Maritime education and training in the COVID-19 era and beyond

• Autorzy: Renganayagalu S. K. , Mallam S. C. , Hernes M.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.12716/1001.16.01.06

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The rapid global spread of COVID–19 has created numerous challenges for educational organizations of all levels around the world. Maritime Education and Training (MET) institutions are no exception and have faced major disruptions from the pandemic. Differing technological and organizational solutions have had to be quickly adapted in short timeframes in order to fill gaps and ensure continued teaching and learning. Although online education is nothing new, COVID-19 has accelerated the necessity for distributed learning, digital tools and infrastructure needed to not only cope, but excel in the restructuring of MET. In this article we present our experiences from the blended course offered to maritime bachelor students at our university in Norway through a case study. The findings from the study have revealed that although blended learning has helped continued education during the pandemic, it still has to overcome general as well as MET specific challenges to be successful in future. Considering the impact and challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic on MET, we further discuss the short-term responses and possible long-term solutions that can contribute to uninterrupted, high-quality learning for future MET. The use of emerging technologies for education, such as virtual reality (VR) and web-based training simulators, are likely to play an essential role in the future direction of MET.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Maritime Education and Training; virtual reality; COVID-19 Pandemic; MET; high-quality learning; COVID-19

• Wydawca: Faculty of Navigation, Gdynia Maritime University
• Czasopismo: TransNav : International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation
• Rocznik: 2022
• Tom: Vol. 16 No. 1
• Strony: 59--69
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 50 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Renganayagalu S. K.

• University of South-Eastern Norway, Borre, Norway
• 2 Institute for Energy Technology, Halden, Norway

autor

Mallam S. C.

• University of South-Eastern Norway, Borre, Norway

autor

Hernes M.

