Australian Army Learning Environment - Case Study Example

Australian Army Learning Environment Author’s Name Grade course Institution Tutor Date Introduction As times change, economic and social aspects of the society get affected too and the need to adapt to these changes is ever so increasing. The army, and in particular the Australian army, has not been left behind as it considers all available avenues and opportunities for the purpose of training and overall development of their solders (Plifka 2011, p. 5). This is in a bid to do away with the long held beliefs about who can be awarded competence and by whom. The concept of ‘communities of practice’ used to describe groups of individuals that are bound together by similar knowledge and purpose. They effectively provide an environment for individual and organisational learning. In this setting, learning takes place in various ways and as a result, their practices will play a key role in determining the kind of learning that occurs and how it is conducted (Plifka 2011, p. 9). The Australian Army, apart from being a workplace organisation, is also a community of practice within which many different communities of practice co-exist (Wegner and Snyder 2000, p. 46). As such, the Australian Army has become a learning environment as much as it is a working environment. Many forms of learning take place within the Australian Army including but not limited to explicit, conceptual, methodological, and procedural leaning, or a complex mix of all. These forms of learning take place within the ‘learning networks’ context (Wegner and Snyder 2000, p. 48). Dimensions of Knowledge Knowledge often takes a two dimension form- explicit or tangible and tactic or intangible- with both dimensions significantly important for effective work performance. On the same note, knowledge can take two categories, procedural (how to) or conceptual (knowing). By applying these descriptions, tracking knowledge development and forces acting on this development is made possible. Vertical Learning Networks Vertical learning networks within the Australian Army employ linear learning programs on its hierarchical structures (Poell, Chivers, Van der Grogt, and Wildermeersch, 2000, p. 27). Within the Australian Army workplace, vertical learning networks form the backbone of all army training. The knowledge got from this is usually procedural in nature and emphases on specifics tasks. When a soldier is recruited, his or her very first tasks will take a more practical form related to the soldier’s job description. Such tasks would include track driving, clerical tasks, radio operation and artillery gun deployment. To demonstrate knowledge, Australian Army soldiers need explicit understanding of procedures in conducting such tasks (Poell et al 2000, p. 28). Learners in this category are described as having no situational experience and solely rely on context free regulations as guidelines. The Australian Army has gone beyond this and its soldiers are more independent in nature. This is well described in the Army’s ethos ‘I am an Australian Soldier.’ There are many factors that affect the way the Australian soldiers work including the army’s high tempo military related operations, invasive nature of modern media, lack of distinctive battle boundaries and the invisibility of threat elements (Plifka 2011, p. 17). With the same breathe, the nature of work that Australian soldiers perform may change within a matter of hours as an Army mechanic may be deployed to service vehicles during the day and then sent out for patrol in the night. This coupled with requirements to meet good governance principles in risk management, equity, cultural awareness and diversity goes on to show that the Australian soldier needs to have a huge knowledge database and have the aptitude to demonstrate expertise in many different areas. Application of procedural and conceptual knowledge by the Australian Army has led to many of its soldiers becoming experts in different fields (Poell et al 2000, p. 30). The Army has helped its soldiers acquire a deeper understanding of concepts over a wide range of situations in various contexts. The Australian Army does this by training soldiers to fully understand the consequences of the dynamic context for their actions within the barracks or when deployed oversees (Poell et al 2000, p. 30). Using different methodologies to combine both conceptual and procedural knowledge in training has led to the production of a more all rounded soldier able to confidently perform different tasks, situations notwithstanding. Horizontal Learning Networks The Australian Army as a workplace facilitates learning in two areas: those related to individual activities and those associated with guidance received while undertaking such activities. Performing a given task and its related guidance usually occurs within a network of teams (Poell et al 2000, p. 32). Such interactions within these groups form learning networks that are horizontal in nature. Australian Army soldiers usually spend their career time within the environs of a small team comprising of members with different levels of knowledge as well as experience. In their preliminary years, Australian Army soldiers become part of small teams in their work place; such as the infantry team, workshop maintenance team or the catering team. As time goes by, they may progress to command teams within the same small teams (Plifka 2011, p. 22). As they get involved deeply within these teams, Australian soldiers get to perform various activities while interacting with other team members. The vast array of knowledge and experience portrayed by team members allows for sharing of information which provides an opportunity for learning (Poell et al 2000, p. 34). For example, a team member deployed to the artillery section will share what he or she has learnt while performing related tasks to the rest of the team. Similarly, a soldier who has completed an