Research and control samples

The research used a control group to assess the impact, if any, of the simulation learning tools on the trainees’ OH knowledge and awareness as well as their attitudes to OH matters. The control group participants (n = 91) received only the standard training provided by the college (discussed at length in Chapter Five), whilst the research/experimental group participants (n = 71) received the standard college training plus OH training employing the hands on simulations (LUSKInS). However, the use of control groups in research can raise ethical concerns when it is thought to be improper to deny an intervention to anyone who could benefit from it (Lau et al. 2003, Conner, 1980). This is particularly significant in medical research where evidence might exist that a treatment or intervention is beneficial, or where the program is perceived desirable and beneficial by participants (Huston, 2001, Emanuel and Miller, 2001). It would in that case be deemed unethical to deny the treatment to a control group of participants. In this research, the primary purpose was to investigate the role and perceived effectiveness of a simulation-based training approach, in order to

104

provide the evidence that this approach to learning is desirable and more effective than traditional training approaches. Thus, the research evaluated the simulation-based training in comparison to the usual training program, as opposed to comparing the LUSKInS-based training with no training at all. Therefore, whilst the control group participants did not receive LUSKInS-based training, they still received the benefits of OH training from the training that was provided by the colleges. Moreover, all participants in the study were fully informed of the study purposes as well as the existence of both a control and experimental group. They freely provided consent to take part in the study, and could withdraw from it at any time. Section 4.5 and the documents listed in Appendix A (1.1 – 1.7) provide further details of the study’s ethical considerations and the procedures that were followed in line with Loughborough University Ethics Committee’s requirements.

Nonetheless, implementation of the LUSKInS-based training was informed by constructivist and experiential learning principles and to a large extent followed the Kolb’s learning cycle (Section 2.3.2.3.2). Accordingly, the simulation-based sessions provided opportunities for the learners to go through the various modes of learning, including experiencing, reflecting, thinking and acting. They were characterised by:

 Learners actively participating in their learning by experiencing the illnesses and observing the consequences first hand;

 Learners asking questions of emerging relevance;

 More knowledgeable peers assisting other learners’ understanding by answering questions and sharing own experiences;

 Learners engaged in reflective thinking and open discussions. A detailed example of a LUSKInS lesson plan is provided in Appendix E.

The assessment of the differences in OH knowledge and attitudes between the control and experimental group participants (if any) due to the simulation-based training utilised questions within the survey questionnaires that were administered before (on day two of the apprentices’ induction week) and after the training (10 days after). Thus, OH knowledge and awareness, as well as attitudes to OH matters were the dependent variables, measured before and after the training, such that a before-and-after analysis could be conducted. It is important to point out that one of the complexities of measuring the effectiveness of OH training is that it can be difficult to separate the effects of training from other factors that can influence individual’s performance as well as their attitudes to OH matters (Cooper, 1998). For instance, whilst the decision was taken to conduct the post- training assessment ten days after the provision of training, factors such as H&S

105

campaigns, increased vigilance from a recent incident or H&S inspection and increased management’s commitment to H&S could arguably have had the opportunity to affect individuals during the time-lapse, and made it difficult to attribute any changes in the participants’ attitudes and performances sorely to the training intervention.

On the other hand, it was important to collect the research data and analyse what was learned or retained over an extended time frame, given that learning is generally considered to be an incremental process which takes time (Section 2.3). Hence, in addition to the data that was collected on day two and ten days after training, semi-structured interviews were conducted with fifteen trainees and eight instructors three months after training provision (Section 4.4.5) in order to fully assess the changes (if any) in the participants’ OH knowledge and attitudes, and whether or not this could be attributed to the training intervention. In addition, the research also utilised the control group to minimise the effect of other factors and to assess changes in knowledge and attitudes, if any, solely due to the training. It was important that both the control and experimental groups did identical jobs and were subject to the same everyday influences. The only factor differing between the groups was the provision of training using the LUSKInS to one group and non-provision of that training for the control group.

The questions that were used can be seen in the questionnaires provided in Appendix B, whilst Sections 4.6.1, 6.5 and 6.6 elaborate on the methods of analysis that were utilised. Figure 4.1 illustrates the experimental design that was adopted, with X representing both groups as equivalent before any training and Y and Y+ representing the results from the control and experimental groups after training, respectively.

106

Control Group

Standard college training only

Equivalent groups

Pre-training

Experimental Group Standard college training

Plus

LUSKInS-based training

Different OH awareness and attitudes?

Post-training

Figure 4.1: Experimental design –Control group VS Experimental group (adapted

from Abdulwahed and Nagy, 2009)

4.4.2.4 Limitations of survey research to study respondents’ attitudes and behaviours

In document An evaluation of the role and effectiveness of simulation-based learning in the occupational health training of construction apprentices (Page 120-123)