and coherence in a longitudinal study of

narrative identity development and mental health over the course of

psychotherapy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(2), 367-389.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0025289

Alford, J., & Bango, A. (2015). Command Investigation into the Circumstances

Surrounding The Death of LCpl. Steven Szymanski. Camp Lejeune, NC:

Commanding General, 2d Marine Division.

Allen, C. (2010). Redress of professional military education. Joint Forces Quarterly,

59(4), 1-8.

Allen, J., Frey, B., & Schmitt, V. (2012). Defining authentic classroom assessment.

Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 17(2), 2. Retrieved from

http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=17&n=2

Anderson, A. (2012). Making Longer School Day Happen May Have a Budget-Busting

Price Tag. New York: New York Times. Retrieved from

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/us/looking-at-outlay-and-district-budget-

cuts-for-a-longer-chicago-school-day.html?_r=1

Anderson, C. (2010). Presenting and evaluating qualitative research. American Journal of

Pharmaceutical Education, 74(8), 141. Retrieved from

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2987281/

Assemi, A., & Sheikhzade, M. (2013). Intended, implemented and experiential null

curriculum. Life Science Journal, 10(1), 82-85. Retrieved from SSN:1097-8135.

137
Baltar, F., & Brunet, I. (2012). Social research 2.0: Virtual snowball sampling method

using facebook. Internet Research, 22(1), 57-74. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/

10662241211199960

Bastos, F., Boni, R., Pechansky, F., Silva, L., & Vasconcellos, T. (2012). Reaching the

hard-to-reach: A probability sampling method for assessing prevalence of driving

under the influence after drinking in alcohol outlets. PLoS One, 7(4), 3-5.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0034104

Bauman, A., Redman, S., & Milat, A. (2015). A narrative review of research impact

assessment models and methods. Health Research Policy and Systems, 13(18).

doi:10.1186/s12961-015-0003-1

Bautum, L., Stan, S., & Zodieru, A. (2015). The role of romanian universities in

increasing graduates' employability. curriculum management and development of

competences required by the labor market. Management Dynamics in the

Knowledge Economy, 3(3), 431-446. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/1722415516?accountid=35812

Beck, C., & Beck, C. (2012). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for

nursing practice. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins.

Beightol, J., Crawford, B., Seaman, J., & Shirilla, P. (2010). Contact theory as a

framework for experiential activities as diversity education: An exploratory study.

Journal of Experiential Education, 32(3), 207-225.

doi:10.1177/105382590903200303

138
Bennett, A., & Elman, C. (2007). Case study methods in the international relations

subfield. Comparative Political Studies, 40(2), 170-195. Retrieved from

http://cps.sagepub.com/content/40/2/170

Bergin, M. (2011). NVivo 8 and consistency in data analysis: Reflecting on the use of a

qualitative data analysis program. Nurse Researcher, 18, 6-12. Retrieved from

http://www.qdatraining.eu/publications/Michael_Bergin-Vivo_8_and_consistency

_in_data.pdf

Biggs, J. (2014). Constructive alignment in university teaching. HERDSA Review of

Higher Education, 1(5), 5-22.

Bjork, R., McDaniel, M., Pashler, H., & Rohrer, D. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts

and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest,, 9(3), 105-119.

doi:10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x

Bloom, B. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Book 1 Cognitive Domain. New

York: Longman, Inc.

Boluijt, H., Brouwers, A., & Tomic, W. (2011). demands, job control, social support and

self-efficacy beliefs as determinants of burnout among physical education

teachers. Europe's Journal of Psychology, 7(1), 17-39. doi:http://dx.doi.org/

10.1037/e676132011-004

Boschee, B., Boschee, F., Glatthorn, A., & Whitehead, B. (2015). Curriculum

Leadership. Washington, D.C.: Sage. doi:9781483347387

Bowen, G. (2005). Preparing a qualitative research-based dissertation: Lessons learned.

Qualitative Report, 10(2), 208-222. Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/

QR/QR10-2/bowen.pdf

139
Brady, A., Byrne, G., & Doyle, L. (2009). An overview of mixed methods research.

Journal of Research in Nursing, 4(2), 175-185. doi:10.1177/1744987108093962

Bredmar, K. (2013). Asking the right question - the craft of formulating a purpose and an

aim for a research paper. Journal of Business and Social Science, 4(2), 21-28.

Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1321484848

?accountid=35812

Brightman, H., & Dewey, M. (2014). Trends in Modern War Gaming. Newport, RI:

Nacal War College.

Brod, M., Christensen, T., & Tesler, L. (2009). Qualitative research and content validity:

Developing best practices based on science and experience. Quality of Life

Research, 18(9), 1263-1278. doi:10.1007/s11136-009-9540-9

Brooks, B., Bowles, M., Ghosh, S., & Ranmuthugala, D. (2016). Authentic assessment in

seafarer education: using literature review to investigate its validity and reliability

through rubrics. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 15(2), 317-336.

doi:doi:10.1007/s13437-015-0094-0

Browning, L., & Kee, K. (2013). Recruiting for and conducting qualitative telephone

interviews to study dispersed groups, virtual organizations, and distributed

communities. National Communication Association annual conference, (pp. 1-

30). Washington, D.C.

Burdett, H., Fear, N., Greenberg, N., Jones, N., & Wessely, S. (2011). Early psychosocial

intervention following operational deployment: analysis of a free text

questionnaire response. Military medicine, 176(6), 620-625.

140
Burts, D., DiCarlo, C., Gioe, C., Laird, R., & Ota, C. (2006). Training and the needs of

adult learners. Journal of Extension, 44(6), 1-4. Retrieved from

http://www.joe.org/joe/2006december/tt5.php

Campbell, D. (2000). Authentic assessments and authentic standards. Phi Delta Kappan,,

81, 405.

Carr-Hill, R. (2010). Cost Effectiveness of Moving from Half Day to Full Day Schooling.

London, UK: Unpublished.

Catherine, R., MacKenzie, A., McGuire, A., & Waller, M. (2014). Spouses of military

members' experiences and insights: Qualitative analysis of responses to an open-

ended question in a survey of health and wellbeing. PLoS One, 9(12), 1-4.

Retrieved from e114755. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0114755

Chapman, D., Uggerslev, K., & Webster, J. (2003). Applicant reactions to face-to-face

and technology-mediated interviews: A field investigation. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 88(5), 944-953. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.944

Charles, V., Crow, W., & Wiles, R. (2008). The management of confidentiality and

anonymity in social research. International Journal of Social Research

Methodology, 11(5), 417-428. Retrieved July 31, 2014, from

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13645570701622231#.

VOp3CywtHIU

Chiarelli, P., & Michaelis, R. (2005). The requirement for full-spectrum operations.

Military Review, 85(4), 4-17. Retrieved from http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/

awcgate/milreview/chiarelli.pdf

141
Clapper, T. (2010). Beyond Knowles: What those conducting simulation need to know

about adult learning theory. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 6(1), 7-14.

doi:doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2009.07.003

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (2nd ed.).

New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.

Colella, A., Hitt, M., & Miller, C. (2005). Organizational Behavior: A Strategic

Approach. New York City, New York: Wiley.

Cooper, D., & Schindler, P. (2003). Business Research Methods (11th ed.). New York

City, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Cope, D. (2014). Methods and Meanings: Credibility and Trustworthiness of Qualitative

Research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(1), 89-91.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research (3 ed.). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

Crabtree, B., & Dicicco-Bloom, B. (2006). The qualitative research interview. Medical

Education, 40(4), 314-321. Retrieved from http://www.hu.liu.se/cf/

larc/utbildning-information/scientific-methodology/course-literature-and-

links/1.253566/qual20interview.pdf

Creswell, J. (2005). Educational research design: Planning, conducting, and evaluating

quantitative and qualitative research (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Creswell, J. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five

traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

142
Cutrer, D., Robert, R., & Ramsay, J. (2010). Development of an outcomes-based

undergraduate curriculum in homeland security. Homeland Security Affairs, 6(2),

1-21. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.contentproxy.phoenix.edu

/docview/1266215237?accountid=35812

D'Angelo, J., & Woosley, S. (2007). Technology in the classroom: Friend or foe.

Education, 127(4), 462-471.

Delgado, M. (2015). An Emergent Model of the Current State of Leadership Preparation

and Development of New Head Teachers for Primary Schools in Mexico. The

European Conference on Education, (pp. 635-648). University of Ciudad Juarez,

Mexico.

Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (2003). The landscape of qualitative research: Theories and

issues (Vol. 2). London, UK: Sage.

