REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS 9664

ELAINE T. CULLEN, Ph.D., and 

ALBERT H. FEIN, Ph.D.
Tell me a Story

3

REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS 9664

ELAINE T. CULLEN, Ph.D., and 

ALBERT H. FEIN, Ph.D.

August 2005
Tell me a Story

4

Disclaimer Page

Mention of any company or product does not constitute endorsement by the 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). In addition, 

citations to Web sites external to NIOSH do not constitute NIOSH endorsement 

of the sponsoring organizations or their programs and products. Furthermore, 

NIOSH is not responsible for the content of these Web sites.

This document is in the public domain and 

may be freely copied or reprinted.

Ordering Information

To receive documents or more information about 

occupational safety and health topics, contact NIOSH at:

NIOSH -- Publications Dissemination

4676 Columbia Parkway

Cincinnati, OH 45226-1998

Telephone: 1-800-35-NIOSH (1-800-356-4674)

Fax: 513-533-8573

E-mail: Pubstaft@cdc.gov

or visit the NIOSH Web site at www.cdc.gov/niosh

SAFER HEALTHIER PEOPLE TM

DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2005-152

August 2005
Tell me a Story

5

Acknowledgments

 A work such as this owes more than I can say to the many miners 

across the West who have cheerfully and enthusiastically assisted me in 

filming, acting, evaluating, and encouraging the production of these videos. 

They have opened their hearts and their souls to recall painful memories of 

one of the most frightening experiences that can happen to a miner—a mine 

fire. They have given time and thoughtful consideration of what a new 

miner needs to know to survive in a work environment noted for its dangers 

and its harshness. Photographs of some of them are scattered throughout 

this document. 

In addition, I want to acknowledge the contribution of the professional 

film crew from TCI/ComCast who worked with us on this research effort. 

Diane Cortez, production manager, Brian Headding, editor, Bill Fitzner and 

Ann Byers, videographers, made these videos a reality with their willingness 

to try a sometimes frighteningly unknown environment, their enthusiasm 

in adjusting to mining schedules and culture, and the good humor that 

they conveyed to the miner-actors as they encouraged them and coached 

them through the filming of the videos. Their patience and professionalism were much appreciated. I also appreciate the contributions of my 

co-author, Dr. Albert Fein, Associate Professor at Gonzaga University. 

The work he did on the evaluation of the effectiveness of our training 

videos was both professional and invaluable. Thanks also go to the two 

who helped format this publication, Priscilla Wopat, technical editor, and 

Kim Clough-Thomas, visual information specialist. It may take a village 

to raise a child, but this publication shows that it takes a village to tell a 

good story! 

 Elaine T. Cullen, Ph.D.
Tell me a Story

6

Table of Contents

4 Disclaimer

5 Acknowledgments 

6 Table of Contents

7 List of Figures and Tables 

8 ABSTRACT

9 INTRODUCTION

10 REVIEW OF RELEVANT THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS 

12 Adult learning styles 

12 Theories of adult learning 

13 Relevance of adult learning theory to training 

15 Mentors 

16 Role of culture 

19 Value of storytelling 

25 RESEARCH APPROACH 

25 Finding the subject 

26 Process 

28 Products 

31 Review 

32 EVALUATION 

36 Interviews of mining safety trainers and safety experts 

38 General overview of evaluation results 

42 YOU ARE MY SUNSHINE

45 EVALUATION OF ZEN AND THE ART OF ROCK BOLTING

51 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 

53 REFERENCES

56 APPENDIX A: Sample technical review questionnaire 

57 APPENDIX B: Sample pre- and post-tests for trainees 

66 APPENDIX C: Pre-test and post-test for Hidden Scars video

68 APPENDIX D: Pre-test and post-test for Zen and the Art of Rock Bolting

70 APPENDIX E: Trainers’ questionnaire for Zen and the Art of Rock Bolting
Tell me a Story

7

List of Figures

Figure 1. Handling Explosives in Underground Mines video poster

Figure 2. Rock Falls: Preventing Rock Falls in Underground Non-coal 

 Mines video poster

Figure 3. Miner Mike Saves the Day video poster

Figure 4. Filming of the Hazards in Motion video

Figure 5. Hazards in Motion video poster

Figure 6. Hidden Scars video poster

Figure 7. You Are My Sunshine video poster

Figure 8. NIOSH conducting interviews at the Sunshine Mine

Figure 9. Zen and the Art of Rock Bolting video poster

Table

Table 1. Improvement percentages between pre- and post-test responses, 

inexperienced versus experienced miners
Tell me a Story

8

Elaine T. Cullen, Ph.D.1

1 Communications chief, Spokane Research Laboratory, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Spokane, WA.

Albert H. Fein, Ph.D.2

2 Associate professor, Gonzaga University, Spokane, WA.

ABSTRACT

Federal law mandates that all miners receive safety and health training 

when first entering the mining industry and at least 8 hours annually 

thereafter. Although the mining industry has historically relied on an 

experiential master-apprentice model for training new employees, the 

formal safety training provided to miners is generally done in a classroom, with mixed results. In a series of stakeholder meetings held by 

NIOSH across the West in 1997-2000, trainers identified significant 

gaps in materials that were available to teach new and experienced miners. They asked whether NIOSH could develop effective materials to 

fill these perceived gaps, as well as make training more effective for 

those who were required to attend, but who often refused to be attentive. Adult learning theories, social learning theories, mentoring, and 

storytelling were all employed in the development of a series of safety 

training videos that have become very popular in the mining industry. 

This Report of Investigations describes the theoretical frameworks that 

were used, the process that was developed to produce the videos, and 

the results of the evaluations as to whether or not they were effective in 

training new and experienced miners.
Tell me a Story

9

INTRODUCTION

 Since 1977, when the Mine 

Safety and Health Act was revised 

to include U.S. metal and nonmetal 

mines in addition to coal mines, safety 

training for all mine workers has been 

legislatively mandated. Under the Act, 

new underground miners are required 

to receive a minimum of 40 hours of 

training before beginning their careers, 

and incoming surface 

miners are required 

to receive 24 hours. 

Thereafter, every employee is required to 

attend a minimum of 

8 hours of annual refresher training that is 

to include discussions 

of safety and health as 

well as information 

on hazard recognition and other topics 

deemed necessary by 

mine management and the Mine Safety 

and Health Administration (MSHA). 

