Gen Memo 12/13: New Member / IMO / Offshore/Workboats / ICSW/ MCQs/ Blog

Dear Member,

PLEASE ENSURE THIS GEN MEMO IS WIDELY DISTRIBUTED WITHIN YOUR

INSTITUTION

1 New Member

It is a pleasure to advise that Batumi State Maritime Academy has become a Member of

GlobalMET. BSMA is part of LEPL - Teaching University, located on the coast at the eastern

extremity of the Black Sea. With Maritime Training Centre 'ANRI', also in Batumi and long a

Member, GlobalMET now has two Members in Georgia. Rector Irakli Sharabidze and his

colleagues are very welcome and we look forward to the mutual benefit of participation in

GlobalMET.

2 IMO

2.1 STW 44

A copy of the latest version of the agenda is attached. The GlobalMET delegation is to be led by

Chairman Capt Tim Wilson. Agenda Item 3 'Validation of model training courses' has 10 papers

for consideration, which include the four 7 Series course reviewed and revised by GlobalMET

Members, together with the new Leadership and Teamwork Course, written by an international

correspondence group led by GlobalMET.

2.2 MSC 92

In association with this meeting on 12-21 June, which GlobalMET also intends participating in,

IMO is organising a Symposium on Ship Safety, to be held on 10-11 June. A copy of Circular

Letter no 3355 is attached. It is a pleasure to see that the session on Maritime Education and

Training is to be chaired by Prof Zheng Renping of Dalian Maritime University, a Member of

GlobalMET since the network was established. Prof Zhang has been a member of many China

delegations to IMO and also a long-term supporter of GlobalMET.

3 Offshore/Work Boats

3.1 IDPOA article

Further to the Work Boats: Certification and Training Forum hosted by GlobalMET during the

Asian Work Boat Exhibition 2013 in Singapore on 27 February, an article describing the forum

and it's findings is included in Issue 5 of the newsletter of the International Dynamic Positioning

Operators' Association (IDPOA) and can be viewed at http://goo.gl/9ZMLk. A similar article is

to be published by Baird Maritime in Work Boat World.

3.2 Asia Offshore Technology Conference

The Royal Norwegian Embassy, Innovation Norway, DNV and NBAS (Singapore) is hosting a

free-of-charge Asia Offshore Technology Conference in Singapore on 16 April, at which the

findings of the Forum in 3.1 above will be submitted for discussion.

4 ICSW

Attached is the last issue of ICSW News. ICSW is merging with the International Seafarers'

Assistance Network and changing its name to the International Seafarers' Welfare and Assistance

Network (ISWAN). ISWAN will provide direct welfare services to seafarers. The 24 hour multilingual

helpline, SeafarerHelp, runs every day of the year and is free for seafarers to call from anywhere in the world. In 2012 SeafarerHelp helped over 4000 seafarers and their families. administer an emergency welfare fund for seafarers in dire need, produces health information for seafarers, and provides information to seafarers on the 450 seafarer centres all over the world. ISWAN will also:

promote the welfare of seafarers worldwide. It will work in support of organisations and bodies that provide direct welfare services to seafarers.

facilitate the maintenance and establishment of welfare facilities and services in ports and on ships.

bring together and support its members to share. work for the implementation of the ILO Maritime Labour Convention 2006 in partnership with

companies, unions, governments, welfare organisations (secular and faith based), and ports for

the benefit of seafarers' welfare.

5 Murray Goldberg on MCQ's

Further to Gen Memo 11/13, multiple choice tests are one of the oldest assessment techniques in existence. Yet they are also one of the most highly maligned. Why, then, do they continue to be used so pervasively in maritime training? Are they effective or aren’t they? Attached is the second of a two-part series that looks at Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) in maritime training - or go to www.maritimeprofessional.com.

6 From the Blogs

James Manson • I am a North Sea Pilot and I have just returned from taking a VLCC from

Brixham to Rotterdam. The 3 OOWs, all European, were in their mid twenties, and I must say

they did an excellent job that I couldn't fault. As well as using the electronic charts, they also

used traditional methods to check the position and parallel indexing was used whenever

appropriate. Their chart-work was everything I was taught 40 years ago. The lookouts reported

ships and lights as they appeared.

Contrast this with a large container ship I was on last month. At one port, after the out bound

harbour pilot left, the OOW spent the next 45 minutes doing his paper work while I took the ship

down towards the Dover Straits. He started to take an interest as we approached Foxtrot 3.