• University of South-Eastern Norway, Borre, Norway

Bibliografia

• 1. Anderson, J.R.: Acquisition of cognitive skill. Psychological Review. 89, 4, 369–406 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.89.4.369.
• 2. Atkinson, S.P.: Adaptive Learning and Learning Analytics: a new learning design paradigm. BPP Working Papers. (2015).
• 3. Bertram, V., Plowman, T.: Digital training solutions in the maritime context: Options and costs. Maritime Technology and Research. 2, 2, 52–68 (2020). https://doi.org/10.33175/mtr.2020.190782.
• 4. Biggs, J., Tang, C.: Teaching for Quality Learning at University. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education (2011).
• 5. Brown, M. et al.: 2020 Educause Horizon Report Teaching and Learning Edition. EDUCAUSE (2020).
• 6. Chen, X. et al.: The Application of E-learning in Maritime Education and Training in China. TransNav, the International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation. 11, 2, 349–354 (2017). https://doi.org/10.12716/1001.11.02.19.
• 7. Costa, N. et al.: Testing Proof of Concept of a Web-Based Ship Manoeuvring Training Tool in the Classroom. In: Proceedings of Ergoship. (2019).
• 8. Dalgarno, B., Lee, M.J.W.: What are the learning affordances of 3-D virtual environments? British Journal of Educational Technology. 41, 1, 10–32 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01038.x.
• 9. Damşa, C. et al.: Quality in Norwegian Higher Education: A review of research on aspects affecting student learning. NIFU (2015).
• 10. Fossland, T.: Moving beyond learning in net-based higher education? In: Fossland, T. et al. (eds.) Academic Bildung in Net-based Higher Education. Routledge, London (2015).
• 11. Foster, I. et al.: Cloud Computing and Grid Computing 360-Degree Compared. In: 2008 Grid Computing Environments Workshop. pp. 1–10 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1109/GCE.2008.4738445.
• 12. Freina, L., Ott, M.: A Literature Review on Immersive Virtual Reality in Education: State Of The Art and Perspectives. Presented at the eLearning and Software for Education (eLSE) , Bucharest (Romania) April 1 (2015).
• 13. Garrick, R. et al.: Creating Technology Rich Learning Environments for the Classroom. In: Wankel, C. and Blessinger, P. (eds.) Increasing Student Engagement and Retention Using Classroom Technologies: Classroom Response Systems and Mediated Discourse Technologies. pp. 263–306 Emerald Group Publishing Limited (2013). https://doi.org/10.1108/S2044-9968(2013)000006E012.
• 14. Groff, J.: Technology-rich innovative learning environments. , OCED CERI Innovative Learning Environment project (2013).
• 15. Guri-Rosenblit, S.: Distance Education in the Digital Age: Common Misconceptions and Challenging Tasks. Journal of Distance Education. 23, 105–122 (2009).
• 16. Haavardtun, P. et al.: Using Virtual Worlds as an Integrated Part of Virtual Distance Learning (VDL) Networks in Simulator-Based Education. In: Nazir, S. et al. (eds.) Advances in Human Factors in Training, Education, and Learning Sciences. pp. 276–282 Springer International Publishing, Cham (2020).
• 17. Haiyan, Y.: Blended Learning Will Be Applicable in Maritime Education and Training. Journal of Shipping and Ocean Engineering. 6, 31–34 (2016). https://doi.org/10.17265/2159-5879/2016.01.004.
• 18. Hanzu-Pazara, R. et al.: Reducing of maritime accidents caused by human factors using simulators in training process. Journal of Maritime Research. 5, 1, 3–18 (2008).
• 19. Hensen, H.: Ship bridge simulators: a project handbook. Nautical Institute, London (1999).
• 20. Hjelmervik, K. et al.: Simulator training for maritime complex tasks: an experimental study. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs. 17, 1, 17–30 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-017-0133-0.
• 21. Hrastinski, S.: Asynchronous and Synchronous E-Learning. Educause quarterly. 31, 4, 51–55 (2008).
• 22. IAMU: Summary results of the survey on the impact of and response to COVID-19 by IAMU member universities. (2020).
• 23. Johnson, S.D., Aragon, S.R.: An instructional strategy framework for online learning environments. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education. 2003, 100, 31–43 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.117.
• 24. Jones, V., Jo, J.: Ubiquitous learning environment: An adaptive teaching system using ubiquitous technology. In: Beyond the comfort zone: Proceedings of the 21st ASCILITE Conference. (2004).
• 25. Karkama, M., Helminen, R.: Online Learning for On-Board Training Officers. In: Advanced Learning Technologies, IEEE International Conference on. p. 280 IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, USA (2003). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT.2003.1215083.
• 26. Kitada, M. et al.: Learning theories meet virtual classroom technologies: understanding new educational opportunities in maritime education and training. In: Global perspectives in MET: Towards Sustainable, Green and Integrated Maritime Transport. (2019).
• 27. König, J. et al.: Adapting to online teaching during COVID-19 school closure: teacher education and teacher competence effects among early career teachers in Germany. null. 43, 4, 608–622 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1809650.
• 28. Mallam, S.C. et al.: Rethinking Maritime Education, Training, and Operations in the Digital Era: Applications for Emerging Immersive Technologies. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering. 7, 12, (2019). https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse7120428.
• 29. Manuel, M.E.: Vocational and academic approaches to maritime education and training (MET): Trends, challenges and opportunities. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs. 16, 3, 473–483 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-017-0130-3.
• 30. Markopoulos, E. et al.: Maritime Safety Education with VR Technology (MarSEVR). In: 2019 10th IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Infocommunications (CogInfoCom). pp. 283–288 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/CogInfoCom47531.2019.9089997.
• 31. Muirhead, P.M.P.: New technology and maritime training in the 21st century: Implications and solutions for MET institutions. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs. 3, 2, 139–158 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03195056.
• 32. Paulsen, M.F.: Online Education Systems: Discussion and Definition of Terms. NKI distance education. 202, 1–8 (2002).
• 33. Psotka, J.: Immersive training systems: Virtual reality and education and training. Instructional Science. 23, 5/6, 405–431 (1995).
• 34. Renganayagalu, S.K. et al.: Impact of Simulation Fidelity on Student Self-efficacy and Perceived Skill Development in Maritime Training. TransNav, the International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation. 13, 3, 663–669 (2019). https://doi.org/10.12716/1001.13.03.25.
• 35. Salas, E. et al.: It Is Not How Much You Have but How You Use It: Toward a Rational Use of Simulation to Support Aviation Training. null. 8, 3, 197–208 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327108ijap0803_2.
• 36. Sellberg, C.: Simulators in bridge operations training and assessment: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs. 16, 2, 247–263 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-016-0114-8.
• 37. Sellberg, C., Lundin, M.: Tasks and instructions on the simulated bridge: Discourses of temporality in maritime training. Discourse Studies. 20, 2, 289–305 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445617734956.
• 38. Sokolov, S. et al.: Compliance with Legal Aspects of the Applying of e-Learning in the Training of Seafarers.TransNav, the International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation. 11, 3, 457–460 (2017). https://doi.org/10.12716/1001.11.03.10.
• 39. STCW: International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers,(STCW) 1978, as amended in 1995/2010. International Maritime Organisation, London, UK. (2011).
• 40. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health: Pandemic school closures: risks and opportunities. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health. 4, 5, 341 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-4642(20)30105-X.
• 41. Vagle, C. et al.: Towards Improving e-Learning Platforms for Professional Education. In: Proceedings of the 50th Nordic Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Conference (NES 2019, DENMARK. (2019).
• 42. Vassileva, D.: Adaptive E-learning Content Design and Delivery Based on Learning Styles and Knowledge Level. Serdica Journal of Computing. 6, 207–252 (2012).
• 43. Veritas, D.N.: Standard for certification No. 2.14 maritime simulator systems. Det Norske Veritas (DNV) Standards for Certification. (2011).
• 44. Voith, A.: Maritime schools embracing digital tools for learning and training, https://www.kongsberg.com/digital/resources/stories/2020/4/maritime-schools-embracing-digital-tools-forlearning-and-training/, last accessed 2022/03/10.
• 45. Wahl, A.M.: Expanding the concept of simulator fidelity:the use of technology and collaborative activities in training maritime officers. Cognition, Technology & Work. 22, 1, 209–222 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-019-00549-4.
• 46. Walkington, C.A.: Using Adaptive Learning Technologies to Personalize Instruction to Student Interests: The Impact of Relevant Contexts onPerformance and Learning Outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology. 105, 4, 932–945 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031882.
• 47. Weintrit, A., Neumann, T.: Advances in marine navigation and safety of sea transportation. Introduction. Advances in Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation - 13th International Conference on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, TransNav 2019. 1 (2019).
• 48. Weintrit, A., Neumann, T.: STCW, maritime education and training (MET), human resources and crew manning, maritime policy, logistics and economic matters. Introduction. Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation: STCW, Maritime Education and Training (MET), Human Resources and Crew Manning, Maritime Policy, Logistics and Economic Matters. 9–10 (2013).
• 49. World Bank: The COVID-19 Crisis Response: Supporting Tertiary Education for Continuity Adaptation, and Innovation. World Bank, Washington, DC (2020). https://doi.org/10.1596/34571.
• 50. Yachina, N.P. et al.: Mixed Objective-Virtual Reality: Theoretical Analysis of Basic Characteristics of Modern Education. INT ELECT J MATH ED. 11, 1, 271–278 (2016).