Simulations use in other sectors

It is noteworthy that the use of simulations is quite extensively documented within medical and other higher education settings but it is not clear what the extent of application is in other sectors. Two cases are considered here, hospitality management and family law practitioners.

Edelheim and Ueda (2007) provide a case study to demonstrate the effective use of simulations in hospitality management education. The case study was based on groups of 30 participants at the International College of Tourism and Hotel Management (ICTHM) in Sydney, Australia.

Edelheim and Ueda found that one benefit of using simulations is in the development of decision-making and group skills. They argue that the simulation approach provides a representation of reality and therefore allows participants to make difficult decisions and develop decision-making skills (higher-order skills) without the risk of failure that could damage the business if practiced in the real world.

Edelheim and Ueda cite Fawcett and Lockwood (2000) in highlighting teamwork as another important skill that is difficult to develop in a traditional classroom situation. They argue that it is possible for lecturers to teach the principles of group work skills in a classroom situation, but to gain true

understanding of group dynamics students must experience a role in a real working group. They assert that simulations can be constructed to recreate real group work situations, but for these situations to be realistic, Edelheim and Ueda cite Roberts (1999), who suggests that participants should not be allowed to choose team mates themselves but should be placed in teams randomly. Roberts points out that this may remove the opportunity for participants to form groups with someone they feel comfortable with and thereby impact on the ‘fun’ element of simulations. They clearly identified that working as closely as possible to reality achieves the optimum benefits from the simulations, stating that in real life situations individuals rarely get the opportunity to choose work colleagues. This is particularly true in the hospitality management sector, where work can involve a variety of different locations and teams.

Edelheim and Ueda’s research also addresses the role of the simulation administrator in simulation based learning. They assert that as with lecturers in traditional classroom teaching, the simulation administrator must be fully familiar with the teaching material, this is important to guide simulations effectively and respond to participant questions/difficulties. They argue that if the administrator is also the simulation designer then understanding of the simulation environment would be sufficient for success. However, where the administrator is not the designer, it is necessary to invest sufficient time to become fully familiar with the scenario. Edelheim and Ueda also suggest that it is essential that the administrator is able to clearly communicate to participants areas within the simulation which may not be fully realistic. They

suggest this can be used as an element for discussion sessions within the simulation and thereby further develop participants’ understanding of the simulated environment versus real life. In the conclusion to their study, Edelheim and Ueda stated that simulation based learning has been shown to be particularly effective in the development of decision-making (higher-order) skills.

In the education of family law practitioners Apel (2011) identified that most law schools maintain a ‘business as usual’ attitude to traditional teaching methods. These methods rely on the study of casebooks and are primarily a passive way of learning in that they remove the students from the realities of practising law on a day-to-day basis. Apel proposed an alternative method of teaching and learning that bridges the gap between theory and practice through the use of simulations. In Apel’s simulation approach, students take on the role of practicing lawyers within a law firm. As they work through simulated cases students receive information through items, such as briefing notes, memorandums from the firm’s senior partner, copies of letters, rules of professional conduct and invitations to client meetings. In addition they are asked to address ethical issues such as whether or not the firm should engage in representation of both parties in a family law case. In doing so the simulations provide a blend of lower-order and higher-order skill development opportunities.

Apel also highlights the importance of the simulation administrator role in a similar way to that described by Edelheim and Ueda. Apel suggests that the

simulation administrator is essential to direct discussions and provide data as simulations progress. Students learn substantive law through reading statutory and case law and other exercises which are injected into the simulations.

Again, Apel highlights a key challenge as that of establishing the balance of realism. She states that students work with a safety net, in that they can refer for guidance from senior partners and help from colleagues. This is all created within an environment where mistakes would not impact on real clients’ lives. However, Apel suggests care must be taken to ensure the environment is not overly artificial thereby diminishing the benefit of the simulation approach.

A further advantage of simulation based learning identified by Apel, is that it requires students to recognise their own strengths and weaknesses. For example, the skills of communication, listening, interaction and judgement are all developed through the approach.

Considering the disadvantages, Apel highlights that simulations require a fairly small teacher to student ratio, she suggests no more than 16 students per simulation. It seems there is a divergence of views as to optimum number for simulation application, with Edelheim and Ueda (2007) suggesting a maximum of 30 participants within their case study. However, the point that Apel makes is that the number of participants must be controlled such that the activity can be effectively supervised and managed.

The second point made by Apel reinforces that made by Alliger and Janak (1989) that simulations need to be carefully prepared. Apel asserts that scenario briefing material should be drafted in detail, together with appropriately selected support materials for injection during the simulation. This supports and reinforces the requirement that preparation is a key aspect in the success of a simulation based learning approach.

In conclusion, Apel confirms that simulations provide an effective approach for improving the pedagogy of family law teaching. However, she does point out that there is a limitation, in that all participants may not adapt easily to taking on the responsibilities of active learning which is required in a simulation based methodology.