 In late 1998, NIOSH funded 

a small-scale research project at its 

Spokane Research Laboratory (SRL) 

entitled “Development and Evaluation of Effective Safety Training for 

Miners.” This project was initiated 

in response to requests heard during a 

series of stakeholder meetings held by 

SRL staff around the West. At these 

meetings, mine safety professionals 

reported what they perceived to be a 

critical lack of appropriate materials 

that could be used to train both new and 

experienced miners. They observed 

that for many topics, the only materials available were decades old and, 

in some cases, were outdated enough 

to make them irrelevant. The safety 

trainers were in agreement that these 

materials were ineffective at best and 

that miners both dreaded and resisted 

the federally mandated safety training 

because they considered it a waste of 

time. Thus, while the law was specific 

in its requirement that 

miners attend training, it 

could not mandate that 

miners learn.

 The principal 

investigator (the primary 

author) on this project 

gathered a group of safety trainers and directors 

from operating mines 

throughout the West to 

assist in the selection 

of topics, methods, and 

training media so that 

the resulting training 

materials would be both 

useful to and used by industry trainers. Concurrently, research began on 

adult and social learning theories, 

training methods, effects of culture on 

learning, and best practices in occupational training. Because video was 

the medium preferred by members of 

the advisory group, all products developed under the project were in the 

form of videotapes. 

 When completed, reviewed, 

and released, the videos created 

were provided free of charge to mine 

safety professionals. A database was 

generated that included the customers3

3

 Because most of the trainers who received the videos were employed in Western underground mines, this group 

composed the largest demographic subgroup during the evaluation phase of the project. 

who requested videos; this 

database allowed information to be 

gathered on how and when the videos 
Tell me a Story

10

were used. Evaluators incorporated 

data from miners who had viewed 

the training videos and from trainers 

who had shown the videos in training 

sessions to determine how the videos 

were being used and whether or not 

they were truly effective. 

 This Report of Investigations 

discusses the first seven videos produced as part of the project, the theoretical models used in creating the 

videos, the methods used to produce 

them, and an evaluation of their effectiveness as determined by the miners 

and safety trainers. Six training videos dealt with underground mining, 

in particular, underground hard-rock 

mining. Although the topics covered (which include ground control 

methods, working with explosives, 

and recognition of roof and mobile 

equipment hazards) are common 

to most underground mines, unlike 

older training films, these videos 

were all shot in deep hard-rock 

mines using real hard-rock miners 

as actors. The seventh video, You 

Are My Sunshine, describes the 

events leading up to the disastrous 

Sunshine Mine fire of 1972 and the 

lessons learned from it; the story of 

the fire is told through the experiences and voices of 27 people who 

lived through it.

REVIEW OF RELEVANT THEORETICAL 

FRAMEWORKS

By Elaine T. Cullen

 Miners are not considered to 

be traditional learners. Their work is 

physical and is performed in an environment frequently described as hostile. 

Survival in this environment depends 

on the ability to maintain a constant 

state of awareness about potential dangers, to read the signs of danger and 

make sense of what’s happening, and to 

react appropriately when the environment changes. Kowalski-Trakofler et 

al. (2004, p. 2) state that —

Training is especially relevant in 

the mining industry because the 

mine environment is dynamic 

and constantly changing. This 

dynamic environment makes 

engineering controls harder to 

implement and frequently less 

effective than they might be on 

a shop floor. 

 Although federal law requires 

miners to attend safety training classes, 

in reality, these workers tend to learn 

their trade in a mine, not in a classroom, 

and they generally learn from more-experienced miners in a master-apprentice 

relationship rather than from reading 

training manuals or safety policies and 

regulations. New miners coming into 

the industry belong to demographic 

cohorts that do not expect to be taught 

in a traditional, authoritative classroom 
Tell me a Story

1

setting (Kowalski-Trakofler et al., p. 5). 

The miners themselves are very explicit 

about how they prefer to learn—

It’s on-the-job training. They 

would never put you with an 

inexperienced person, they’d 

put you with one who was 

already experienced. And 

you’d learn your 

trade through 

that person. 

He’d teach you 

what he knows 

and then maybe 

a few weeks or 

months down 

the road you 

might partner 

up with another 

individual that 

also has several years of 

training and he’ll teach you 

his methods of work and so 

forth. (Mitchell, personal 

communication, 2001)

You don’t want to...[learn 

to mine] with somebody you 

don’t trust and don’t look 

up to. And I think that’s 

why...everybody will name 

somebody that taught them, 

you know, because...he was 

willing to take time and show 

these guys how to survive, 

really. That’s what they 

are teaching them is how to 

survive....There’s no way 

that you can learn that in a 

classroom. You’ve got to be 

down there one-on-one with 

a miner....You ain’t gonna 

learn nothing until you get 

down there and actually start 

doing it. (Jerome, personal 

communication, 2002)

1

 Federal law, however, requires 

that new hires participate in a classroom 

course, and typically the trainer 

generally relies on a traditional “I talk, 

you listen” model. One of the primary 

goals of the project research, therefore, 

was to find alternate ways to provide 

information and training to miners that 

would be effective in both keeping 

them safe long enough to learn the trade 

(if they were newly hired) or to remind 

them of the importance of working 

safely (if they were experienced). How 

could these two seemingly disparate 

realities be melded to create successful, 

effective safety training for the workers 

involved? This was the challenge for 

the NIOSH project.
Tell me a Story

12

Adult Learning Styles

 Miners fit the definition of 

“adult learners” as described by 

Knowles, Holton, and Swanson (1998). 

As adult learners, they make decisions 

about what, or indeed, even whether, 

they choose to learn. Knowles, who 

is generally credited with being one of 

the originators of modern adult learning theory, based his theory on primary 

assumptions about how adults learn. 

These include the need for training to 

be grounded in real-life experiences 

and the premise that skills or knowledge 

learned must be applicable to immediate 

circumstances. Adults are pragmatic 

in their learning. Unlike children in a 

schoolroom, they will not put energy 

into learning what does not appear relevant to their lives. For training to be 

effective, adult learners—

Theories of Adult Learning

 • Need to know why they 

 need to learn something.

 • Need training to be 

 self-directed.

 • Need training to be related 

 to prior experience.

 • Must be ready to learn.

 • Must be motivated to learn.

 • Must believe that what 

 they are learning is oriented 

 toward problem solving.

( (pp. 64-68)

 Adults are motivated to learn 

those things that will be helpful in solving 

problems or will provide what Knowles 

calls an “internal payoff” rather than an 

external one (p. 149). While this does 

not mean that adults don’t value promotions or pay raises that may result from 

increased training, the stronger motivator 

is the satisfaction of perceived internal 

needs. Knowles (p. 149) cites Wlodowski 

(1985) in explaining this preference, who 

suggests that adult learners are more 

motivated to learn if—

 • They believe they will be 

 successful.

 • They believe they have a 

 choice in whether or 

 not to learn.

 • They see the training as 

 valuable.

 Caudron (2000) interviewed a 

number of adult professionals to gather 

information on what effective training 

looked like. Responses from participants were consistent and showed that 

adults learn differently than do children. Their most memorable learning 

came from personal experiences, from 

working within groups of other adult 

learners, and from mentoring they received from someone they perceived to 

be both knowledgeable and wise.

