THE JOB TASK ANALYSIS/SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE MARRIAGE (PART 1)

T. M. Ansbro and W. A. Hayes CNET/TAEG NEPDIS Development Team, CNET HQ. NAS Pensacola

As job/task analysis methodology continues to advance in sophistication, the computer takes over an ever greater share of the work of analysis, leaving less and less of formerly judgemental areas to assumption. But, assumption still functions where job "skills and knowledges" are assigned as underlying or component to tasks in inventories» f

i

CjP i So far, in front-end analysis of the workplace, task interrelationships, ^^ rankings by complexity, and degrees of commonality can be readily determined by 00 Che computer. If task 00165 in package 017 proves common to 16 others in an

inventory of 2500, has a complexity index of 1.25, and embodies all the subor- dinate work behaviors of 137 other tasks, the computer can record these fea- tures and position the subject task appropriately in an output hierarchy. It can also sort on the basis of identifying or descriptive data included in the task record in the inventory. Such processing gets pretty far down into speci- fics of work behaviors underlying tasks, but it doesn't affix identified mani- pulative or processing skills and static-descriptive or process-associated knowledge (Information) elements to those tasks.

This paper (Part I) describes a matrix of "skills and knowledge" elements to augment a model front-end job/task analysis subsystem (NEPDIS—Naval Enlis- ted Professional Development Information System) and discusses such alterna- tives as adding these data to the master job/task inventory or providing an ancillary "skills and knowledge^ inventory for use of the training program developer* _

/

W

103

Ir As "front-end" job/task analysis methodologies have progressed and ,-* continued to advance In sophistication, the computer takes over an even greater Cj share of the work of analysis, leaving less and less of formerly judgemental I areas to panel-of-experts analysis, evaluation, and cataloguing. Identifl- * cation and description of tasks in inventories appear fairly concrete, as they '«• do for such task component work behaviors as task elements (Johnson and £ Richmann, 1975). What analysis is possible so far with the task (and its ';• accompanying descriptive factors) as the sole data source has yielded task com-

plexity indexes, hierarchies expressive of task interrelationships, and task commonality indicators within and among occupational fields. With such outputs of job/task analysis producible by computer programming, assumption and subject-matter expert (SME) consensus might well be expected to fade into the background. However, assumption still functions where such work behaviors as job "skills and knowledges" are or must be assigned as underlying or component to tasks in inventories.

-.■■

In Navy manpower management, ship and squadron manning documents and job (billet) descriptions are dependent in the main upon extensive, detailed, and comprehensive inventories of operational, maintenance, administrative, military watchstanding, and other tasks (as well as ship, systems, and equipment data).

;> Personnel distribution, rating ass jnment, advancement, and training (espe- S daily training) depend upon Inventories of skills as well as tasks; and the

training community needs to take the job/task inventory "audit trail" down /£ farther still—to the level where "job knowledge" can be associated directly ;.: with "job skills" to support job tasks.

-• This paper (Part I) describes an attempt to produce a matrix of "job skills H| and knowledges" elements to augment model front-end job/task analysis subsystem

currently under development by the staff of the Chief of Naval Education and >• Training (CNET) and Training Analysis and Evaluation Group (TEAG) elements in \'m Pensacola, Florida. The subsystem model is the Training Analysis Subsystem of '.-. the Naval Enlisted Professional Development Information System (NEPDIS) (Davis, g 1976, 1977, 1977a, 1977b).

.1 The NEPDIS model currently stores some 23,000 Naval Avionics rating tasks In its inventory. Occupational data acquisition was accomplished for other

.*; ratings in the Naval aviation community, ten in all, but these data are not yet In the computer. As a result, occupational data stored and analyzed to date by NEPDIS remain in the major functional category of Maintenance. A typical listing of an avionics maintenance task is shown in Figure 1.