Department of the Navy. (2013). Military Occupational Specialties Manual, MCO

1200.17E. Washington, D.C.: Department of the Navy.

Diehl, D., Guion, L., & McDonald, D. (2011). Triangulation: Establishing the validity of

qualitative studies. Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597-607. Retrieved January 16, 2015,

from http://www.ie.ufrj.br/hpp/intranet/pdfs/texto_7_-_aulas_6_e_7.pdf

Dixon, A., Hardin, T., McConnell, J., & Yssel, N. (2014). Differentiated instruction,

professional development, and teacher efficacy. Journal for the Education of the

Gifted, 37(2), 111-127. doi:10.1177/0162353214529042

Dopson, S., & Fitzgerald, L. (2009). Comparative case study designs: Their Utility and

Development in Organizational Research. In A. Bryman, & D. Buchanan, The

143
 Sage Handbook of Organizational Research Methods (pp. 465-483). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage.

Downs, D., & Murtazashvili, I. (2012). Arms and the University: Military Presence and

the Civic Education of Non-Military Students. New York City, NY: Cambridge

University Press.

Draugalis, J., & Slack, M. (2001). Establishing the internal and external validity of

experimental studies. American Journal of Health System Pharmacy, 58(22),

2182-3.

Droege, D., Ferguson, D., Lester, J., Sampson , N., & Williams, J. (2001). Designing

personalized learning for every student. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Retrieved from

http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED458718

Dyer, J., & Schaefer, P. (2012). Bridging the gap between adaptive training research and

Army practice. Military Psychology, 24(2), 194-219. Retrieved from

http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&id=2012-

10968-007

Eddy, P. (2013). Wikis as Platforms for Authentic Assessment. Innovative Higher

Education, 38(4), 253-265.

Elliott, M., & Naphan, D. (2015). Role exit from the military: Student veterans'

perceptions of transitioning from the U.S. military to higher education. The

Qualitative Report, 20(2), 36-48. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com

/docview/1677848280?accountid=35812

144
Englander, M. (2012). Interview: Data collection in descriptive phenomenological human

scientific research. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 43(1), 13-35.

doi:10.1163/156916212X632943

English, F. (1987). It's Time to Abolish Conventional Curriculum Guides. Educational

Leadership, 44(4), 50-52.

Farrell, T. (2010). Improving in war: military adaptation and the British in Helmand

Province, Afghanistan, 2006–2009. The Journal of Strategic Studies, 33(4), 567-

594.

Feilzer, M. (2010). Doing Mixed Methods Research Pragmatically: Implications for the

Rediscovery of Pragmatism as a Research Paradigm. Journal of Mixed Methods

Research, 4(1), 6-16. doi:10.1177/1558689809349691

Ferren, M. (2013). Army and Marine Corps Training: Better Performance and Cost Data

Needed to More Filly Assess Simulated-Based Efforts. Washington, D.C.: United

States Government Accountability Office.

Fink, D. (2003). Creating Significant Learning Experiences: An Integrated Approach to

Designing College Courses. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Fitzgerald, K. (2011). Army-Marine Corps Logistics IntegrationIs Current Doctrine,

Training and Education Sufficient to Develop Joint Logisticians? Quantico:

Marine Corps Command and Staff College. Retrieved from Marine Corps

Lessons Learned

Flynn, G. (2009). Employment of the Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion.

Washington, DC: Marine Corps Central Printing and Publishing Management

145
 Organization (MCCPPMO). Retrieved from the Marine Corps Publications

Electronic Library (MCPEL)

Flynn, G. (2011). Management of Marine Corps Formal Schools and Training

Detachments. Washington, D.C.: Headquarters United States Marine Corps.

Retrieved from http://www.t3s.marines.mil/Portals/64/MCO_1553.2B.pdf

Fontana, A., & Prokos, A. (2007). The interview: From formal to postmodern. Walnut

Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.

Forsling, C. (2014, December 29). The Real Reason For The Poor State Of Military

Morale. Task & Purpose, p. 1. Retrieved from http://taskandpurpose.com/real-

reason-poor-state-military-morale/

Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the century. New

York, New York: Basic Books.

Gerring, J. (2007). Case study research: Principles and practices. Cambridge, UK:

Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from http://www.kenbenoit.net

/courses/principles/Gerring_Case_Study_Research_Ch5.pdf

Gomes, L. (2007). PowerPoint turns 20, as its creators ponder A dark side to success.