 Caudron also discovered that in 

spite of this preference for real-world 

training, over 70% of current training 

in organizations was still the talkinghead variety, with a trainer in front of 

a classroom and the trainees sitting and 

listening passively. While this may be 

an effective way to teach children, it 

doesn’t work well with adults. It’s no 

wonder that trainees are impatient with 

this type of training. Not only is it NOT 

self-directed or experiential, it’s not very 

interesting. Trainers who are required 

to teach a range of technical topics but 

who don’t make classes enjoyable are 

missing the boat, according to Owenby, 

who states, “Training programs that deal 

strictly with technical, job-related subjects are boring” (1992, p. 43). 
Tell me a Story

13

 An investigation into theories of 

adult learning and occupational training revealed many to choose from, and 

they often included differing objectives 

or ideas. Zemke suggests that there 

is no such thing as an overall “general 

theory of adult learning” (2002, p. 89). 

He believes that all have valid points to 

make, but for any training to be truly 

effective, it is necessary to choose the 

theoretical framework that best fits 

the trainees themselves as well as the 

organization’s training objectives and 

its occupational culture. The goal is not 

necessarily to increase 

knowledge, but rather 

to create expertise. 

 Social learning 

theory (SLT) may provide the best model for 

the creation of training 

materials for skilled bluecollar workers, particularly those who work in 

trades that depend on 

older, wiser workers to 

mentor new employees, 

as mining does. SLT 

has its roots in theories 

of behaviorism originally described by 

Skinner and other psychologists in the 

1940’s in which rewards and punishments were considered to have a great 

impact on behavior. SLT was officially 

proposed by two researchers, Miller 

and Dollard, as a means of explaining 

human behavior. Their book, Social 

Learning and Imitation, was published 

in 1941 (Stone, 1999), and in the ensuing years, many other researchers have 

refined or redefined different aspects of 

the original theory. 

 Bandura is an accepted leader 

in the field of social learning theory, 

or, as he calls it, social cognitive theory 

(Miller, 1993, pp. 192-195). Bandura 

suggests that people learn not only 

by personal experiences, but also by 

watching the experiences of others, 

which he terms “vicarious learning.” 

This hypothesis has strong relevance to 

the development of effective training 

materials, for if proper role models or 

mentors can be convinced to share their 

experiences, their stories will provide 

valuable learning opportunities.

 The common tenet of existing social learning theories is that an 

individual’s behavior is influenced by 

observing the behaviors 

of others, particularly 

people who are admired 

or viewed as mentors, 

teachers, coaches, etc. 

Humans are a species 

that learns by watching 

others, but imitation of 

others’ behavior is more 

likely to occur if the 

mentor possesses characteristics that the learner 

views as desirable and if 

the mentor is similar to 

the learner. In addition, 

the behaviors that are 

modeled must be seen 

as constructive by the learner, with a 

positive impact, or the behavior will 

be avoided instead of imitated (Zemke, 

2002). 

Relevance of Adult Learning 

Theory to Training

 Perhaps the most compelling 

reason for providing training is to try 

to change people’s behavior in some 

fashion. This is especially true in safety 

training. Stone (1999, p. 3) states that 

the primary purpose of the various 

social learning theories is—
Tell me a Story

14

• To understand and predict 

individual and group 

behavior and

• To identify methods in 

 which behavior can be 

 modified and changed.

 Stone further states that SLT is 

frequently used by public health specialists because of its applicability to 

changing the behaviors and beliefs of 

individuals toward adopting healthier or 

safer choices. Clearly there is value to 

safety trainers and developers of safety 

training materials in understanding 

why people make unsafe choices and 

in identifying ways to influence those 

choices toward safer ones. Under this 

theory, the key is to 

provide appropriate 

role models from 

whom to learn: 

people who are 

respected, admired, 

and who have credibility. For these 

role models to be 

most effective, their 

experiences must 

be relevant to the 

learning expected 

and tied to the work 

experience and culture of the learners. 

 Kowalski and Vaught state that 

adult learners “learn best by having 

[their own] experiences and reflecting 

on them” (2002, pp. 3-4), but Bandura 

would add that adults can also learn by 

reflecting upon the experiences of others. Bandura’s concept of the strength 

of vicarious learning becomes even 

more significant when considering 

that, in the mining industry, many of 

the experiences shared by mentors are 

descriptions of close calls or are stories 

about people they have known who 

were injured or killed on the job. Sharing such histories is an integral part of 

the oral tradition of the mining culture; 

it is hoped that new miners will avoid 

such close calls and learn the lessons 

simply by hearing about them. For 

miners working in potentially dangerous environments, this can mean the 

difference between working safely and 

being injured or even killed. It is imperative that training be “effective,” but 

this can be an elusive goal. 

 Zemke (2002) states that four 

separate processes must occur if effective observational learning is going to 

occur. 

1. The learner must 

pay attention to 

what’s happening. 

2. He or she must 

remember what 

was seen. 

3. He or she must 

be physically and 

intellectually capable of mimicking 

the behavior.

4. He or she must 

have the motivation or reinforcement to model it. 

 In an environment that relies 

heavily on master-apprentice learning, as does the mining industry, 

these processes may be the keys to 

effective training.
Tell me a Story

15

Mentors

 The importance of a mentor in 

developing safe, productive workers 

cannot be overstated. Many researchers 

have identified mentoring as a key component to effective learning, particularly 

in those hands-on trades that require a 

high degree of skill in performing work tasks and 

a sensitivity to potential 

or real hazards. Darwin 

says, “For centuries, mentoring has been used as a 

vehicle for handing down 

knowledge, maintaining 

culture, supporting talent, 

and securing future leadership” (2000, p. 197). 

 Camm and Cullen 

(2002) discuss the value 

of mentoring new hires 

and provide an overview 

of prevailing theories 

about why mentoring works particularly well in skilled blue-collar occupations. Pegg (1999) attributes mentors’ 

credibility as expert teachers to many 

things, including their financial and occupational successes, perceived street 

smarts about how to survive, personal 

presence or charisma, or simply their 

age and length of experience. No matter 

where the source of their credibility lies, 

however, it is true that good mentors are 

admired and trusted and that they play 

key roles in training and teaching new 

employees. 

 Lucas (1969) provides a view 

of how the social relationships between 

mentors and apprentices develop, particularly in mining communities, and 

discusses why they are so effective. It 

is his belief that young people are enculturated at a very early age. They grow 

up hearing stories about what happens in 

the mines and about the people, usually 

men, who are working there. They see 

for themselves the “toys” that top miners 

can afford, and the community’s young 

men develop a natural desire to be like 

them. They admire the economic and 

social position that good miners have in 

the community and in the 

mining culture itself. 