Positions were put on haphazardly at intervals of about 30 minutes. Radar or visual fixes were

not employed. When charts were changed, the last position was not transferred. Alteration of

course positions were not logged. The lookout could steer well when needed, but he had no idea

about reporting ships or buoys. The captain appeared to tolerate this.

All bridge work on a ship starts with the captain. It is up to him to ensure that the bridge team

operates properly, both for collision avoidance and navigation. He has to set the standard.

Unfortunately, these days, the captain seems to have been reduced to the position of paperwork

manager. Ship's staff are under huge pressure to get the paperwork.done and sometimes

standards slip. That being said, the captain on the first ship had just as much paperwork, but

clearly made sure that his crew were well trained.

Perhaps the biggest difference between the two ships is that the tanker has to face regular

OCIMF inspections and these are far tougher than Port State Control. I doubt if 1 in 10 non-

tankers could pass an OCIMF inspection.

I have no problem with the current younger generation. If they lack the knowledge that we have,

then it is up to us to teach them. We have to explain to them why the magnetic compass and

traditional methods are still important is so important.

Nautical Institute 3 April

Kind regards

Rod Short

Executive Secretary

GlobalMET Limited

I:\STW\44\1-Rev-2.doc

E

SUB-COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS OF TRAINING AND WATCHKEEPING 44th session Agenda item 1

STW 44/1/Rev.2 2 January 2013

Original: ENGLISH

PROVISIONAL AGENDA*

for the forty-fourth session of the Sub-Committee, to be held at

IMO Headquarters, 4 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7SR

from Monday, 29 April to Friday, 3 May 2013

(Session commences at 9.30 a.m. on Monday, 29 April 2013)

Opening of the session 1 Adoption of the agenda 2 Decisions of other IMO bodies 3 Validation of model training courses 4 Unlawful practices associated with certificates of competency 5 Casualty analysis 6 Development of an e-navigation strategy implementation plan 7 Development of guidance for the implementation of the 2010 Manila Amendments 8 Promotion of the implementation of the 1995 STCW-F Convention 9 Development of guidelines for wing-in-ground craft 10 Role of the human element: .1 Guidelines on how to present relevant information to seafarers .2 Enhancing the efficiency and user-friendliness of ISM Code 11 Development of guidance for personnel involved with tug-barge operations 12 Revision of the Recommendations on training of personnel on mobile offshore units (MOUs) 13 Development of a mandatory Code for ships operating in polar waters 14 Review and modernization of the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS)

* Agenda item numbers do not indicate priorities.

STW 44/1/Rev.2 Page 2

I:\STW\44\1-Rev-2.doc

15 Review of general cargo ship safety 16 Biennial agenda and provisional agenda for STW 45 17 Any other business 18 Proposed amendment to the STCW Code's colour vision requirements 19 Report to the Maritime Safety Committee

Notes:

1 In accordance with the Guidelines on the organization and method of work of the MSC and the MEPC and their subsidiary bodies (MSC-MEPC.1/Circ.4/Rev.2):

.1 documents should be received in the Secretariat as follows*:

(a) documents (including information documents) containing more

than 6 pages of text (bulky documents) by Friday, 25 January 2013; (b) non-bulky documents (including information documents) and

bulky information documents, if submitted in electronic format, by

Friday, 22 February 2013; and (c) documents containing 4 pages or less, commenting on those referred

to in subparagraphs (a) and (b) above, by Friday, 8 March 2013 (see also paragraph 6.12.5 of the Guidelines);

.2 for reasons of economy, documents should be submitted in single spacing,

be as concise as possible and:

(a) all documents should include a brief summary prepared in accordance with section 6 of the above-mentioned guidelines;

(b) substantive documents should conclude with a summary of the action

which the Sub-Committee is invited to take; and (c) information documents should conclude with a summary of the

information contained therein;

* In the case of:

.1 documents exceeding the number of pages specified, the provisions of paragraph 6.12.1 of the Guidelines will apply; and

.2 documents other than information documents and correspondence group reports, which contain more than 20 pages, will not be translated into all working languages in their entirety. Such documents should include, for translation purposes, a summary of the document not longer than four pages, with the technical content submitted as an annex in the language needed by working groups (e.g. English).

STW 44/1/Rev.2 Page 3

I:\STW\44\1-Rev-2.doc

.3 the following word-processing format should be observed in order to standardize the presentation of documents:

- font: Arial; - font size: 11; - justification: full; - margins: 2 cm top; 2.5 cm bottom, left and right.

