Project Support in AMEISE: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Analysis of existing simulation runs showed, that trainees who did not plan their project in advance achieved worse results than trainees who carefully planned the projects prior to the simulation run. | |||
====Project Planning==== | ====Project Planning==== | ||
{{Box1|Therefore the project should be planned before executing a simulation run. The project | {{Box1|Therefore, the project should be planned '''before''' executing a simulation run. The project plan should include the sequence of activities to be performed in the project as well as an appropriate staff assignment plan.}} | ||
However, | However, detailed project planning is only possible '''after''' starting a simulation run, because this is the point when the trainees receives all the relevant information (costs, employee skills) about the project at hand. The AMEISE system provides also support information, that is available to trainees only after activities, which means that the student has to have performed a task before getting a feedback by the support tools. | ||
Thereby, errors cannot be avoided, but trainees | Thereby, errors cannot be avoided, but trainees can be alerted to mistakes and can learn from these. The support to trainees is not to prescribe perfect procedures, but to give clues, activities could improve the current situation. | ||
====Common Mistakes==== | ====Common Mistakes==== | ||
Analysis of SESAM/AMEISE - simulation runs showed, that the following mistakes were committed rather frequently: | |||
* '''Objectives are not fulfilled''' | * '''Objectives are not fulfilled''' | ||
** The students have a big problem to fulfill all objectives of a simulation run. | ** The students have a big problem to fulfill all objectives of a simulation run. | ||
* ''' | * '''Workload''' | ||
** Occupying their employees constantly | ** Occupying their employees constantly is a great problem for most students. Therefore, employees are often without an activity over a long period of time, but still earning money. | ||
* ''' | * '''Reviewing/testing and corrective actions are missing or are only partially carried out''' | ||
** During the simulation run trainees forget about the necessary checking- and corrective actions of individual phases. This leads to bad simulation results. | |||
** | |||
| Line 32: | Line 31: | ||
====Support Tools==== | ====Support Tools==== | ||
New components were integrated in the AMEISE environment to reduce | New components were integrated in the AMEISE environment to reduce these errors and support the trainees. Two options of '''Support Tools''' are available: | ||
* Advisor | * Advisor | ||
| Line 42: | Line 41: | ||
====Overview==== | ====Overview==== | ||
The advisor is a '''passive''' support tool and has to be | The advisor is a '''passive''' support tool and has to be explicitly asked by the trainee. Therefore, the advisor component assumes the role of the instructor and answers predefined questions during a simulation run. The friendly peer is an '''active''' support tool and tells the trainee if a difficult situation occurs. The friendly peer assumes the role of an experienced colleague who observes the trainee in order to react in case of dangerous situations. | ||
Latest revision as of 13:49, 11 August 2013
Analysis of existing simulation runs showed, that trainees who did not plan their project in advance achieved worse results than trainees who carefully planned the projects prior to the simulation run.
Project Planning
| Therefore, the project should be planned before executing a simulation run. The project plan should include the sequence of activities to be performed in the project as well as an appropriate staff assignment plan. |
However, detailed project planning is only possible after starting a simulation run, because this is the point when the trainees receives all the relevant information (costs, employee skills) about the project at hand. The AMEISE system provides also support information, that is available to trainees only after activities, which means that the student has to have performed a task before getting a feedback by the support tools.
Thereby, errors cannot be avoided, but trainees can be alerted to mistakes and can learn from these. The support to trainees is not to prescribe perfect procedures, but to give clues, activities could improve the current situation.
Common Mistakes
Analysis of SESAM/AMEISE - simulation runs showed, that the following mistakes were committed rather frequently:
- Objectives are not fulfilled
- The students have a big problem to fulfill all objectives of a simulation run.
- Workload
- Occupying their employees constantly is a great problem for most students. Therefore, employees are often without an activity over a long period of time, but still earning money.
- Reviewing/testing and corrective actions are missing or are only partially carried out
- During the simulation run trainees forget about the necessary checking- and corrective actions of individual phases. This leads to bad simulation results.
Support Tools
New components were integrated in the AMEISE environment to reduce these errors and support the trainees. Two options of Support Tools are available:
- Advisor
- Friendly Peer
The instructor decides, if these support tools are available during a simulation run.
Overview
The advisor is a passive support tool and has to be explicitly asked by the trainee. Therefore, the advisor component assumes the role of the instructor and answers predefined questions during a simulation run. The friendly peer is an active support tool and tells the trainee if a difficult situation occurs. The friendly peer assumes the role of an experienced colleague who observes the trainee in order to react in case of dangerous situations.