 In mining communities 

that are geographically 

isolated and provide a 

minimum of good-paying jobs, young people 

have few choices other 

than mining if they want 

to stay in the area. Thus, 

by the time they are old 

enough to work in the 

mines, they are ready to 

join that unique occupational culture, knowing 

that they will be taught 

and protected by someone who knows 

the ropes (Lucus, 1969). 

 McCarl adds that the status of a 

mentor or master miner is directly tied 

to his experiences underground and how 

he handled them. “A man’s skill performances below ground, particularly 

during times of stress or danger, are by 

far the most important media through 

which his identity and reputation are 

created” (1997, p. 13). Miners know 

who is admired and understand clearly 

who would be both their best teacher 

and their best chance of survival should 

disaster strike. These masters are generally informal leaders, but they are also 

mentors to anyone wanting to learn their 

lessons without having to experience 

directly the incidents that taught those 

lessons. 

 A good mentor is seen as a truth 

teller, as one who will provide an honest picture of what is happening. To an 
Tell me a Story

16

inexperienced person, unsure of what 

to do and how to survive, this is invaluable. Voynick (1978) describes his 

own apprenticeship as a new miner and 

remembers that the old hands provided 

many valuable lessons in subtle and notso-subtle ways. Young hands may learn 

from any other miner, but most often, 

their practical training is entrusted to an 

assigned mentor—a journeyman miner 

who teaches in three essential areas: 

 • Knowledge about what’s 

 important

 • Knowledge about how to 

 do things right

 • Knowledge about the 

culture, including the 

 values and attitudes 

 expected if one is to take 

 one’s place in the 

 occupational 

culture (Billett, 1994).

 Expert miners have the credibility 

and the position within the mining culture to be taken seriously as trainers and 

teachers. Gargiulo provides this insight 

into the role played by expert mentors. 

“Learning results from piecing together 

our experiences. One experience builds 

on another....Experts have more experience; and whether they realize it or not, 

they apply that experience to novel situations” (2002, p. 35). The ability to use 

what one knows (the knowledge) when 

facing a new or unusual situation is 

one way to describe wisdom, and these 

master miners have earned their wisdom 

through hard experiences. Mentors, 

then, have a powerful role to play in the 

training of new employees as they share 

their stories, their experiences, their 

knowledge, and their wisdom.

 If training materials are going to 

be truly successful, they must not only 

include accurate and relevant content, 

but must also work seamlessly within 

the culture the trainers seek to influence, or they will face the resistance 

that the members of that culture will 

exhibit. Culture is a difficult thing to 

identify, but can be simply explained as 

“the way we do things around here.” It 

effectively defines what is acceptable 

and what is not. 

 Hofstede defines culture as “the 

collective programming of the mind 

which distinguishes the members of 

one group or category of people from 

another” (1997, p. 5). Patton believes 

that culture provides the road map by 

which members of that culture negotiate the world. 

Culture is that collection of 

behavior patterns and beliefs 

that constitutes standards for 

deciding what is, standards for 

deciding how one feels about 

it, standards for deciding what 

to do about it, and standards 

for deciding how to go about 

doing it. (2002, p. 81)

 Van Maanen and Barley further 

the argument by suggesting the existence of “occupational communities” 

(or occupational cultures), which they 

define as—

A group of people who consider themselves to be engaged 

in the same sort of work; 

whose identity is drawn from 

the work; who share with one 

another a set of values, norms 

and perspectives that apply 

to but extend beyond workRole of Culture
Tell me a Story

17

related matters; and whose 

social relationships meld work 

and leisure. (1984, p. 287)

 If occupational culture is a gatekeeper that provides its members with 

guidelines on what to do and how to 

do it, then it is also the primary key to 

successfully changing their behaviors. 

Occupational cultures that are particularly strong because of shared dangers 

faced by their members (such as police, 

firefighters, loggers, or miners) will be 

very resistant to changes suggested by 

outsiders. However, if these changes 

are recommended and accepted by insiders, they are much more likely to be 

adopted. 

Danger...invites work involvement and a sense of fraternity....Recognition that one’s 

work entails danger heightens 

the contrast between one’s 

own work and the safer work 

of others, and encourages comparison of self with those who 

share one’s work situation. 

Attitudes, behaviors, and selfimages for coping physically 

and psychologically with threat 

become part of an occupational 

role appreciated best, it is 

thought, only by one’s fellow 

workers. (Van Maanen & 

Barley, 1984, p. 301)

 The term “occupational culture” is very applicable to miners. 

Their identity is strongly tied to their 

work, and they can be distrustful of 

outsiders, especially those who come 

into their environment and try to 

tell them how to do their work. Van 

Maanen and Barley believe that occupational communities such as mining 

use task rituals, behavioral norms, 

work codes, and stories to reinforce 

the values and standards expected 

from members, and that this will be 

most prevalent in “those occupations 

that transmit a shared culture from 

generation to generation of participants” (1984, p. 292). In an occupation 

such as mining, culture can be seen 

as both a strength, as expected norms 

and values have developed over many 

years and are well-grounded in practical experience, or as a hindrance to 

changing aspects that are antithetical 

to safety or health.

 Occupational culture must be 

considered when dealing with any 

attempt to change behaviors within 

it. Schein admits that early social 

researchers failed to appreciate its 

power and did not see that “culture, 

viewed as such taken-for-granted, 

shared, tacit ways of perceiving, thinking, and reacting, was one of the most 

powerful and stable forces operating” 

(1996, p. 232). Hansen suggests that 

new information provided to people 

(through training, for example) will 

always be filtered through the beliefs, 

experiences, and norms provided by 

their occupational culture. Because 

members of an occupational culture 

believe that “members have the exclusive right to perform a given set of 

related tasks,” they can be resistant to 

outside influences (1995, p. 60). Han-
Tell me a Story

18

sen ties learning directly to the norms 

and traditions of the work culture and 

states that “information communicated in a manner greatly different from 

what is culturally common requires a 

longer learning period and often leads 

to a lack of comprehension or misunderstanding” (p. 61). 

 The value of using peer trainers, or people who are inside an occupational culture and 

know its ways and its 

language, is apparent. Because they are 

“members of the tribe,” 

these people have the 

ability to break through 

the barriers created by a 

culture that is resistant 

to outside influence. 

They understand the 

norms, values, semiotics, and unwritten rules 

that govern the culture 

and can maneuver successfully through them.