With computerized analysis of such data as typified by this entry in the Aviation Electrician's Mate (AE) job/task inventory under NEPDIS, tasks may be ranked by complexity; and degrees of commonality (from the Identical to an agreed-upon level of similarity) (Davis and Perry, 1980) may be established. Task interrelationships may also be established. Some tasks obviously contain many component work behaviors that are also contained in other tasks of lesser complexity and scope; some tasks duplicate the work behaviors of others, some- times regardless of the task titles Involved. Tasks shown to "embody" other (subordinate or component) tasks are termed "Omnibus" tasks; the tasks shown to be component to the Omnibus tasks are termed "Embodied" tasks (Figure 2). In the NEPDIS job/task inventory (JTI) AE task 00165 in package 017 may be shown to have a complexity index of 1.25, prove common to 28 others in a one-rating

104

w&

inventory of 3700 tasks, and embody all the component work behaviors of 137 other tasks. The computer can record these features after producing them via analysis, and it can position the subject task appropriately in any specified output hierarchy. It can also sort on the basis of identifying or descriptive data included in the task record in the inventory (Ansbro, 1978). Such processing gets pretty far down into the specifics of work behaviors underlying tasks, but it doesn't extend beyond identifying job-related skills. Figure 3 shows task "signature block" (work-behavior descriptive data) printed out. The five skill areas included in the task signature block contain statements of work behavior that would appear to be as descriptive of elements (or components) of a task as of the skills that they represent. They are definitive, small In compass, and specific to (and therefore underly) task performance; therefore attached to other descriptive data for the task.

Herein lies a problem for the training program developer or curriculum designer* To design a training course, he needs an inventory of tasks to describe course graduate job performance capabilities and to provide realistic practical exercises and performance tests. Successful student/graduate task performance when matched with on-job (billet) requirements in the fleet (also tasks) serves as a reasonable predictor of successful performance on the job.

However, can a course cover all the tasks that the graduate must perform on the job in his fleet assignment? The best that we can hope for is coverage of these tasks that best represent fleet requirements. The analysis that results from this realization requires Intricate grouping and cataloguing of work behaviors. Selection of representative tasks really involves selection of those underlying behaviors component to or most widely transferable among tasks assumed to be representative of fleet job requirements.

The transferable component/supporting work behaviors underlying task performance are skills. Skills, stated in behavioral action language, resemble tasks* Indeed, the workplace and the schoolhouse both use task and skill ter- minology almost Interchangeably* As an example, welding is described as a transferable skill, since welding something to something else is component to performing many metal fabrication and repair tasks. However, depending upon how a work-behavior statement reads ("weld fire-hose support bracket to bulk- head"), welding may be regarded as the action part of a task statement. Welding as a major work behavior can also be regarded as more encompassing than a task; it can represent an entire worker career, or the sole mission or output of a shop or department. Soldering, somewhat similar technically, but a consi- derably smaller skill, is usually termed just that—a skill. Viewed from a task-descriptive orientation, it Is also a task element. But, because of its simplicity, subordinate/component nature, and wide applicability (therefore transferabillty) to task performance, it is generally considered to be a skill, and in the occupational field(s) of electricity/electronics, a basic one, at that.

On the premise that if the schoolhouse Is to train the graduate to perform on the job in the fleet, the instructional program/course designer must attempt to replicate the best representative and most critical tasks from that target environment; then, he must ferret out, verify aid train on those skills found to be component to those tasks selected for training and transferable to those known to exist in the workplace but not selected for training Therefore, the

105

training community needs extensive and comprehensive JTIs with task-descriptive data as fully fleshed out as possible; and it is certainly more than merely convenient to have skills appropriately identified as such. Further, in any career continuum, it must follow that in the earlier training programs (basic, apprentice, initial job-entry), the concentration of training effort is on skills, transferable to the job environment where they may be applied and refined in a work-and-OJT setting. Advanced specialized training still teaches skills, but task performance figures somewhat more prominently, as higher level technician training more closely approximates the real-world environment of the graduate's ultimate work site.