Wall Street Journal, 1-3. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview

/399005621?accountid=35812

Grant, C., & Osanloo, A. (2011). Understanding, selecting, and integrating a theoretical

framework in dissertation research: Creating the blueprint for your "house".

Adminstrative Issues Journal, 4(2), 1-15. doi:10.5929/2014.4.2.9

146
Gratton, M., & O'Donnell, S. (2011). Communication technologies for focus groups with

remote communities: A case study of research with First Nations in Canada.

Qualitative Research, 11(2), 159-175.

Green, J., & Thorogood, N. (2009). Qualitative methods for health research. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage.

Greenberg, N., Gibbs, T., Matthew, G., Sawford, H., & Wessely, S. (2015). What Are the

Psychological Effects of Delivering and Receiving “High-Risk” Survival

Resistance Training. Military medicine, 180(2), 168-177. Retrieved from

http://www.kcl.ac.uk/kcmhr/publications/assetfiles/2015/Matthew2015.pdf

Griffin, P., Kocher, C., & Stocker, D. (2011). Evaluating the knowledge and use of web

2.0 technology among criminal justice students at two-year and graduate level

institutions of higher learning. Sociological Viewpoints, 27(1), 76-93. Retrieved

from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1009906585?accountid=35812

Grossman, S., Herrerll, R., Kok, B., West, J., & Wilk, J. (2015). Prevalence of

Professional Burnout Among Military Mental Health Service Providers.

Psychiatric Services, 67(1), 137-140. Retrieved from http://ps.psychiatryonline

.org/doi/abs/10.1176/appi.ps.201400430

Hall, T. (2002). Differentiated instruction. Wakefield, MA: National Center on.

Halverson, A., & Neary, T. (2001). Building inclusive schools: Tools and strategies for

success. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Harden, R. (2008). Death by PowerPoint–the need for a ‘fidget index’. Medical teacher,

9(10), 833-835.

147
Harris, C. (2013). Army Educational Process. Fort Eustis, Virginia: Training and

Doctrine Command.

Harvey, W. (2011). Strategies for conducting elite interviews. Qualitative Research,

11(4), 431-441.

Henderson, J. (2007). Stop the boring PowerPoint presentations. Machine Design, 79(13),

54 - 58. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/217192674?

accountid=35812

Hendry, C., McLafferty, E., & Pringle, J. (2011). Phenomenological approaches:

Challenges and choices. Nurse Researcher, 18(2), 7-18. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/851577978?accountid=35812

Heurtin-Roberts, S., Gaglio, B., Glasgow, R., & Phillips, S. (2014). How pragmatic is it?

lessons learned using PRECIS and RE-AIM for determining pragmatic

characteristics of research. Implementation Science, 96(1), 9.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-014-0096-x

Holt, A. (2010). Using the telephone for narrative interviewing: A research note.

Qualitative Research, 10(1), 113-121.

Hora, M., & Oleson, A. (2014). Teaching the way they were taught? Revisiting the

sources of teaching knowledge and the role of prior experience in shaping faculty

teaching practices. Higher Education, 68(1), 29-45. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007

/s10734-013-9678-9

HQMC. (2011). 3500.110. Washington, D.C.: Department of the Navy.

Hull, I. (2005). Absolute Destruction: Military Culture and Practices of War in Imperial

Germany. Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP.

148
Huong, P. (2012). Differentiated instruction and the need to integrate teaching and

practice. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 9(1), 13. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/1418716123?accountid=35812

Jacob, S., & Furgerson, P. (2012). Writing Interview Protocols and Conducting

Interviews: Tips for Students New to the Field of Qualitative Research. The

Qualitative Report, 17(42), 1-10.

Jebson, S., & Moses, A. (2012). Relationship between learning resources and student's

academic achievement in science subjects in Taraba state senior secondary

schools. Ife Psychologia, 20(1), 87-102. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/929077639?accountid=35812

Johnson-Freese, J. (2012). The Reform of Military Education: Twenty-Five Years Later.

Philadelphia,PA: Foreign Policy Research Institute. Retrieved from

file:///C:/Users/MarinePC/Downloads/ADA570086.pdf

Kelley, K., & Johnson-Freese, J. (2013). Rethinking Professional Military Education.

Philadelphia, PA: Foreign Policy Research Institute.