 Kowalski and 

Vaught state that adults “come to the 

learning situation from a particular 

environment and with a personal 

history” (2002, p. 4). While more 

traditional training theories focus on 

the skills and abilities of individuals, 

current belief is that the environment 

(which likely includes occupational 

culture) and the dynamics existing 

within the training group play important roles in effective learning. Adults 

come to training classes as experts in 

some area, and this expertise, according to Kowalski and Vaught, needs to 

be recognized and honored. This is 

congruent with what other scholars 

have said, that learning is an interactive process for adults and that the 

culture is used by learners to determine 

what is important and what is not.

 One of the most basic components of effective training is the 

language (jargon) used by a trainer. 

Hansen (1995) acknowledges that 

occupational cultures often develop 

their own distinct jargon that communicates what is important to members, 

as well as members’ perceptions of 

that information. Jargon has the added benefit of excluding nonmembers, 

who may not understand the meaning 

of terms or constructs. 

Thus, understanding 

and using accepted occupational jargon are 

critical to a trainer’s 

success. 

 “People...feel 

more comfortable and 

trusting of those who are 

most like themselves” 

(Hansen, 1995, p. 62). 

The federal government 

recognizes this factor and 

in regulations pertaining 

to mine safety training, 

states that “You must ensure that each program, 

course of instruction, or training session 

is...presented in language understood 

by the miners who are receiving 

the training” (U.S. Code of Federal 

Regulations, 30 46.4(3), 2001). One 

might argue that it was the intent of 

the authors of this regulation to assure that non-English speakers be 

trained in their native tongue, but 

it clearly also speaks to the need to 

communicate effectively to every 

miner by using language that is understood by him or her. This would mean 

using occupational jargon—the tribal 

language—of mining when developing 

any training. Creating these materials 

in bureaucratic or highly technical 

language not commonly used by the 

miners themselves would increase 

the likelihood that the regulations 

and materials will be ignored.
Tell me a Story

19

Value of Storytelling

 Humans are storytellers. Stories have 

been used throughout history to entertain, to 

inform, to provide a sense of inclusiveness 

in the narrative of mankind. Stories work 

at a very different level than pure information-sharing because they deal not just with 

rational thought, but also with how we feel 

about what we have heard. Stories are able 

to move beyond the barriers people create, to 

touch not just our minds, but our hearts. 

 Trying to change another person’s 

behavior permanently (one of the primary 

objectives of safety training) without obtaining their buy-in is impossible. It is true that 

people will change their behaviors to generally comply with mandated rules when they 

must (when the supervisor or the inspector is 

watching, for example), but when nobody is 

around to monitor their behavior, they often 

revert to how things have always been done 

and how their occupational culture expects 

them to behave, particularly if those mandates are in conflict with culturally expected 

behaviors. To openly go up against a traditional norm, people have to be convinced 

that the new behavior is a better choice and 

that the choice to follow it is their choice. 

 The key for a safety trainer, then, 

is to find the internal control switch in each 

trainee that responds to the “why should I 

care about this information?” question and 

provides the answer “because it makes sense 

for me to care. It may save my life some 

day.” Stories have the ability to do this.

 Gargiulo suggests that stories have 

many uses. While it is true that stories evoke 

different memories and responses in different 

people (generally depending on individual 

experiences and values), Gargiulo states flatly that “The hallmark of intelligence is our 

ability to collect stories and regularly reflect 

on them in order to gain new insights from 

them” (2002, p. 6). 

 The roles played by stories are 

numerous. Among them, Gargiulo lists the 

following:

 • Stories empower the 

 speaker.

 • Stories create an 

 environment of trust.

 • Stories create a bond 

 among those who hear 

 them.

 • Stories engage the mind.

 • Stories have a unique 

 ability to defuse conflict 

and differences of opinion.

 • Stories encode a lot of 

 cultural information.

 • Stories provide a way to 

 learn from personal or 

 vicarious experiences.

 • Stories can be used as 

 weapons.

 • Stories bring about 

 healing. (pp. 7-37)
Tell me a Story

20

 Slater has studied the immense power that stories have. He 

claims that stories—

have substantial potential 

to influence behavior. It is 

difficult to consider another 

communication genre that can 

communicate beliefs, model 

behavior, teach skills, provide 

behavioral cues, and simulate 

consequences of behaviors 

over time in as compelling a 

fashion. (2002, p. 16)

 Simmons believes that stories

are “the oldest tool of influence in human

history” (2001, p. xvii) and that they can

provide the trainer with an effective way

to “connect people to what’s important

and to help them make sense of their

world” (p. 29). In other words, stories

have the power to provide the answer

to the critical question “why should I

care about what this teacher/trainer is

saying?” 

 Stories have been recognized by

many organizational theorists for their

power to communicate not only information, but also the culture of an organization. Zemke states that stories “can

act as powerful directives for members’

behavior, and they can teach specific

lessons as well” (1990, p. 44). As such,

they can provide the “culture map” that

guides new employees and point out

“the dangerous and the safe” (p. 45).

In a work environment, stories provide

both the philosophy of an organization

in a way that inspires those coming into

it and enough information about what to

do and how to act once they are inspired

to do something. Good training stories

will thus provide information on what

to do, as well as how to do it, why it is

important to do it “this way,” and what

the consequences may be for ignoring 

the established norms. 

 Lave and Wenger (1991) argue 

that true learning does not take place in 

isolation, but rather in a socially interactive environment. Stories are inherently 

social. They entertain, but they also 

show what others would do in a given 

environment when faced with a certain 

set of circumstances. Those watching 

or hearing stories of this type are drawn 

into the tale. They associate with the 

characters, and by placing themselves 

vicariously into the scenario, they can 

investigate how they would feel or behave in similar circumstances. 

 The benefits of vicariously 

experiencing dangerous or harmful 

environments or incidents are obvious. 

Learning can take place while the learner remains safe. Bruner believes that it 

is only through interaction with others 

in the context of a specific culture that 

we can find meaning and understanding of our world. “Human beings...are 

expressions of a culture. To treat the 

world as an indifferent flow of information to be processed by individuals each 

on his or her own terms is to lose sight 

of how individuals are formed and how 

they function” (1990, p. 12). Geertz 
Tell me a Story

21

sums this view up by stating “There is 

no such thing as human nature independent of culture” (1973, p. 49). Stories 

are effective in connecting us to the 

experiences of others, to those who are 

telling the stories, and more broadly, to 

the overall culture in which the stories 

exist. It is not necessary to repeat the 

experiences, then, in order to learn from 

them. 

Storytelling is often associated 

with entertaining or teaching children, 

but MacDonald believes that “The 

adult’s sense of story is fully 

developed, the attention span 

is long, and adults provide eager listeners if you will take the 

time to seek out...tales we need 

to hear” (1993, p. 57). The love of 

stories is not lost when people grow up. 

In fact, it may be that adults are better 

listeners than the young.

