Train-the-Trainer by DataHomeLab
Concept

Systematic Approach to Training

The Systematic Approach to Training (SAT) is a structured, iterative method for designing, delivering, and evaluating training. It treats every programme as a problem to be solved and every solution as something to be measured. The same discipline appears in the wider literature as analyse, design, develop, implement, evaluate (ADDIE). Without a closed cycle, the organisation has projects, not a training system.

The five-step cycle

flowchart TB O[1 Define objectives] --> P[2 Select training plan] P --> A[3 Define assessment method] A --> T[4 Administer training] T --> E[5 Draw conclusions / evaluate] E --> O
Step Question Output
1. Define objectives What should the trainee be able to do at the end? Knowledge objectives (KNOW, BE FAMILIAR WITH, BE ABLE TO, BE PROFICIENT)
2. Select the training plan How, where, with which media and devices? Methods, sequence, device strategy
3. Assessment method How will we know objectives were met? Assessment design before delivery
4. Administer the training Run the plan Delivered sessions
5. Draw conclusions Did trainees meet standards, and does the system work? Evaluation data back into Step 1

Evaluation feeds the next objective-setting round. A programme that runs Steps 1–4 once and never closes Step 5 has implemented a one-shot project.

Performance-based intent

Correctly applied, SAT is a performance-based approach: relate training to operational and regulatory requirements, include critical content in the time available, choose methods and media that fit the objectives, and set performance standards trainees must meet. CRM principles are part of the method-selection criterion, not an optional add-on. A method that produces a behavioural outcome while bypassing multi-crew coordination the line requires fails the criterion.

Learning by doing and training to proficiency

Practical systems training develops procedures, crew concept, and task sharing on synthetic training devices whose functionality reflects the fleet. Trainees acquire procedural and motor skills more reliably by doing them than by being told about them.

Training to proficiency is the standard: a trainee does not advance until skills for the specified objectives are demonstrated. Exposure is not completion. Assessment or examination after each programme records that objectives were met. This is the local form of the same gating principle in Doc 9995: competence below standard is retrained until it meets the floor.

Training needs analysis

Training needs analysis (TNA) supplies the SAT inputs:

  1. Select the task.
  2. Identify training needs of all involved.
  3. Derive training objectives from needs.
  4. Evaluate the objectives.
  5. Sequence the objectives.
  6. Use the task analysis content for assessment, notes, and lesson plans.

TNA is continuous, not a once-only kickoff. Evaluation (Step 5) produces data the next TNA consumes. Running TNA once and then freezing it while operations change (new generation, routes, safety findings, regulations) breaks the loop. In EBT terms, TNA is the local instance of the data argument: industry and operator safety and training data (as a class of sources) drive priorities; competencies are developed against the most relevant threats and errors.

Instructor use

  1. Write objectives first; never reverse-engineer them from a favourite lesson.
  2. Define assessment before box time or classroom delivery so training is designed against the test, not the reverse.
  3. Gate phase progression on demonstrated proficiency, not scheduled hours alone.
  4. After the session or course, feed individual outcomes and system observations back into course design (instructor duty, not optional feedback).
  5. Use TNA language when arguing for syllabus change: task, need, objective, assessment, sequence.

Connections

Sources