Kenner, C., & Weinerman, J. (2011). Adult learning theory: Applications to non-

traditional college students. ournal of College Reading and Learning, 41(2), 87-

96.

Kimberlin, C., & Winterstein, G. (2008). Validity and reliability of measurement

instruments. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 65, 2276-2284.

Retrieved from http://www.ajhepworth.yolasite.com/resources/9817-

Reliabillity%20and%20validity.pdf

149
Knowles, M. (1990). The adult learner: A neglected species. Houston, TX: Gulf

Publishing.

Koch, T. (2006). Establishing rigour in qualitative research: The decision trail. Journal of

Advanced Nursing, 53(1), 91-100.

Krauss, S., & Peredaryenko, M. (2013). Calibrating the human instrument:

Understanding the interviewing experience of novice qualitative researchers.

Qualitative Report, 18(43), 1-17. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/1505320978?accountid=35812

Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research. Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

Laing, P. (2011). LAR: More Than Just a System, It is a Mindset. Quantico, VA: USMC

Command and Staff College. Retrieved from www.dtic.mil/cgi-

bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA600770

Lakshmi, S., & Mohideen, M. (2013). Issues in reliability and validity of research.

International Journal of Management Research and Reviews, 3(4), 2752-2758.

Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1415612380

?accountid=35812

Lang, S. (2003). Narrative: The under-rated skill. Teaching History, 110(1), 8-17.

Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/213325037?accountid=35812

Laurence, J. (2011). Military leadership and the complexity of combat and culture.

Military Psychology, 23(5), 489-501. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/index.

cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&id=2012-32017-004

150
Lawrence, J., & Tar, U. (2013). The use of grounded theory technique as a practical tool

for qualitative data collection and analysis. Electronic Journal of Business

Research Methods, 11(1), 29-40. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com

/docview/1460386269?accountid=35812

Lawrence-Brown, D. (2004). Differentiated instruction: Inclusive strategies for

standards-based learning that benefit the whole class. American Secondary

Education, 32(3), 34-62. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/195190361?accountid=35812

Leedy, P., & Ormrod, J. (2011). Practical Research: Planning and Design. NYC: Merril.

Light Armored Reconnaissance Training Company. (2016, June 6). Mission. Retrieved

from Advanced Infantry Training Battalion:

http://www.trngcmd.marines.mil/Units/West/SOI-W/Advanced-Infantry-

Training-Battalion/Light-Armored-Reconnaissance-Training-Company/

Little, C., McCoach, D., & Reis, S. (2014). Effects of differentiated reading instruction

on student achievement in middle school. Journal of Advanced Academics, 26(2),

382-402. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1627082454

?accountid=35812

Lotrecchiano, G., & Ekmekci, O. (2014). Collaboration Science and Translational

Medicine. Journal of Translational Medicine & Epidemiology, 2(2), 1029.

Lunenburg, F. (2011). Theorizing about curriculum: Conceptions and definitions.

International Journal of Scholarly Academic Intellectual Diversity, 13, 1-6.

Retrieved from http://www.nationalforum.com/Electronic%20Journal

151
 %20Volumes/Lunenburg,%20Fred%20C.%20Theorizing%20about%20Curriculu

m%20%20IJSAID%20V13%20N1%202011.pdf

MacKenzie, S., Podsakoff, N., & Podsakoff, P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social

science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of

Psychology, 63, 539-569. Retrieved from 10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452

Mackey, A., & Gass, S. (2005). Second language research: Methodology and design.

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Retrieved from http://npu.edu.ua/!e-

book/book/djvu/A/iif_kgpm_Mackey_Second%20Language%20Methodology%2

0and%20Design..pdf

MacQueen, B. (2013). Mission Impossible: Maximum Learning in Minimum Time.

Conference for Industry and Education Collaboration (pp. 1-4). British

Columbia: American Society for Engineering Education.

Magilvy, J., & Thomas, E. (2011). Qualitative rigor or research validity in qualitative

research. Journal for Specialists in Pediatric Nursing, 16(2), 151-155.

doi:10.1111/j.1744-6155.2011.00283.x

Mann, L., & Willis, S. (2000, November). Differentiating Instruction: Finding

manageable ways to meet individual needs. Retrieved from

http://www.ascd.org/publications/curriculum-update/winter2000/Differentiating-

Instruction.aspx

Marrocco, G. (2014). Fostering significant learning in graduate nursing education.