 Training is only effective when 

the trainer is able to connect with 

learners and provide lessons that are 

perceived by them as valuable. Stories 

provide a powerful tool to do this, and 

as Wylie says, they “make the important 

interesting” (1998, p. 30). Trainees, 

especially those new to an industry, are 

often bombarded with a bewildering 

amount of new information, much of it 

as unfamiliar as the environmental or 

occupational landscape. It is a daunting 

task to organize and make sense of this 

information, much less to remember it 

long enough to put it into action. 

 In the opinion of King and 

Down (2001), it is the hope (perhaps the 

goal) of trainers and teachers that learners will take the information provided 

to them, turn it into knowledge of their 

task or occupation, and eventually reach 

understanding of when and how to apply 

that knowledge. This is what the expert 

mentor does as a matter of habit. 

‘Story’ is a way of 

knowing and remembering 

information—a shape 

or pattern into which 

information can be arranged. 

It serves a very basic 

purpose; it restructures 

experiences for the purpose 

of ‘saving’ them. And it is 

an ancient, perhaps natural 

order of mind....By imposing 

the structure of a story 

onto some circumstance 

or happening, greater 

coherence and sensibility are 

achieved within the event 

itself, and otherwise isolated 

and disconnected scraps are 

bound up into something 

whole and meaningful. (Livo 

& Rietz, 1986, p. 5)
Tell me a Story

22

 King and Down (2001) believe 

that one of the simplest functions of 

stories is that they provide us with a 

way to better remember information. 

People, they argue, pay attention and 

listen more attentively to stories. If 

paying attention and remembering what 

has been told are two keys to effective 

learning, as Zemke (2002) argues, then 

stories make learning not only possible, 

but increase the likelihood that people 

will learn. Forster et al. sum it up by 

stating that—

Stories...act as both mirrors 

and windows on the human 

experience, showing people 

either how to look at reality 

in a different way or suggesting alternative realities....

Traditions of storytelling 

have enabled human beings 

to make sense of the world 

that surrounds them, and 

their place in it, for millennia. 

(1999, pp. 11-12)

 Changing the voluntary behavior of adults is not a simple task. 

Cranton (1994) believes that “transformational learning” (the primary 

objective of safety training—to truly 

change the belief system and subsequently the behavior of workers) is the 

key. True transformational learning 

occurs through critical self-reflection 

when a learner consciously looks at 

his or her prior beliefs and revises old 

assumptions in favor of new. Critical 

self-reflection, however, is difficult to 

achieve in an 8-hour safety training 

session, particularly if the materials 

and information presented are out of 

date, irrelevant, or boring. Stories can 

provide shortcuts to self-reflection and 

thus transformational learning by making boring material interesting and by 

putting confusing information into a 

more understandable context.

 Neuhauser discusses the different levels of consciousness that stories 

access and why this aspect of theirs is 

valuable in a learning environment. 

[O]ne of the theories for why 

stories are remembered so well 

is that you are using your ‘whole 

brain’ to take in information....

Stories allow a person to feel 

and see the information as well 

as factually understand it... 

[B]ecause you ‘hear’ the information factually, visually, and 

emotionally, it is more likely to 

be imprinted on your brain in 

a way that it sticks with you 

longer with very little effort on 

your part. (1993, pp. 4-5)
Tell me a Story

23

 MacDonald reinforces this idea 

with a lyrical story of her own. “ ‘I have 

heard,’ said the philosopher, ‘that the 

head does not hear anything until the 

heart has listened, and what the heart 

knows today the head will understand 

tomorrow’ ” (1993, p. 43).

 Miners are storytellers. One need 

only spend time with them to observe 

that they interact with each other through 

the telling of stories. Such stories may 

be about close calls they have had, about 

other master miners they have known 

and worked with (and in many cases, 

learned from), about someone they knew 

who made an error in judgment and paid 

dearly for it, or about things they have 

seen and experienced as they have gone 

through their careers. The role of miners’ stories is complex and includes the 

sharing and strengthening of their occupational culture as well as the bonding 

that must exist to survive in a dangerous 

environment. 

A primary role of storytelling, however, is the education of inexperienced miners. Experienced miners see these people 

as a potential hazard to everyone in the 

mine if the way they make decisions and 

carry out their work isn’t in alignment 

with culturally acceptable practices. 

Experienced miners understand that one 

thoughtless or dangerous act can put everyone in peril. It is in their best interest 

to teach inexperienced workers how to 

do the job correctly. Their own lives may 

depend on it. Billett explains it this way: 

“Developing learners’ conceptual understanding of why things are done a certain 

way and what would happen if they were 

not, is a key role” (1994, p. 13). 

 Cole has done extensive research 

into the role of storytelling and its relationship to training, particularly in the 

mining industry. In his work, he has 

investigated the use of narrative-based 

simulations to teach particular skills or 

ideas. He discusses the concept of “narrative thinking” as the process of—

translation of one’s own and 

others’ experiences into stories that integrate facts, perceptions, emotions, intentions, 

actions, and consequences 

into coherent meaning. 

Storytelling is not the only 

successful cognitive process 

for organizing perception, 

thought, memory and action, 

but...it is more effective than 

any other. (1997, p. 331)

As noted earlier, federal law mandates that miners receive safety training 

(CFR 30 46.4(3). It is, in the opinion of 

the lawmakers and regulators, critical that 

they receive what Bruner (1990) would 

call “socially relevant information.” Turning the facts and statistics from socially 

relevant (defined as what the experts think 

you should know) into personally relevant 

information has long been the challenge 

of trainers, however. As Cole points 

out, “many learners who receive...this 

formally codified and socially relevant 

knowledge tend to find both the content 

and the instruction to be burdensome, dull, 

and boring” (1997, p. 334). Stories turn 

impersonal statistics into faces—people 
Tell me a Story

24

just like the listeners—who may have suffered injury or death on the job. Because 

of the shared sense of danger and camaraderie felt in the culture of mining, it is not 

difficult for learners to transfer themselves 

into the story and think about how they 

would have reacted or what they would 

have done. This is immensely powerful 

when teaching the “why should I care?” 

about safety.

 Miller, Oaks, and Akmal provide 

very pragmatic guidance for the design 

and delivery of training materials useful 

to the mining industry. Using current 

adult learning theories, characteristics 

of the mining culture, and information 

provided by mine safety trainers, they list 

the following criteria as critical to effective training.

 • Materials and activities 

 should focus on visual 

 and hands-on learning.

 • Training should be 

 grounded in authentic 

 events and situations.

 • Materials need to be 

 interesting and motivating.

 • Materials should be 

 applicable to both groups 

 and individuals.

 • Materials and activities 

 should be consistent with 

 the interests and 

 characteristics of learners.

 • Activities should be 

 practical, immediately 

 useful, and focused on 

 authentic training.

 • Effective training combines 

 similar concepts rather 

 than presenting small 

 unrelated topics.