In this respect, a template is available on the IMODOCS website for use in the preparation of documents; and

.4 to facilitate the processing of documents, they should be accompanied by

USB flash drive, preferably in Microsoft Word, where available or sent via e-mail in Microsoft Word to IMO's e-mail address info@imo.org.

2 The MSC has recommended that the provisions of the above Guidelines, which, inter alia, provide that the Secretariat should strictly apply the rules concerning the submission of documents and not accept late submissions from Governments or delegations, should be strictly observed. 3 It should be noted that, in accordance with Circular letter No.2995 on Measures to reduce the costs of IMO meetings and meet United Nations climate neutral objectives, the distribution of meeting documents in hard copy, in advance of a meeting, will cease and hard copies of meeting documents produced in advance of meetings will no longer be available during the meetings.

___________

I:\C_L\3355.doc

E

4 ALBERT EMBANKMENT

LONDON SE1 7SR Telephone: +44 (0)20 7735 7611 Fax: +44 (0)20 7587 3210

Circular letter No.3355 20 March 2013

To: All IMO Members

Intergovernmental Organizations Non-Governmental Organizations in Consultative Status

Subject: Symposium on the Future of Ship Safety (10 to 11 June 2013) 1 The Secretary-General has the honour to invite attendance at the Symposium on Future Ship Safety, which has been scheduled to take place from 9.00 a.m. on Monday, 10 to Tuesday, 11 June 2013, at IMO Headquarters, 4 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7SR, United Kingdom. 2 The Symposium, to be conducted in English only, is open to attendees from Member States and IGOs/NGOs in consultative status with the Organization, Symposium steering group members, the media and other invitees on the basis of a limited allocation. Depending on the demand, seating in the Main Hall may be limited and those wishing to attend should contact a relevant Member State or IGO/NGO to secure a place. Attendees above the agreed allocation will be directed to committee room 9, where the proceedings of the Symposium will be shown via a video link. 3 The tentative programme for the Symposium, with invited speakers and session chairmen, is attached in the annex, but may be subject to change. After the event, the presentations made at the Symposium will be posted on the IMO public website.

Registration and security 4 To register for the event, reference is made to Circular letter No.2692 of 20 January 2006 concerning security at IMO meetings. All Symposium attendees are required to carry a specially-issued pass to gain access to the Headquarters building. In view of the costs incurred in the production of the pass, delegates to IMO meetings who have previously been issued with a security pass are kindly requested to bring this pass with them for reactivation. All attendees will be required, on first arrival, to show proof of identity, e.g. their passport or identity card. 5 Additionally, Member Governments, IGOs and NGOs are required to provide, prior to the Symposium date, the names of those intending to participate, via the Online Meeting Registration System (OMRS), which replaces the paper-based registration process, as advised in Circular letter No.3251, to facilitate their entry into the building and to the Main Hall. The list of Symposium attendees, which serves as authorization to attend, must be on official letter-headed paper and signed by the responsible officer of the Government or organization concerned, should be attached to the registration details sent via the OMRS, by Thursday, 6 June 2013, at the latest.

Circular letter No.3355 Page 2

I:\C_L\3355.doc

Any issues related to the use of the OMRS should be communicated to: Registration Unit Conference Section E-mail: registration@imo.org 6 No attendees will be registered without such evidence of authorization to attend the Symposium. Attendees whose names appear on the aforementioned list will be issued with the requisite pass, which will include a photograph of the bearer. Attendees whose names are not on the list will be requested to provide evidence of their authorization to attend the meeting. 7 Attendees are advised that the Registration Desk will be open for registration from 7.30 a.m. on 10 June 2013, when early arrival would be of assistance.

Procedure for visa applications 8 With a view to facilitating visa applications by those delegates who require United Kingdom entry visas, the Procedure governing the support by IMO for visa applications is attached.

***

TENTATIVE PROGRAMME

IMO SYMPOSIUM ON THE FUTURE OF SHIP SAFETY

IMO Headquarters, London 10 and 11 June 2013

Monday, 10 June, 2013 DAY 1 – SHIP SAFETY – WHERE ARE WE?

07.30 REGISTRATION

09:00 OPENING ADDRESS

Mr Koji Sekimizu

Secretary-General, IMO

This session will highlight the recent trends in ship

design and the likely impact on ship safety in the

decades to come in the light of such trends and discuss

how future risks should be assessed.

MODERATOR: Mr Bernard Meyer

Managing Director, Meyer Werft

Trends in Passenger Ship Design

Mr Harri Kulovaara, Executive Vice President, Maritime, Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd.