Journal of Nursing Education, 53(3), 177-179. doi:doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3928

/01484834-20140223-02

152
Marshall, P. (2003). Human subjects protections, institutional review boards, and cultural

anthropological research. Anthropological Quarterly, 76(2), 269-283. Retrieved

from http://xtf.grainger.illinois.edu:8080/xtfEthics/data/gunsalus

/Anthro_Quarterly_final_Huma/Anthro_Quarterly_final_Huma.pdf

Mascolo, M. (2009). Beyond student-centered and teacher-centered pedagogy: Teaching

and learning as guided participation. Pedagogy and the human sciences, 1(1), 3-

27.

Mason, M. (2010). Sample size and saturation in Ph.D studies using qualitative

interviews. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 11(3), 1-19. Retrieved from

http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/viewArticle/1428

Mason, W., & Watts, D. (2012). Collaborative learning in networks. Proceedings of the

National Academy of Sciences, 109(3), 764-769. Retrieved from

http://www.pnas.org/content/109/3/764.full

McCallum, C. (2008). A process of curriculum development: Meeting the needs of a

community and a professional physical therapist education program. Journal of

Physical Therapy Education, 22(2), 18-28. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/853890028?accountid=35812

McNeary, K., Snell, T., & Lederhaus, K. (2014). Core Function B. Illinois: Review of the

Literature to Support the Core Functions and Indicators. Retrieved from

https://www.illinoiscsi.org/researchandresources/Documents/CFI_B_Learning_or

_Instructional_Infrastructure.pdf

Mertens, D. (2005). Research methods in education and psychology: Integrating diversity

with quantitative and qualitative approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

153
Mitchell, M. (2013). ENTHUSIASM: Seeking student learning and avoiding apathy.

Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 84(6), 19-24. Retrieved

from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1431431772?accountid=35812

Mollerup, P. (2014). Slide presentations, seriously. Visible Language, 48(1), 5-21.

Retrieved from Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/

1547940100?accountid=35812

Moranville, A., & Paulson, D. (1989). Training Requirements Analysis: Light Armored

Vehicle 25 (LAV-25) Training for Officers and Staff Non-Commissioned Officers

in Maintenance, Driving, and Gunnery. San Diego: Navy Personnel Research and

Development Center. Retrieved from http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=

getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA240452

Murray, M. (2015). Narrative psychology. In Qualitative Psychology: A Practical Guide

to Research Method. London: Sage.

Murray, T. (2013). Military occupational specilaities manual. Washington, D.C.:

Headquaters Marine Corps. Retrieved from

http://www.marines.mil/Portals/59/Publications/MCO%205215.1K.pdf

Nakonieczny, M. (2010). The Need For and Benefits of the Creation of the Light

Armored Reconnaissance Regiment. Quantico, VA: USMC Command and Staff

College. Retrieved from http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadata

Prefix=html&identifier=ADA603018

Nassaji, H. (2015). Qualitative and descriptive research: Data type versus data analysis.

Language Teaching Research, 19(2), 129-132. doi:10.1177/1362168815572747

154
Neuman, W. (2006). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches.

Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Niehaus, L., Taylor, T., & Turgeon, B. (2014). Contrasts and class talk: A critical

discourse analysis of welfare-to-work program managers. Discourse & Society,

25(5), 656-671. doi:10.1177/0957926514536827

Noddings, N. (2013). Standardized curriculum and loss of creativity. Theory into

practice, 52(3), 210-215.

Novick, G. (2008). Is There a Bias Against Telephone Interviews in qualitative research.

Research in Nursing and Health, 31(4), 391-398. doi:10.1002/nur.20259

Noy, C. (2008). Sampling knowledge: The hermeneutics of snowball sampling in

qualitative research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology,

11(4), 327-344. doi:10.1080/13645570701401305

O'Cathain, A., & Thomas, K. (2004). Any other comments?" Open questions on

questionnaires–a bane or a bonus to research? BMC medical research

methodology, 4(1), 1.

O'Donnell, E., & O'Donnell, L. (2015). Technology-Enhanced Learning: Towards

Providing Supports for PhD Students and Researchers in Higher Education. In V.