As mentioned earlier, skill statements resemble task (and task elec~~,t) statements: There are action verbs, objects of action, and job-environment conditions and work-performance standards. It is necessary to make one clear distinction if there is to be any observable difference between these state- ments (In an inventory). In the task statement, the object of the action is specific: a clearly identified or coded item (system or subsystem component, equipment Item, part, form, machine, instrument, etc.) In the skill statement, the object of the action is not a specific item; it can be typical of a group or class, a "generic" Item (mild steel plate, galvanized sheet metal ducting, bar stock, tubing, circuit wiring, solid state printed circuits, etc.), even a synthesized or composite Item generated for such a purpose as training or prac- tice of an identified skill action. As tasks fall Into hierarchies, so also do skills. A "troubleshooting" task (in NEPOIS: "Isolate Fault/Troubleshoot object") employs subordinate (component) "troubleshooting" skills: selecting/using references, selecting/using tools, selecting/using support materials, selecting/using support equipment, and selecting/using test equip- ment.

The principal mechanistic reason for making these task/skill distinctions In the NEPDIS Training Analysis subsystem is the need for the computer to recognize the distinctions in its progress through analysis toward such outputs as billet-specific task Inventories and rating-specific skill Inventories* NEPDIS front-end analysis was designed to be totally computer-served and to conduct all job/task/ski11 analysis for designated users at the "front-end"; hence, the emphasis on coding, detailed identification and descriptive factors, and other aspects of an audit trail from task identification through reference source.

Job knowledge, or the task/skill performance enabling base (Information/ data); lies at the bottom of the audit trail. Information from all reference sources pertinent to task/skill performance can be assumed to fit into a rela- tively simple matrix, an example of which Is shown in Figure 4. A NEPDIS- conducted literature search based on reference text support of occupational data already in the JTI indicated substantial reference support for the details of task and task element performance. However, little test support for those behaviors identified as component skills was found in these references* For instance, what to solder and at what point to solder, and what tools and materials applied to the task element were amply covered by reference. How to solder was not. Hence, in a Navy-designed front-end job/task analysis sub- system built to support Instructional Systems Development (ISD), the subsystem developers discovered that in some instances they had provided themselves with relatively light direct reference text support for developing the essentials of some skills training. By tracking back through the appropriate job

106

e

task-oriented references and by recourse to rating-specific texts and existing skills-training school texts, the necessary reference support can be found. But it is not direct, and it is not totally and specifically contained within the master JT1 for the rating or occupational field.

NEPDIS front-end analysis hi been designed with the avowed intent of keeping all the job/task (and skill) analysis at the front end. An instructional systems developer was to receive all the various inventories (subsystem outputs) needed to develop curricula/instruc- tional programs, etc. without having to "go back to the front end" himself to analyze or further analyze data; especially, he should not have to collect raw data.

One simple solution is to add such text references in the appropriate spot in the task identification block in the master JTI. Another is to provide a brief structured addendum to the master JTI, this item strictly for the use of training program development personnel. Figure 5 illustrates the general r ope of basic supporting Information useful to the developer of skills training. In essence, this example would suggest the beginning of an adjunct task/skills performance-supporting information Inventory or skills and knowledge library.

A third alternative is to construct a matrix such as the one shown (in concept) in Figure 4, and code it to the task signature block in the JTI. The matrix generally illustrates the task support hierarchy: from the top down, task performance is supported by any number of task elements; the task elements are supported by (and Incorporate) manipulative and/or Information-processing skills; and these skills are supported by static descriptive and process- associated knowledge items (the enabling information base). For practical incorporation into the JTI, Identified skills can be cross-coded to task iden- tification codes, and bodies of Information identified as skill-supporting items.

The alternatives mentioned above represent current NEPDIS effort to marry the already definitive job task information in the JTIs with equally definitive supporting skill and knowledge data. The Intent also is to maintain a visible and easily followed audit trail throughout the Training Analysis Subsystem.

REFERENCES

Ansbro, T. M. "Using the Computer to Build the Task Inventory." Proceedings - 20th Annual Conference of the Military Testing Asoclation, Oklahoma City, OK, 1978, 263-274.

Davis, D. D. "Dialogue." CAMPUS, The Naval Education and Training Monthly. January, 1976, 24-27.

Davis, D. D. "Dialogue." CAMPUS, The Naval Education and Training Monthly. April, 1977, 22-27.

107

Davis, D. 0. "Naval Enlisted Professional Development Information Support System." Proceedings of the National Security Industrial Association on the State-of-the-Art Application of Advanced Training Technology. April, 1977a.