exchange program with an allied country’s army will share with team members information regarding tactics other armies apply when faced with particular issues. These horizontal networks within the Australian Army apply procedural knowledge that is supported by relevant guidance from seasoned colleagues and supervisors (Plifka 2011, p. 27). This contributes a great deal towards the overall improvement of tactic conceptual knowledge. Once this has been achieved, it is applied to explicit procedural performance in order to develop an in-depth understanding of tactic concepts relating to tasks and the circumstances they are executed in. Exhibiting a deep knowledge in tactic conceptual knowledge coupled with explicit and tactic learning as a result of team member interactions has seen Australian soldiers move from novice learners to more competent performers within very short periods of time (Plifka 2011, p. 27). Therefore, it is this learning got from horizontal networks in the Australian Army, together with a combination of well developed explicit procedural knowledge and an enhanced tactic conceptual knowledge, which contribute massively towards the learning experience and development of the Australian soldier career. Liberal Learning Networks This form of learning network is formed when learners develop their individual leaning from personal experiences and reflections (Kolb 1984, p. 78). Through repetition of tasks and interactions, learners are able to create individual learning; this is referred to as experiential learning. This concept is well explained by the Kolb’s experiential learning model developed by David Kolb (Kolb 1984, p. 81).. The Australian soldier will gain a deeper understanding if only he or she applies acquired skills within the different contexts; concrete experience. These different contexts will vary from the barracks to combat environments. By looking at one’s own performance – reflective observation - and comparing it to the performance of co-soldiers leads to an enhanced tactic and conceptual understanding; abstract conception (Kolb 1984, p. 92). This is then refined further by active experimentation in order to develop a fresh concrete experience resulting in deeper and better grasping of tactic and conceptual knowledge. This process thus deepens the understanding of Australian soldiers leading to the development of what may be termed as true expertise (Kolb 1984, p. 108). It should be noted that experiential learning becomes effective if applied by learners capable of thinking critically and this is a fact that the Australian Army recognizes. In light of this, the Army has begun research on better methods of developing thinking skills among soldiers. Liberal learning has successfully been applied in the ‘adapt’ phase of the Australian Army’s ‘Adaption Cycle’ articulated in the Army’s model of Adaptive Campaigning. Fig 1: Kolb’s Model of Experiential Learning As with any other form of learning that is not controlled, learning what may be considered as inappropriate knowledge is hard to ignore (Kolb 1984, p. 140). This may be as a result of lack of ideal attitudes from fellow soldiers and from experts with minimal actual expertise – armchair experts. Once inappropriate knowledge has been learned, it becomes difficult to correct it. Commanders and supervisors in the Australia Army have therefore been vigilant over the years and take an active role in monitoring learning occurring within the liberal learning network (Plifka 2011, p. 29). This has made sure that the Australian soldier gains only appropriate knowledge and abides by Army rules and regulations. Learning Networks and Knowledge Congruence Learning networks within the Australian Army, in all reality, never fall perfectly into any one single category. The same can be said to the different types of learning occurring within the Army. The vertical model of learning in the Australian Army can be said to be the result of vertical nature of the organisation’s structure as well as its design (Plifka 2011, p. 18). Despite this, horizontal and liberal learning networks criss-cross the many different levels of the Australian Army vertical organisational structure. For instance, command learning policies will cross all learning networks to reach every single learning level in the Army. Similarly, a single learning activity will always be made up of components from several different network frameworks. These make learning and the acquired knowledge in the Army a very complex experience. The Australian soldier will be exposed to, at any given time, formal, informal and chance learning opportunities through structured and unstructured learning activities, self reflection and the performance of normal duties. All these contribute greatly to the development of the Australian soldier’s overall knowledge (Plifka 2011, p. 31). Conclusion Learning programs in the Australian Army have existed for a number of years and despite the strides made, full potential of such programs have not been harnessed. With a well developed and designed learning structure reinforced with committed personnel, workplace learning within the Australian Army as a community of practice will contribute greatly to a learning environment that fuctions optimally. References Wegner, E., and Snyder, W. (2000). Communities of Practice: The Organisational Frontier Harvard Business Review, 70(1) Kolb, D. (1984). Experential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Eaglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Poell, R., Chivers, G., Van der Grogt, F., and Wildermeersch, D. (2000). Learning-Network Theory: Organizing the Dynamic Relationships between Learning and Work. Management Learning. 31(1), 25-49 Billet, S. (2001). Learning in the Workplace: Strategies for Effective Practice. Crows Nest: Allen and Uwin. Plifka, J. (2011). Blended Learning: The Army’s Future of Education, Training and Development. Carlisle: US Army War College. Read More