Wang, Handbook of Research on Scholarly Publishing and Research Methods

(pp. 231-251). Hershey, PA. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-7409-7.ch012

Pascal, J. (2010). Phenomenology as a research method for social work contexts:

Understanding the lived experience of cancer survival. Currents: Scholarship in

the Human Services, 9(2), 1-23. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com

/docview/1431991079?accountid=35812

155
Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage.

Peterson, E. (2009, February 21). Learning how to control your fast rate of speech.

Retrieved from http://www.articlesbase.com/self-improvement-articles/learning-

how-to-control-yourfast-rate-of-speech-783892.html

Poggenpoel, M., & Myburgh, C. (2005). Obstacles in qualitative research: Possible

solutions. Education, 126(2), 304-311. Retrieved from

http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ765679

Pollock, K. (2012). Procedure versus process: Ethical paradigms and the conduct of

qualitative research. BMC Medical Ethics, 13(25), 1-10. doi:10.1186/1472-6939-

13-25

Pope. (2012). An Intergrated Approach to Military Science Course Design. West Point:

Unired States MIlitary Academy. Retrieved from http://www.usma.edu/cfe

/literature/pope_12.pdf

Pratt, G. (1996). Activity-based costing and Marine Corps Formal Schools budgeting.

Monterey, CA: Naval Postgraduate School. Retrieved from

http://calhoun.nps.edu/bitstream/handle/10945/32033/96Dec_

Pratt.pdf?sequence=1

Prince, M., & Felder, R. (2006). Inductive teaching and learning methods: Definitions,

comparisons, and research bases. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 123-

138. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2006.tb00884

156
Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (2014). Qualitative variation in constructive alignment in

curriculum design. Higher Education, 67, 141-154. doi:10.1007/s10734-013-

9701-1

Reardon, C. (2008). View from the ranks: Social and cultural history of the American

armed forces. Magazine of History, 22(4), 11-16. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/213724692?accountid=35812

Reeves, T. (2006). "How do you know they are learning? The importance of alignment in

higher education. International Journal of Learning Technology, 2(4), 294-309.

doi:10.1504/IJLT.2006.011336

Rhodes, T. (2011). Making learning visible and meaningful through electronic portfolios.

Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 43(1), 6-13.

Rosenshine, B. (2012). Principles of instruction: Research-based strategies that all

teachers should know. American Educator, 36(12), 1-9. Retrieved from

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ971753.pdf

Rotherham, A., & Willingham, D. (2009). 21st century skills: The challenges ahead.

Educational Leaderhsip, 67(1), 16-21.

Rubin, B., & Sutriyantono, A. (2013). The relationship between teacher professional

attitudes, work motivation, along with organizational culture towards teacher

performance. Indian Journal of Positive Psychology, 4(4), 571-574. Retrieved

from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1614019895?accountid=35812

Sandelowski, M. (1986). The problem of rigor in qualitative research. Advances in

Nursing Science, 8(3), 27-37.

157
Scalise, K., & Wilson, M. (2011). The nature of assessment systems to support effective

use of evidence through technology. E-Learning and Digital Media,, 8, 121-132.

School of Infantry. (2013, 11 22). Advanxe Infantry Training. Retrieved from Light

Armored Vehicle Training Company: www.tecom.marines.mil/soiwest/Units/

AdvancedInfantryTrainingBattalion/LightArmoredVehicleTrainingCompany.aspx

Simon, M. (2011). The role of the researcher. Retrieved August 20, 2014, from

http://dissertationrecipes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Role-of-the-

Researcher.pdf.

Skills. (2010). Military Training: Actions Needed to Further Improve the Consistency of

Combat Skills Training Provided to Army and Marine Corps Support Forces.

Washingtong, D.C: United States Government Accountability Office. Retrieved

from http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a518886.pdf

Smyth, R. (2006). Exploring congruence between Habermasian philosophy, mixed

method research, and managing data using NVivo. International Journal of

Qualitative Methods, 5(2), 1-11. Retrieved from https://ejournals.library.

ualberta.ca/index.php/IJQM/article/viewArticle/4395

Squires, D. (2012). Curriculum alignment research suggests that alignment can improve

student achievement. Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues

and Ideas, 85(4), 129-135. doi:10.1080/00098655.2012.657723

Stein, K. (2013, February). A qualitative narrative phenomenological study: Parental

perceptions in choosing online educational classes for gifted children. Retrieved

from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1419426947?accountid=35812.

(1419426947).