 • Training materials need to 

 be cost effective.

 • Training should be realistic 

 and practiced in real 

 environments.

 • Materials and activities 

 should be easy to use.

 • Materials and activities 

 should be flexible for a 

 variety of settings and 

 learners. (1998, pp. 8-9)
Tell me a Story

25

 These criteria are consistent with 

the theoretical models already presented 

and serve to emphasize the practical 

nature of safety trainers in the industry. 

Their primary responsibility is to provide 

the information and knowledge necessary to assure that both experienced and 

inexperienced miners go home safely at 

the end of every shift. 

 Zemke (2002) was correct in 

stating that, in order for anyone to learn 

new information or skills, they first 

must pay attention and then remember what they are taught. In the end, 

trainees must make the decision to both 

learn and use the information presented 

because they recognize its validity and 

its value to their success in their work, 

not because it is the organization’s 

policy that they do so. 

 The challenge to the new NIOSH 

research project was clear. Safety 

trainers and specialists admitted their 

need for new materials to teach specific 

mine safety topics, but for these materials and the trainers that presented them 

to be effective, a new way of providing 

information had to be found. Two major forces already existed in the mining 

industry that could be drawn upon in the 

creation of new training materials: The 

existence of a powerful occupational 

culture that valued and relied upon a 

strong master-apprenticeship training 

model and an oral tradition of storytelling handed down over centuries. These 

two forces would become the foundation for the theoretical frameworks 

used to develop truly effective safety 

training for miners.

RESEARCH APPROACH

Finding the Subject

By Elaine T. Cullen

 The initial request for effective safety training materials came 

to NIOSH through the stakeholder 

meetings held at numerous locations throughout the West. At these 

meetings, mining professionals were 

asked to participate in facilitated information-gathering sessions to provide data on critical research needs 

that NIOSH could help them meet. 

One such need was for up-to-date, 

interesting training materials, and 

late in 1998, NIOSH funded a smallscale pilot project to investigate what 

could be done. Before starting the 

development phase of the project, 

additional meetings were held with 

small groups of mine safety trainers 

to determine what training topics 

were most important and what media 

were most commonly used. 

 The principal investigator 

made the decision at this time to 

focus the project on underground 

hard-rock problems. SRL’s sister 

laboratory in the East, the Pittsburgh 

Research Laboratory (PRL), had a 

proven track record of creating training materials for coal miners, and 

with a small budget, it was obvious 

that it was necessary to limit the pa-
Tell me a Story

26

rameters of the project in order to be 

successful. In time, the scope of the 

project was widened to include surface and aggregate operations, The 

development of coal mine training 

materials was continued by researchers at PRL. As it quickly became 

obvious that most mine sites did not 

have access to computer laboratories, a second decision was made that 

computers were not to be considered 

as a medium for providing the new 

training materials. 

 The issue of “handling explosives” was at the top of the short 

list of prioritized training topics. 

In-depth interviews with safety specialists interested in this topic determined that many types of explosives 

were in use in underground mines, as 

well as a variety of specific hazards 

associated with working near explosives. We decided to focus on general safety for all miners rather than 

specific task training for blasters. 

MSHA regulations particular to handling different types of explosives 

were taken as the starting point, and 

the MSHA Accident and Injury database, an excellent source of statistics 

on mining-related injuries (accessible through its Website at www.

msha.gov), provided information on 

all accidents directly attributable to 

explosives in an underground environment. 

 Conversations with explosives experts identified individuals 

who might have stories related to 

explosives accidents to tell. Armed 

with these resources, a storyline was 

developed that included the more 

common problems associated with 

handling explosives, and several underground mines were contacted to 

arrange shoot sites for the video. 

Process

 The process of developing the 

training videos themselves evolved 

along with the project. SRL does not 

have the in-house capability to produce 

professional-quality digital video, so 

after a competitive bidding process, 

an outside contractor, the local AT&T4 

4

The mention of specific products, manufacturers, and companies does not constitute endorsement by the National Institute 

for Occupational Safety and Health.

production studio (now owned by ComCast) was selected to do this work. The 

professional crew, made up of a videographer and a production manager, 

provided the technical expertise, professional-quality videograhic equipment 

to gather the footage, and the high-end 

hardware and software to edit it into a 

concise, interesting training piece. It 

was necessary to train the members 

of the crew in all general and specific 

hazards of mining, and to overcome the 

logistical challenges faced by taping in 

an environment that could range from 

below 0 °F on the surface to over 100 °F 

underground. Humidity, groundwater, 

dust, and diesel fumes also posed problems for the film crew and their sensitive 

equipment. 

 The value of the experience 

gained and the specific knowledge 

learned by both the professional film 

crew and by SRL staff as the project 

progressed made it practical to use the 

same crew for all the videos. Real miners 

were employed in all the videos rather 

than professional actors, researchers, or 

regulators. These people were generally 

uncomfortable in front of the cameras, 

but the crew developed an excellent 

rapport with the miners, helping and 

encouraging them throughout. Without 

that connection, it is doubtful the results 

would have been satisfactory.

 Many hard-rock miners work 

under a “gypo,” or contract, system. 

This means that while the miners are 
Tell me a Story

27

paid an hourly wage based on experience, expertise, and work assignment, 

they can also earn substantial production 

bonuses. Because this system puts pressure on miners to work hard and fast to 

maximize their bonuses, many people in 

the mining industry doubted that miners 

would be willing to take time to “be in 

the movies.” Any time they spent working with the film production crew meant 

lost wages. There was also a very real 

concern that the miners would not be 

willing to cooperate with a government 

agency. 

 Both of these fears proved 

groundless. The miners were generally delighted to be asked to participate. 

They are proud people and eager to talk 

about what they do. If anything, a very 

lively competition developed at the film 

sites as miners vied with each other to 

be included in the videos. In an occupational culture that values expertise and 

the status it provides, being chosen as 

an acclaimed mentor and “movie star” 

guaranteed bragging rights. 

 When shooting a training video 

that stars nonprofessional actors, especially those who may never have been 

taped before, it is important to be, above 

all else, patient. Miners were not given 

scripts to memorize. (Early attempts at 

using a more formal script proved that it 

would be both frustrating and unproductive.) They were only told what things 

they needed to talk about and then were 

allowed to do so in their own words and 

in their own way. If something was not 

covered, we merely continued to shoot 

as they talked about that issue and then 

edited the segment to make sure all the 

important topics were covered. We 

worked very hard to maintain a fun, 

friendly, laid-back environment and to 

assure the miners at all times that they 

were doing a great job. In some cases, 

we provided them a new hire to talk 

with that helped the miners organize 

their thinking and their teaching. Most 

of the older miners we worked with had 

trained new people, and when we asked 

them to pretend they had a new young 

partner, they had no trouble instructing 

him, easily falling into the roles of mentor and teacher. 