Trends in Containership Design

Dr Bo Cerup-Simonsen Senior Vice-President, Maritime Technology, Maersk

Trends Impacting Tanker Design

Mr Christopher Bailey Technical Vice President, BP Shipping

Trends in Ship Equipment

Dr Masayoshi Kawakami Senior Technical Advisor, Niigata Power Systems

11.00 COFFEE/TEA - SPONSORED BY

12:00 LUNCH

This session will look at the way shipping responds to the needs of society, industry and global trade and looks

to possible ways forward in the future.

MODERATOR: Mr Tom Boardley

Marine Director, Lloyd’s Register

Sustainable Development and the Future of the Maritime Industry

Mr Claes Berglund Director of Public Affairs and Sustainability, Stena

Ship owners’ perspective on the needs of the maritime industry

Dr Katharina B. Stanzel Managing Director, Intertanko

Meeting the needs of society and the maritime industry through ship design

Mr Wu Jiameng, Vice-Director Marine Design & Research Institute of China (CANSI)

Lessons learned from Fukushima

Mr Denis Flory Deputy Director General, IAEA

16.00 COFFEE/TEA - SPONSORED BY

This session will look at the economic, environmental

and consumer forces impacting maritime safety and how

such forces will drive future ship design and operations.

Moderator: Mr Peter Hinchliffe OBE

Secretary-General, ICS

Future Challenges for the Maritime Industry

Ms Birgit Liodden Secretary-General, YoungShip International

Economic Imperatives

Dr Martin Stopford President, Clarkson Research Services Limited

Innovation and Risk

Mr Philippe Corrignan, Head, Safety, Energy &

Environment Section, Bureau Veritas

Accident Zero Campaign

Mr Gary Prosser Secretary-General, IALA

18.30 EVENING RECEPTION - SPONSORED BY

11:30 PANEL DISCUSSION: WHAT WILL BE THE IMPACT ON

SAFETY IF THESE TRENDS CONTINUE?

15.30 PANEL DISCUSSION: ARE THESE VIEWS MUTUALLY

EXCLUSIVE OR IS THERE A WAY FORWARD?

17.50 PANEL DISCUSSION: CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES

09.30 SESSION 1 – FUTURE IMPACTS ON SHIP SAFETY

14.00 SESSION 2 – MEETING THE NEEDS OF SOCIETY

AND THE MARITIME INDUSTRY

16.30 SESSION 3 – DRIVING FORCES ON MARITIME

SAFETY

ANNEX Circular letter No.3355

TENTATIVE PROGRAMME

IMO SYMPOSIUM ON THE FUTURE OF SHIP SAFETY

IMO Headquarters, 10 and 11 June 2013

09.00 OPENING REMARKS

Mr Koji Sekimizu, Secretary-General, IMO

KEYNOTE SPEAKER

Dr Tor E. Svensen

President, DNV Maritime and Oil & Gas

This session will discuss the availability and need for

data collection and analysis methodologies necessary to

provide the sound scientific basis for continuous

improvement in the years to come.

MODERATOR: Dr Kirsi Tikka

President and COO, ABS Europe

Data Collection and Analysis Methodologies

Mr Koichi Yoshida, Maritime Consultant

The Scientific Risk-Based Approach

Mr Jim Peachey and Mr Rae McIntosh Royal Institute of Naval Architects (RINA)

Setting Goals for Safety

Dr R. Hamann, Sr. Engineer, Department Safety & Environmental Research, Germanischer Lloyd (GL)

Residual Risks and Emergencies

Mr Vaughan Pomeroy IMarEST

11.00 COFFEE/TEA - SPONSORED BY

12.00 LUNCH

This session will seek to identify the best way of

encouraging a safety culture beyond mere compliance

with statutory requirements based on both theoretical

and practical examples.

MODERATOR: Mr Gerardo A. Borromeo

President, Intermanager

Human Element and Maritime Safety

Professor Neil Greenberg Clinical Director, March on Stress

From Best Practice to Self-Regulation

Mr Andreas Nordseth Director General, Danish Maritime Authority

Education and Training

Professor Zhang Renping Dalian Maritime University

15.30 COFFEE/TEA - SPONSORED BY

This session will look at whether the current international

safety regulatory framework will effectively respond to

the future challenges discussed throughout the

Symposium and identify the actions needed to get us

from where we are today to where we need to be in that

future world.