Davis, D. D. "Naval Enlisted Professional Development Information Support System." Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 1977b, 6(2), 133-141.

Davis, D. D., Perry, N. N. "Determining Task Commonality in Navy Training- Two Methods Examined." Proceedings - 22nd Annual Conference of the Military Testing Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 1980, 229-237.

Johnson, R. N., Richmann, J. N. "Task Analysis: The Basis for Criterion Test and Curriculum Design." Proceedings - 17th Annual Conference of the Military Testing Association, Indianapolis, IN, 1975, 538-550.

108

i© fs. ti (M o

M( • >- JJ» —1 as. a* © II o s»- UJ •v *- »— CO »"* « K ■Ma

l_> UJ X ac ©

co co a

CO «s cv >■ X © H— © w C? u

CO

o o

•z a, : u. if U tO »»J X — s » UJ •*• _j © ae *» CD co o UJ ea

© •s SNJ Ct- CM H» X uj cv —i © u i '-' o e U' i— i © > 1 © ac UJ UJ UJ ss* i— co i

JU i CM a co

I X i_> cv x «e as •e e *»* ew<su)~ *

a«: to UJ co x CM t— <_> WU>*iX—S 0 •e o -«1 U> X U. f*> X 9 9 ►— UJ JT £2 x UJ i x co *z

ss ^* — ac —< © »s. ac c u *w CO UJ < © c UJ UJ

UJ o >■ X H> — X

cv » i cvtyc UI<<090B> u *-» C —I M.— ac — x u u» cv ae

X © —< as *» < •r o •=■ c CO fC m*

UJ ■sr >-» co 4T CO •— tS «

X UJ

« "v ac »— x o X U> U.

1 < E — X — uj ac

tS £ «** UJ ■■* ©

u»-su 25S K ae co is -s

•c a. a. >- — LU 1 • » *£ s <^->e *«• (-> u. N*» >• «-» —> x < <C ae us ae o

X O X ac —i « UJ a. UJ OS o o *E5 » CV v» o "-» ! < IT as ~ UJ <■» S5K

< o a i

1 su< *—>■(_* ■

lAtf»»»- <5F ►— 1 — x e yj X B. _IUJX IS <— S* ! * X U.' •—1-> a »

UJ 1 sit © •- X < UJ x ae S 1 •E UJ — < e ea x o ©

►»• H- ►— »- u> — X UJ —i cv cv *• • < s X X uae-> UJ < u. © a» cv c ) =£1 UJ CV ©

csu ( X

CO o u»

co« x

<m> CO X t— CO CO >»

—» x *-> r- — CV C >• X fcn» CO 15 >- o 5

—> ►" CO «c «= «c © •= ae ">• LV1WU cau

o o © © © © ©

9 © © © © © ©

© © © © © © ©

© © © © © © ©

e> —< © © © © © CM © © © © © h-\

—I © © © © © —<

— —< © © © © CM

mm *r\ © © © K\ -»

—I —<"-i © © © CM

f-\ O —i —< © —I (*\

-H CM «-» CM © «-4 e»

-<K\«i C\0 <-IN

oe — m» 9 ** •S © CV

ac x S3

• U. © CV CV CO HUICSBW © ac -» 1/5 CO H-

—J © —< CM «A *r (,"< CO

x — —' —• —J —i >- —.' -J -J! —' _J

_ 9 x X X X M o a co co co co co

^: CO to < < K 1- "M.

• «X 8 CO -s O

LU

§ 1-

> < to

■ « Z

s < —• G h- 00 (X 4MP. K -J o

ÜJ X. —I CO LU < >~ H B g co h- —' H Z

e < LU — > UJ > Z A. <

109

-V

Ä

':>\

H 0. z — UJ I >

E~ — UJ h- h- S* UJ

SS < —

o 5 UJ H

C uj

4Ü5

1«

O ^ ^»» -» c ■** «^ — »*>— — Q «*i «»(

»V »S —Hl — Ä ^ •*»

< U O -* «■" »/". «T- V.

r\;

c*

SS ml ml ml W •"» —( —I _' Zfl---

u. w • >: * * < C O •.*! i/v v,

8"'S. mtmtmi «£' -'mtmtmi 3 </> _ - _

I* to * Stf * X ■C C O ^ •••> V.

