I__. - International Military Testing Association

Navy Basic Electricity Theory Training: Past, Present, and Future
Steve W. Parchman, John A. Ellis, & William E. Montague
Navy Personnel Research and Development Center
THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED IN THIS PAPER ARE THOSE OF THE AUTHORS,
ARE NOT OFFICIAL AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF
THE NAVY DEPARTMENT
Introduction
Basic electricity and electronics theory training (BETT) in the Navy has historically
had high attrition and setbacks and has been plagued by questions about the relevance of
the course content to Navy jobs. BETT is taught as a separate topic at the beginning of
more than twenty Navy A schools to more than 20,000 students annually. BETT
material historically has proven difficult for students to learn and has resulted in high
attrition and set-back rates. For example, in FY 88 attrition in five electrical A schools
averaged 28% (AE, ET, EM, IC, DS; total annual throughput = 5000). Average setback
rate for these same schools was 69%. Approximately 70% of these losses occurred in the
BETT phase of these courses. Further, the abstract nature of this content has raised
questions about its relevancy for vocational jobs. For example, recent research has
shown that trainees who have passed course tests fail to pass relatively simple practical
exercises. These problems with trainee learning have remained even in the face of
substantial expenditure of effort to revise the content and to change the method of
delivering it.
Research on learning and training suggests that more fundamental changes in
curriculum structure can lead to improvements in learning. Research and development is
needed to develop and test alternative methods for training electrical and electronic
theory, with the goal of reducing both attrition and setback rates by a minimum of 25%.
This paper discusses Navy basic electricity and electronics theory training (BETI’)
with some suggestions for development of future training programs. It begins by briefly
reviewing the history of Navy BETT training followed by a discussion of alternative
approaches to this training that have been tried. Finally, several options for training
improvements are presented.
BETT History
Through the 1950s and 6Os, Navy electronics training was both theory and math
intensive. Well qualified trainees were amply available, thanks in part to the draft. “A”
School electronics courses, often eight months long, challenged the trainees and also
prepared them for the rigors of the “B” schools. “B” schools of up to fifteen months were
available to qualified re-enlistees. These schools resembled university engineering
programs.
Perhaps it was inevitable that two dozen or more schools around the country
independently teaching similar content would generate pressure for consolidation. In the
early 196Os, consolidations were carried out, and a common syllabus, based on Bureau of
Personnel publications, was adopted at each of the major training centers.
TWO factors which came into play in the 1960s and 70s resulted in major changes in
Navy electronics training. First, the Programmed Instruction (PI) movement reached its
Peak of popularity in the 60s. Use of this approach in the Navy was judged desirable,
132