MODERATOR: Dr Tom Allan

Former MSC Chairman

Gaps and Pitfalls in the Current Regulatory Framework

Professor Dracos Vassalos University of Strathclyde, Glasgow

Making Better Use of Industry Consensus Standards

Captain Charles Piersall, Chairman, ISO Technical Committee on Ships and Marine Technology (TC 8)

The Need for Change

Ms Anneliese Jost, Deputy Head, Maritime Safety Division, Federal Ministry of Transport

Shaping Safety into the Future

Mr Roberto Cazzulo Chief Operating Officer, Rina SpA

17.50 APPROVAL OF SYMPOSIUM RESOLUTION FOR

CONSIDERATION BY THE MARITIME SAFETY

COMMITTEE

18.00 CLOSING REMARKS

Mr Koji Sekimizu Secretary-General, IMO

Tuesday, 11 June, 2013 DAY 2 – SHIP SAFETY – ACHIEVING OUR GOAL

11.30 PANEL DISCUSSION: IS A RISK-BASED REGULATORY

APPROACH RIGHT FOR SHIP SAFETY?

15.00 PANEL DISCUSSION: CAN WE LEGISLATE FOR PEOPLE?

17.20 PANEL DISCUSSION: SOLAS 74 – IS IT TIME FOR A NEW

SOLAS CONVENTION?

09.30 SESSION 4 – RESPONDING TO REGULATORY

CHALLENGES THROUGH RISK ASSESSMENT

14.00 SESSION 5 – DEALING WITH THE HUMAN

ELEMENT

16.00 SESSION 6 – THE NEED FOR CHANGE

Circular letter No.3355

I:\C_L\3355.doc

PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SUPPORT BY IMO OF VISA APPLICATIONS Delegates invited by the Organization, and who require United Kingdom entry visas, should, in the first instance, apply for a visa at the nearest British Consulate or Embassy and obtain reference numbers. The necessary documentation (such as copy of the IMO programme of meetings (usually issued during December/January each year); the original and relevant IMO official letter of invitation (usually issued some six months prior to the time the meeting is to convene at IMO); nomination letter and note verbale from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs) must accompany such visa applications. Delegates must be nominated by the Ministry of Transport (or any other competent Ministry) or the National Maritime Administration. The nomination letter should be taken to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to prepare a note verbale to the British Embassy/High Commission.

If, upon following the above procedures, the delegates still have visa problems, then either the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Transport or the National Maritime Administration should communicate, on letterhead, the following details to the Head, Human Resources Services of IMO, requesting visa assistance and communicating the reasons, given by the British Embassy/High Commission, why visas have been refused or may be refused.

i First Name: Surname: Profession: Date of birth: Place of birth: Type of passport: Passport No: Place of issue: Date of issue: Valid until: Visa reference number: Date and place of visa application: ii Purpose of visit: iii Duration of anticipated stay in the United Kingdom:

This exercise must be undertaken at least six weeks before the date on which the meeting is to take place to enable the Organization to support the visa application accordingly and the visa to be issued in good time*.

___________

* Request for visa assistance should be sent to IMO by fax at (+44(0)20 7587 3210) or by e-mail at:

visa@imo.org.

Asia Offshore Technology Conference

- The Challenges of Offshore E&P in Asia Pacific

16th

of April 2013 at Raffles Town Club

Increased energy demand due to rapid economic development has driven countries in Asia Pacific to reduce their dependency on imported oil and gas by increasing their offshore exploration and production (E&P) activities. While such activities will enhance supply, they also pose challenges. This half day conference, which seeks to address these issues, is a joint collaboration between the Royal Norwegian Embassy, Innovation Norway, Norwegian Business Association (Singapore) and DNV. A specially commissioned survey on “The Challenges of Offshore E&P in Asia Pacific”, which analyzes the key trends and issues in the E&P sector in the region will be unveiled at the conference. The survey summarized key challenges facing the industry as viewed by the entire E&P value chain; from IOCs and NOCs to Production contractors, EPCI contractors, Drilling contractors and Regulators.

Key speakers from the industry including the EDB Executive Director Mr. Lim Kok Kiang, and Group Chairman of Douglas-Westwood, Mr. John Westwood will share their views focusing on key trends and themes related to:

General market outlook

Technology

Ageing assets and IRM (Inspection, Maintenance and Repair)

Human Resources

A highlight of this special conference will be a panel discussion, chaired by Mr. James Brown, DNV, where regulators from key countries in the region will discuss:

Regulatory landscape related to offshore safety

The current regulatory status and trends for the future

The possibility of unified regulatory requirements/approach in the future

The conference will take place the 16th of April at Raffles Town Club from 1 pm – 6.30 pm followed by a networking buffet. A detailed programme will follow shortly. The event is free of charge. To register for the event, please click here: REGISTER Address of the event: Raffles Town Club, 1 Plymouth Ave, Singapore 297753 Should you need more details, please contact: Royal Norwegian Embassy Ellen Skarsgard, e-mail: elsk@mfa.no, Tel.: +65 6818 2000

ICSW News - March 2013

Dear Subscriber, This is the last issue of ICSW News as from 1 April we are changing our name to the International Seafarers' Welfare and Assistance Network (ISWAN) as we merge with ISAN. The new organisation will be able to have a greater impact on the welfare of seafarers as well as being more efficient. Over the new few months we will launching several new initiatives including the 2013 International Seafarers Welfare Awards and a report on port levies and seafarers welfare. If your organisation or company would like to join ISWAN then please do contact me. In this month's ICSW News :

ISWAN Officially Launches on 1 April It's farewell to the ICSW and ISAN and welcome to ISWAN. On 1 April 2013 the International Committee on Seafarers' Welfare (ICSW) & the International Seafarers' Assistance Network (ISAN) formally merge ....»

A Hijacking The cargo ship MV Rozen is heading for harbour when it is hijacked by Somali pirates in the Indian Ocean. Among the men on board are the ship's cook Mikkel (Pilou Asbæk), who along with the rest of the seamen are taken hostage in a cynical game of life and death. ...»

ITF Launches New Apps For Seafarers 4 March 2013 The ITF is launching a new generation of free apps, including one to help seafarers and charterers support and build on the fair employment provisions of MLC 2006. A second app helps seafarers find a trade union and ...»

Seafarers' Welfare Organisations in the Ukraine Improve Co-ordination At a meeting in Odessa in the Ukraine on Wednesday 27 February seafarer welfare organisations agreed to come together to form an umbrella association. The meeting included local representatives from Mission to Seafarers,....»

ISF Calls on Governments to Facilitate Shore Leave for Seafarers The International Shipping Federation (ISF), and ICSW member, which represents maritime employers globally, is calling on port states to facilitate the right of seafarers to shore leave, in line with governments' international treaty obligations,...»

Emergency Fund for Seafarers Relaunched The Seafarers Emergency Fund (SEF) has just been re-launched. The SEF is a fund available to provide immediate, essential aid to seafarers and the families of seafarers, who are directly involved in sudden and unforeseen crises.....»

New Initiative to Improve the Fitness of Seafarers A new website, Training on Board (www.trainingonboard.org) aimed at increasing the fitness of seafarers has just been launched. The website has been developed by the Norwegian Maritime

Authority for the International Committee on Seafarers' Welfare (ICSW) ...»

Maritime piracy affects us all An European Union meeting in Brussels on 24 January heard from a wide range of different participants that piracy affects not only seafarers but also ordinary citizens and the world economy. The meeting of the EU European Economic and Social Committee (EESC)....»

You can download a pdf of ICSW March News here

If you have any stories and news about about seafarers' welfare, please send them toicsw@icsw.org.uk for inclusion in future issues. Please forward this email on to colleagues and networks. Best wishes

Roger Harris Executive Director ICSW roger.harris@icsw.org.uk t +44 (0) 300 012 4279

Visit the ICSW website here

Using Multiple Choice Tests in Maritime Training Assessments - Part 2

Introduction

In my last article I began a discussion of the use of multiple choice questions (MCQs) in maritime assessment. In this, the second article, I now continue the discussion by looking at two aspects of the use of MCQs:

the importance of using them in combination with other assessment techniques, and the importance of understanding cultural and gender issues as they relate to

MCQs (and other assessment techniques).

Although this second article is somewhat “high level”, in the third and final article of this series, I will switch gears to look at some very concrete and practical tips for writing and maintaining multiple choice questions. If you would like to receive a notification when the third part of this series is available (as well as for subsequent maritime training articles) and have not yet done so, please click here to sign up.

