Learning through Making If–Then Connections

During the training at CCTC, cadets make connections of a third, and related, kind, which are if-then connections. As cadets make these connections they learn to draw distinctions between why certain courses of action are correct or incorrect based on the practical consequences of those actions. Making if-then connections is noted in the example below, which shows the use of a photograph for cadets to get an idea about the potential consequences of incorrect actions on board.

This brings the presentation to a photo of a ship that bent in an upside down U shape – this is called hogging. The photo shows the physical representation of what happens if there is no understanding of bending pressure and if the cargo is loaded incorrectly. [CCTC Field Notes 1st Block]

The example above highlights to the cadets, the consequences of incorrect cargo loading on the ship structure. Hence, it helps the cadets connect to the site of practice of the ship and, through making the connection it helps them learn the distinction between the correct and incorrect courses of action. In terms of Tsoukas & Vladimirou’s (2001) understanding of distinctions, if-then connections can be conceived as – if these actions are performed, then that is the consequence. Cargo loading is not a task given to cadets; it is usually the job of the chief officer on board, who oversees the cargo loading operations and comes up with the cargo loading plan, which is based on calculations of the effect of the cargo weight on the ship structure. However, in learning about bending stress, the cadets learn the consequentiality of the actions (Feldman & Orlikowski, 2011) on board; that is, if the cargo is not loaded correctly, it might result in damage to the ship.

In showing the cadets a photo of a bent ship, the instructors at CCTC help them make connections between practices at CCTC and their (the cadets’) future work practices on board. Furthermore, it allows the cadets to envision the if-then connections through a visual representation of what might happen as a consequence of actions on board. Envisioning helps the cadets draw distinctions in terms of what is or is not acceptable per the international regulations, the flag-state regulations and the company regulations. It is a way of showing, do X instead of Y because the consequences of Y are shown on the screen in front of you.

If-then connections are made by the cadets primarily in simulation sessions, because simulators help the cadets see in real time what the consequences of certain actions are. Simulators help the cadets familiarize themselves with material aspects of the ship, such as the navigation console and other equipment such as the GMDSS and ECDIS which are commonly used on board. Simulations also help the trainers at CCTC and Crewco ensure that the cadets have some degree of understanding of the equipment, as they are aware that cadets on board ship might not always get the chance to participate on the bridge (Chapter 5 will discuss this in-depth discussion). Newcomers, through observing old-timers operate ship simulations can get a sense of which materials are used for what purposes and start understanding the role of the navigational equipment on board as well as the simulator as a learning tool. The field notes below show that before they go on board, cadets are given a chance to observe and participate in certain aspects of simulation training.

We go into the sim room and Capt R explains the equipment and what it does, what it is used for and the different parts - fire panel, GMDSS, GPS, radar. He tells them how to operate the radar. The cadets are all huddled around the radar screen watching Capt R work on it. He shows them how to switch mode from day to night, how to acquire target, how to cancel. Then goes over the overhead console. He shows them the speedometer. The forward and aft speeds, the port and starboard speeds and says that this comes in very handy during docking. He shows them how to use the control panel to maneuver the ship, change the speed and the different functions. For example, what to do in the case of emergency run or stop. He gives them an example where the main engine has a problem or emergency or malfunctions. The system will automatically stop the functions to prevent further damage. However, there is a way to bypass the system. The class then moves to the wheel, where one of the cadets has volunteered to take the wheel. Capt R goes to the main control panel shows them how to

perform a certain function and gives the acting helmsman the heading, 180. [CCTC Field Notes 1st Block]

Thus, during their first blocks, the cadets use the simulators to observe; they are not encouraged to manipulate the equipment. Hence, they are still treated as peripheral participants at this site of practice; their legitimacy at this stage is being negotiated through demonstrations of skillfulness (Lave & Wenger, 1991: 68). As the simulators are expensive pieces of equipment, their progression with the simulators is gradual. First, they learn about the equipment, the language of helm orders, and the functions and procedures to be performed on board. Then, gradually, they learn certain aspects of manipulating the equipment, working in bridge teams, simulating being officers on watch, among others. Moreover, it allows the cadets to observe the old-timers perform aspects of the practices of navigation (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Gherardi et al, 1998). In this sense, simulator training creates a safe environment for cadets to learn some aspects of the practices of navigation. Furthermore, we see the link between if-then connections and the use of simulators to form connective visions of the consequences of actions on board. The example shows the instructor taking the cadets through the different parts of the navigation console and how to use the equipment in different situations such as changing speed or maneuvering the ship. Here cadets are making if-then connections regarding the use of equipment on board. If speeding up the ship, then use the speedometer and control panel. If making an emergency stop, then use the control panel in this way.

The example above shows how cadets use simulators to make if-then connections through envisioning the correct course of actions for particular situations on board. The simulation training acts as a supplement and buffer for the cadets to use in case they do not get a chance to perform maneuvers in practice, or if they are given the opportunity to perform in practice, then

to enable them to perform competently. If-then connections help newcomers draw distinctions though preparing the cadets for the “what-if” scenarios that they might face as future operational seafarers. “What if something goes wrong?” – is the cadet then able to identify the potential causes of the problem? “What if the equipment stops working” – is the cadet then able to perform the calculations manually. “What if the port authorities question a particular action?” – is the cadet then able to state the correct procedure and explain the actions taken? This emphasis on the “what if” is a reason for both theoretical and practical training at CCTC – “what if the cadets do not get a chance to do these things on board?” The training at CCTC then becomes a way through which the organization (Crewco) seeks to control the learning of the cadets, by providing them with an alternate scheme to what they will experience on board.

Critically, the section above highlights the use of dialogical and material apparatus to envision the connections between sites of practice. The particular practice of envisioning connections using the dialogical and material apparatus is what I term forming connective visions. Connective visions are important for the process of transition, because they allow the newcomers to form the connections between the sites. These connections are formed only when the cadets are able to see or envision the concrete representations of shipboard practices which are found in the dialogical and material apparatus at this site of practice.

Prior to going on the ship, the cadets do not have access to forms of participation, discussed in Chapter 2 (section 2.6) such as physical immersion (Ribeiro 2012). Furthermore, forms of participation such as physical contiguity (Ribeiro, 2012) are not possible to the full extent. While cadets have access to simulation training and maybe a ship visit, they do not have access to the forms of participation required to be legitimate peripheral participants in operational seafaring. Making connections is

essential for drawing distinctions because it allows the cadets to understand the consequentiality of their potential actions on board. In traditional apprenticeship setting newcomers learn the correct and incorrect ways of doing through direct observation, through mimesis (Billett, 2014; Chan, 2015), and through physical immersion (Ribeiro, 2012) in the practices. However, at CCTC we see an attempt to draw distinctions about the correct and incorrect ways of doing without the newcomers’ physical presence in the setting, through making connections between the sites of practice.