158
Stenbacka, C. (2001). Qualitative research requires quality concepts of its own.

Management Decision, 39(7), 551-555. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/212056937?accountid=35812

Szabo, S. (2006). KWHHL: A student-driven evolution of the KWL. American

Secondary, 34(3), 57-6. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/41064583

Taras, M. (2010). Student self-assessment: Processes and consequences. Teaching in

Higher Education, 15, 199-209.

TEAL. (2011, May 17). Adult learning theories. Retrieved from Teaching Excellence in

Adult Literacy: https://teal.ed.gov/sites/default/files/Fact-

Sheets/11_%20TEAL_Adult_Learning_Theory.pdf

Tevis, R. (2010). Creating the future: goal-oriented scenario planning. Futures, 42(4),

337-344.

Tomlinson, C. (2000). Reconcilable Differences? Standards-Based Teaching and

Differentiation. Educational Leadership, 58(1), 6-11. Retrieved from

http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational_leadership/sept00/vol58/

num01/Reconcilable_Differences%C2%A2_Standards-Based_Teaching

_and_Differentiation.aspx

Training and Education Command. (2004). Systems approach to training. Quantico, VA:

Marine Corps Combat Development Command. Retrieved from

http://www.mcu.usmc.mil/lleadership/LLI%20site%20documents/LDDS/

SAT_Manual.pdf

159
Training and Education Command. (2011). Management of Marine Corps Formal

Schools and Training Detachments. Retrieved from

http://www.t3s.marines.mil/Portals/64/MCO_1553.2B.pdf

Tufte, E. (2003). The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.

U.S. Army. (2011). Marines to upgrade armored vehicle training systems. Taining &

Simulation Journal, 1, 1. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/874911585?accountid=35812

U.S. Defense Department Comptroller. (2016). United States Department of Defense

Fiscal Year 2016 Budget Request. Washington, D.C.: Officer of the Under

Secretary of Defense. Retrieved from http://comptroller.defense.gov/

Portals/45/Documents/defbudget/fy2016/FY2016_Budget_Request

_Overview_Book.pdf

U.S. Department of Defense. (2015). Estimated Impacts of Sequester-Level Funding:

United States Department of Defense Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Request.

Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://index.heritage.org/military/2015

/chapter/us-power/us-marine-corps/#footnote_3_10

Vandergriff, D. (2006). From Swift to Swiss: Tactical decision games and their place in

military education and performance improvement. Performance Improvement,

45(2), 30-39. doi:10.1002/pfi.2006.4930450207

Wang, T. (2011). Critical perspective on changes in educational leadership practice.

Front Education China, 6(3), 404-425. doi:10.1007/s11516-011-0139-x.

160
Weldy, T., & Gills, W. (2010). The learning organization: variations at different

organizational levels. The Learning Organization, 17(5), 455-470.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09696471011059831

Whitlock, B., & Nanavati, J. (2013). A systematic approach to performative and authentic

assessment. Reference Services Review, 41(1), 32-48.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00907321311300866

Wilmot, A. (2005). Designing sampling strategies for qualitative social research: with

particular reference to the Office for National Statistics' Qualitative Respondent

Register. Survey Methodology Bulletin Office for National Statistics, 53, 56.

Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage.

Yurtbasi, M. (2015). Why should speech rate (tempo) be integrated into pronunciation

teaching curriculum. Journal of Education and Future, 8, 85-101. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/1764087742?accountid=35812

161
 Appendix A

Introductory Letter to Participants

162
 Appendix B

INFORMED CONSENT: PARTICIPANTS 18 YEARS OF AGE AND OLDER

163
164
 Appendix C

Phone Interview Questions

1. Describe the driver training activities at the Light Armored Vehicle Training

Company.

2. How do you characterize quality training? Explain.

3. Have you had to adjust what you were taught at the LAVTC in order to adapt to your

operational unit? Explain.

4. Has there been any MOS training since graduating from the LAVTC? Follow-up: If

so, how has this training differed from what you had received at the LAVTC?

5. If you could change anything about your training at LAVTC, what would you

change?

6. Explain your view of LAVTC’s driver training program.

7. How do you feel that the instructors at the LAVTC instructed the drivertraining

course?

8. How do you think the LAVTC believes its driver curriculum is doing?

9. How much of your driver training was hands-on or experiential, and can you describe

this?

10. Do you have any final comments?

165