Quick Recap of Part 1

MCQ tests are one of the oldest and most widely used assessment techniques in existence. Yet they are also one of the most highly maligned. If you are looking for a good time, I encourage you to take a strong stand on (either side of) the use of MCQs next time you are sitting in a room full of trainers. I guarantee you a lively discussion, some new friends gained, and some old friends lost. On balance, my personal feeling is that MCQs, written carefully, and used appropriately as one component of a multidimensional assessment program, can be a real asset to a maritime assessment program. You may agree or disagree - in either case I hope we can still be friends. If you plan to use MCQs as part of maritime training and assessment, there are some basic guidelines that can be followed to help maximize their value and minimize their limitations. Even so, it is important to note that the limitations of MCQs can never be fully neutralized. What the detractors of MCQs often neglect to acknowledge, however, is that the same is true for any assessment technique. Every form of assessment, including MCQs, can be royally botched to the detriment of training and assessment if the trainer does not have a basic understanding of what he or she would like to achieve, how the various assessment techniques fit into the overall picture, and how to avoid the most common mistakes. While the discussion in this series of articles could hardly be considered comprehensive, it does, hopefully, serve to whet your appetite to find out more and to discuss the issues with your colleagues. It is an opportunity for us all to learn. Let’s look at the combination of MCQs with other assessment techniques, and the issue of cultural and gender differences as they relate to assessment.

Guideline #1: MCQs Should Never Be the Sole Assessment Technique

This is the first guideline here because I feel it is the most important. As I mentioned in the previous article, every form of assessment has its strengths and limitations. Fortunately, those of MCQs (both the strengths and limitations) generally are not the same as those of many other assessment techniques. Each technique has something to offer. As such,

combining mutiple techniques to form an assessment program is a very effective way of broadening assessment coverage and negating the weaknesses of individual techniques. To make this a bit more concrete, consider three assessment techniques: MCQs, constructed response questions (CRQs - i.e. a “written test” where trainees answer in sentence or paragraph form), and demonstrations of skill (Demo). Looking at each of these from a high level, I have chosen (more or less randomly) a few assessment goals and indicated whether that goal could be viewed as a strength (S) or a limitation (L) of that technique:

Assessment Goal \ Assessment Technique MCQs CRQs Demo

Is highly objective S L L

Ability to test basic knowledge S S L

Avoids potential to guess correctly L S S

Ability to test higher order thinking L S S

Ability to test skillful performance L L S

Requires ability to recall (rather than recognize) L S S

Resistant to trainees “studying the test” S L L

Non-overlapping Strengths and Limitations of Assessment Techniques

As I say, the table is not meant to be a proper assessment of strengths and limitations of assessment techniques. Those presented above are easily argued and are far from absolute. As such, the point of the table is not to demonstrate that one technique is better than the others - but instead to demonstrate that strengths and weakness of different techniques are largely non-overlapping. So feel free to substitute your own assessment goals and build your own table - I suspect you’ll find the same result. A Real-World Example: This fact that each assessment technique “brings something to the table” that the others cannot (and accommodates the shortcomings of the others) means that a combination of techniques can produce a better assessment outcome than any individual technique alone. This fact was not lost on British Columbia Ferry Services Inc. (BC Ferries) when they designed the assessment portion of their SEA program (Standardized Education and Assessment program). I have written about the outstanding (in my view) SEA program in the past, so I will just recap the assessment portion here. At BC Ferries, assessment (or “Clearance”) varies according to position and trainee background, but typically is a day-long event consisting of four assessment activities. The activities are meant to be complementary - each assessing the trainee from a different perspective. The four activities are as follows:

1. A multiple choice exam, on which the candidate must achieve a minimum grade of 80%. This tests critical basic knowledge and is 100% objective in grading.

2. An oral exam requiring the trainee to verbally respond to a number of proposed scenarios (for example - “You spot a fire in a trash can on the car deck. What actions

do you take”?).While not objective in grading, this helps test the ability to assess a scenario and “think on his or her feet”.

3. A demonstrative exam requiring the trainee to demonstrate proficiency and knowledge of a number of skills (for example - “Show the proper technique to pass through a watertight door and explain the various hazards associated with such an act.”). This tests the ability to perform required skills under normal situations.

4. A meeting with the master. This meeting is important for a number of reasons - one of which is to assess those attributes which usual assessment techniques are unable to. For example, communication skills, attitude, professionalism, etc.

I have greatly oversimplified the BC Ferries SEA assessment approach here, but the point is to illustrate an example of combining assessment techniques. BC Ferries has chosen these four types of assessment, but other combinations are also valid. Whatever is chosen, consider the various strengths and limitations of each, and chose the combination to ensure that all of the your assessment goals are met.