8* --i < öc

110

i

!

tu >

111

5 LU

CO LU

CC

g z UJ

z

CO

UJ

CO UJ

s > z

X o UJ

co

O

CO CD UJ cr CO

Z »-

£co 3 b §UJ

co UJ

z UJ >

O

c-1 UJ

z UJ > z

CO

UJ >

cc o CO

8 I o

<

co

co

CO co CC UJ UJ • X m »a: Lu S CO 3 »Q 3 o: o uj z zo !- z-

S88 ß * . -a. ct

CO < <

CO

CO »o Z UJ — UJ CC H

05LZ WZh UJ UJ z P * s < O Q o z —

CO »o CO — CO UJKO

co OO

gc? . — < CO »- I LU

•85 to I

i. O UJ ii

to » H to to O

• _J H to

£8*2 tO LU LU —

P £ E £

L12

u u < s

«ft e Z Mc l». C t- fc. te Mi

H < < ki Mi 0. ft. < ^s >c<

X m S Z fc M> B B X < te * e te • X e c pi * tft e « u c kl .i u •*. 1 «ft

e z H B H «i-e u * — m < O ~) 10 z Di M B. cJ U

Ä M! •• • e > y m < K •• © m - c u > MJ #** in Ml Z M Z w ■ • «» •> »te MC > Mc H B c >■ c te >— tK Mt Z < •* < c •"* B X B tr. < ml < k! — e K s a < K s X kä um • w te z -i K — b . «tic« e K (.' •" H ■• • * * *; 5 to < X g! K z * < e B - e c v - - • • Z X

B e -j e te

H-* <e < te < K K te B — S

V 5i -: M. tt k. V K

e < e

H

w

te

fc! X' tl w; »' ei B:

1

e K B B e s hun

tC Ml kB Z S •te«

i- z z te M

• 3 S I- *- K u te K k. v. <•». H fc; fc < Z fct H -? e M B

U U K kt S HKK kW U-- tt -. u k.

Kt t, z es '*• — >■ K < m -t »- - H « a.

«e f. u o. B < I», . B M- x J fc. t- H I k: z ki 3 > i < < B U K K < U fc: - — <w. zkcte =U>X*-I<

i i u u B li!

<

| B<-,

ki Ml ü X > MC Mc < (K H 1 H »■ X »M U B H k! X ■e •« J W kt

ki O U £ tft 1 IC »■ kl s e "» t- K U!

5 fc. «"<•«« f ac O X B B •*• 3 Wl -• e 5 fc. Wi ES • y

a W <• «9 21 ftw Z! KB te "1 < kil H < ki «

. t ac k! e M< -; M.

£ B kil tC U 3 Z

Si Z k. > — B e 2 K

*■* < B e m Hl e «; Z t> X F

<

f-

•3

< M. w o > u <

M1 • e K o e s »- w S K u

t kl < ki x B MC te < t- B < H X

kl e

e es

t- n W k- B B B B W Ilh e e B V a. B

wie Mc W k. B X e K e

Ml B - U ■» H K B ••^ W K »- J H *•>« k! « M. < U M -1 X 3 H u c»» B W W B n J *» BE • < Je«. O »• < kl V ki 1» B V. fc; B »• 9 w X a - ~ c <

O B m B B 3 B 8 »• H « k« M> H 1 H < < e St B M> ü e B a. CM j Z B K B B M. M e kl B < .- < as - < «i Ci, M U B B a. B