Guideline #2: Consider and (as much as possible) Accommodate Cultural and Gender Differences

After publishing the first article on MCQs, I received a very thoughtful response from Dan Connors who has a great deal of experience in maritime training in various parts of the world. His observation was that there were significant cultural differences in people’s ability to perform well on MCQs - and that many who could not perform well on them still could demonstrate competencies in other ways. At the same time, I recalled attending a presentation of an outstanding paper on the use of MCQs in the maritime industry given by co-author Denis Drown Ex.C., F.N.I. at IMLA 20 - the 20th International Conference on Maritime Training. The paper was titled “Multiple Choice Question Assessment: A Question Of Confidence”. Of the many interesting results presented in the paper, one of them was that there are gender differences in the ability to perform successfully on MCQ tests. This was a bit of an eye-opener for me. I had always been aware of cultural differences, but never considered gender differences. Although this is a significant oversimplification (and possible misrepresentation), I consider cultural and gender differences to boil down to two basic issues - familiarity with assessment techniques, and real differences in people based on their cultural and gender context.

Familiarity with MCQs

The first issue is that some people are completely unaccustomed to the MCQ format. After all, MCQs are more of a North American phenomenon - less popular in other parts of the world and almost unheard of in still other parts. We cannot expect people who, during their school years, had never seen a MCQ to perform well when confronted with them. This problem, while very important, is something we can partially accommodate for through practice. And fortunately, practice is one of the great strengths of MCQs. MCQs are an excellent formative testing technique - one for the use of the trainee to assess their own uptake of knowledge as they progress through learning. And because they are easily delivered by technology in a randomized fashion, they can be experienced over and over again, on demand, each time with a different set of questions. In this way, trainees not only gain insight into whether they are learning the knowledge to the depth expected, but they also derive the side benefit of becoming accustomed to, and proficient with, the assessment technique itself. This effect cannot be overstated for any assessment technique. Trainees must have the opportunity to practice assessments before they are faced with their “final exam”. Otherwise, when exam time comes, although they may be very familiar with the materials, they may be confounded by the assessment technique and thus perform poorly. In my university classes,

I always ensure that my students have seen and done one of my exams before the final exam. Otherwise, I am testing familiarity with my style of questioning, not familiarity with computer science concepts (or in this case, maritime concepts).

Yes - People are Different

The second issue with respect to cultural and gender differences is that, simply said, people of different genders and cultural background are … well … different. As such, their performance is going to reflect not only their actual knowledge, but also the differences in personality traits molded by cultural norms and gender influences. As with many of the issues raised, this is true of all types of assessment - MCQs are no exception. In the paper presented by Denis Drown at IMLA he indicates that gender differences in MCQ testing need to be considered given increased female participation and recruitment in the maritime industry. He cites a number of studies which indicate that “MCQ tests promote values of objectivity, factual knowledge, and rapid performance (male socialisation), and devalue subjectivity, reflection, introspection and feelings (female socialisation)”. And that “Females do less well than males on MCQ tests and better on essay tests … with lower MCQ test scores for females attributed to social and cultural differences”. Although the above text addresses gender differences, I suspect that very similar findings are true when considering cultural differences. We have all had the experience of seeing people from different cultures perform very differently on our tests. These are deep differences inherent in culture and gender affecting not only the ability to perform on various assessment types, but also how people learn. I suspect that these differences will be similarly evident on all forms of assessment - not only on MCQs. This, to me, is yet another strong argument for combining multiple assessment techniques. Doing so would hopefully help to balance the playing field as people with different backgrounds will have more and less success with each assessment type. At the very least, it is important to be aware of the issues and consider them when designing your assessment program.

Conclusion of Part 2

As I concluded in the first article of this series, I believe MCQs to be of value despite their shortcomings. All assessment techniques have shortcomings. Should MCQs be used as the sole technique to assess seafarers? Absolutely not. Nor should any other technique. Likewise, in designing an assessment program, we need to be aware of the differences between people of different cultures and genders - and the fact that those differences affect their ability to perform on different types of assessments. The next article is going to conclude this series with some practical guidelines on how to create good multiple choice questions. While it is not difficult to do so, a little bit of advice goes a long way in ensuring the time you put into it yields good results. If you would like to receive notification of the final article of this series (and subsequent maritime training articles) and have not yet done so, please click here to sign up to receive notifications. Until then - thanks for reading!

# # # About The Author: Murray Goldberg is the founder and President of Marine Learning Systems (www.marinels.com), the creator of MarineLMS - the learning management system designed specifically for maritime industry training. Murray began research in eLearning in 1995 as a faculty member of Computer Science at the University of British Columbia. He went on to

create WebCT, the world’s first commercially successful LMS for higher education; serving 14 million students in 80 countries. Murray has won over a dozen University, National and International awards for teaching excellence and his pioneering contributions to the field of educational technology. Now, in Marine Learning Systems, Murray is hoping to play a part in advancing the art and science of learning in the maritime industry.