k> — «ftc OB u X H fc] kl M

«9 » < K 09 B Ml

< a H

*> -: ^ M B < a. X t- Ml B B J te X w to »•»• < •- W ki U M l« k> Z B M*

z » o B K H H W

K U •c C*ki H W B w

B M e e ki < H ü B H S ki «v. e »- •• X e H <

V B Ml

z K «- te Z Ml B t> B B B K « X kt S < — o *• »3 u * oc M u < MI

»9 <

B X B 9 M ^ < B e » B B — ki

ki C fc. ki e N W

Mi K X < B U

< M1 < •H

B kl ki N X B B I- » o e *

-3

< te

ki t- X k. * 3 k. B --

e a. < w

• » •KB

V) B K •V. > t: « ol a. B MI o ■ «U

H U 3 B U <

B

M1 H < H t>< B» X e HO kl m B I SO

U te o u

U tt B fc> B < a. < - t- k> x B M> K

« i e • SB«

B I B l O SUM. ■ Um

e u ■ •B M>

fc» fc* B

e o e

B u ■9

u

f-l

B U • B -

K B — MI - U fc. U B K C Z B < £ B a -IBB

o IB

a U ki 3 «se ■ < te t- k. w U » ■tkh

5 B B B

• « U ■ a. z kl o - J ■" O a. a: -' a B . J

B e HUB 2B I

O B B HO

B tn <

113

*.'

r„".

*"». V X t- a > X X X «« a i- < • I t» • X u a

X X «* 10 1- 9 9 • «i X X H X X < z < 1- e X to« X X 1- X f- ki e

e w kS Z

© X

W H tit x to

© x X ki 9 a X »• ^ X to« 10 © X X H •w « e ►«■ © X to» u X »■•« 9 • -» X © 9 X X hi X c K (to •^ 9 H K "■ ■■J e x e x 9 ■s z s e © H a» V «- X ^S X < XX H X X C a H h z IK. i- XXX to - < »to X V. < x e M m

s u 1- X K > z to X K ■- X K OS e X X U X 9 O *s X •■ < X X toJ Z X D

*x < 9 X to a — 9 X 10 H 4. «e X X c ©a *• 9 »- X < «- c a © x z c © X X —• • < ~i •a M X u z < e < e V t- X 1» X z X «to. l- u Z in 9 V. 9 X ki •- x < M X »to < K » u c • X X n t> J 9 to* »E © to» u 9 X X X 9 X x X X 9 »»* XX© > © K o •to X a to < O kl k> X •»» X u • e X 9 X X

#■»» • ■ k. X < a X c —* -X X M ■^. © kl ^ e a) H X 9 a X 10 ki * ►» j X < H f O «3 to * U t. © to« e © X U x 9 Z X to X X »» X 9 »- X X a x * e u to« X 9 a u i t- Bi te X X X c X 9 ©XX X w • k> X c X X H O X 9 © e * H X X C X a U X 9 I e ■t e -i eis X «to «■2 e *■ • a ib k. «* K X n • < e • x © »• »•». i •*«■ •* X X H U to 1- to to« 9 M

ki ■ x X U to» w 9 < a H o X • ■» U x z N* < "» < • pm 1- X X m* «to» x X H X ki tol o X < H ■ e x < ■ H X X so © -» e x 9 < • w «to « z - X 9 to» X O x a ©a «to 1- > X 9 X • M 9 »- • i- J - X X < k. H © Z to » to« z x © • < < X x • X X X k) X R c < •J to to » M • al x e x § o X u 9 M IV X kt «• * ■ x X X < X H to« to Z 9 X H M x * *• » •« ki ki < X © » 9 X U 9 A H 9 © > X • ki X e © 9 i*> e x e X < ie * X b X X a x • 6 < 9 © •»» 9 X 9 c X _• X ~ t- X X »• K X x • M •»•, e • c X V. to 9 9 9 X X

X K - X z •9 V. n e x X H X •* < H C - < X X a X X • m U >• K- Z N X • it «■* < X X Z X B e z S» «to X X k. 9 3 »» c < t- © to X •t- c X X X 9 ki 1» z ««». e 3 •a* < •» X X - X t- X e < X b <S u ■a t- »- X K 9 < K < •- fc. *- V X u k. 9 U U X < 9 < •" l-

§ X V X < X z 9 J» X X X X X a z U ki — ki X < ij <» X X X s »•». z X X

u X - X X 1 X H X X X H < 9 R z X ki - X wl X X « o 9 X »ex X N ©

to! Hi c

u «". Z ki u u 10 < z u «■ to« x © i> e x a

e

to^

114 bit

l>BWfefMl