 Having the right people to act as 

master-miners or young new miners is 

critical to the development of effective 

safety training, and the safety directors 

and managers at the cooperating mines 

did a wonderful job of identifying and 

screening potential miner-actors. They 

were well aware of which people at their 

sites did the best job of performing different tasks, as well as who had a good 

sense of humor or who would be willing 

to participate. 

 At no time did we show up unannounced in a stope or at a working face 

and expect people to drop everything 

to work with us. The miners were always warned that we were coming, and 

they always had the option of whether 

to be part of the filming or not. Such a 

prearrangement had the dual benefit of 

assuring that when we arrived, the miners would be ready to film, which would 

minimize their own downtime and maximize our productivity underground. It 

also gave the miners time to think about 

how they would do things, what they 

would talk about, what equipment or 

props they needed to have on hand, and, 

in many cases, suggestions about other 

topics or scenes that should be included 

that we might not have thought about. 

They were the masters, and we followed 

their advice whenever it was possible to 

do so. If we had been tied to a strict storyboard, with no room for improvisation 

or additions, this would have been quite 

frustrating, but because we followed a 

fairly loose storyline, the videos tended 

to grow and become as we progressed.
Tell me a Story

28

Products

Handling Explosives in Underground Mines (1999)

 The first video produced, 

Handling Explosives in Underground 

Mines (Cullen, 1999) (figure 1), was 

approximately 15 minutes long. When 

released, it was very well received by 

the industry. The miners, we were told, 

really liked watching and hearing from 

people who looked like themselves. 

They also had no trouble associating 

with and understanding the stories of 

the explosives disasters described. 

 After the video’s release, the 

advisory group of safety and training 

specialists reconvened and developed 

a further list of training materials that 

they believed were needed by the industry.

Rock Falls: Preventing Rock Fall 

Injuries in Underground Non-Coal 

Mines (1999)

 The only video produced at 

SRL that was not an actual part of the 

initial research project was Rock Falls: 

Preventing Rock Fall Injuries in Underground Non-Coal Mines (Miller, 

1999) (figure 2). This 20-minute video 

was produced under a separate research 

project (thus separate funding) in which 

roof hazard recognition and effective scaling techniques were being investigated. 

When safety trainers asked the project researchers to put together a training video 

to show what they had learned, the same 

production crew was employed. Not only 

was this video well-received by the mining industry, but it also won NIOSH’s 

Alice Hamilton Award for Excellence in 

Educational Materials for 2000. 

Figure 1.—Handling Explosives in 

Underground Mines video poster. 

Figure 2.—Rock Falls: Preventing 

Rock Falls in Underground Noncoal 

Mines video poster.
Tell me a Story

29

Miner Mike Saves the Day--or--

Ground Support: It’s Important

(2000)

 In Miner Mike Saves the Day 

(Cullen, 2000) (figure 3), a story 

was created that featured two lazy, 

young miners who decide that leaving out vital roof supports would 

not be noticed by anyone and would 

save them from having to work too 

hard. An older, wiser miner observes 

this behavior and teaches them how 

roof supports work, why they need 

to be installed as planned, and what 

happens when they are not. He then 

takes them around the mine to meet 

other experts who explain different 

types of supports, how they should 

be installed properly and how to tell 

if they are not, and what to do if there 

is a problem. The Miner Mike video 

starred 14 separate miners working in 

five different mines. This video also 

won an Alice Hamilton Award for 

Excellence in Educational Materials 

in 2001.

Figure 3.—Miner Mike Saves the Day

video poster.

Hazards in Motion (2001)

Hazards in Motion (Cullen, 

2001a) (figures 4 and 5) furthers the 

use of storytelling by creating not 

only a brash young miner, Ben, who 

refuses to pay attention during his 

new-miner training, but also an “angel of safety.” This “angel” acts as a 

mentor, conscience, and protector of 

young Ben as he learns that his behavior puts everyone in danger, particularly himself. In this video, Ben 

wanders around the mine, clueless 

but cocky. He encounters many types 

of mobile equipment (mobile equipment is one of the major contributors 

to injuries in underground environments), as well as expert miners who 

teach him about proper safety checks, 

equipment operating procedures, and 

accepted behavioral norms. Under 

the safety angel’s watchful eye, Ben 

learns much about mobile equipment 

Figure 4.—Filming of the Hazards 

in Motion video.
Tell me a Story

30

Figure 5.—Hazards in Motion video 

poster.

and finally realizes that he, himself, is 

the major mobile hazard underground. 

 This video makes use of several important constructs, including 

the role of the master-mentor and 

the transitional character who gains 

knowledge and wisdom as a result of 

near-miss errors in judgment. It also 

uses storytelling and humor to break 

down barriers, encourage learning, and 

increase the attention span of viewers. 

Hazards in Motion won a national 

award for outstanding achievement 

from the Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention’s Communicators 

Roundtable in the Electronic Media 

category in 2002.

Hidden Scars (2001)

 During the filming of You Are My 

Sunshine (see below), many, if not most, of 

the miners interviewed shared stories about 

their careers in the mines. Some of these 

stories were about near-misses they had experienced, the miners who had trained them 

as new hands, or the friends and co-workers 

lost over the years to mining accidents. One 

of the most poignant stories was told by Don 

Capparelli. He described a rock burst in 

1994 that buried him alive for 3 hours and 

killed his long-time partner and best friend, 

Jimmy Finlay.5

5

A report on this rock burst is available from NIOSH (Whyatt, Williams, & White, 2000).

Don’s story was captured 

in its entirety and released as Hidden Scars

(Cullen, 2001b) (figure 6). In it, Don talks 

about what it is like not being able to move or 

even breathe and to feel his partner struggle 

beneath him and eventually die. It’s a stark 

reminder of the hidden cost of industrial 

accidents—the physical and psychological 

scars that are carried by the victims forever, 

as well as the impact such tragedies have on 

colleagues and co-workers. 

Figure 6.—Hidden Scars 

video poster.
Tell me a Story

31

Review

 As each video neared completion, 

it was put through a rigorous technical 

review process that included showing 

the draft version to technical and safety 

mining experts as well as to researchers 

with specific expertise in the topic of the 

video. Both written and verbal comments 

were gathered on how well the video 

provided information on the subject in 

question, whether the information was 

accurate, whether the information was 

complete, what other subtopics should 

have been included, and whether or not 

the video was interesting and generally 

appealing. (Appendix A shows a sample 

technical review questionnaire.) Focusgroup-type meetings were held also, but 

always with subject matter experts as 

the primary source of the information 

gathered. These comments were used to 

make adjustments to the videos before 

they were submitted to the Office of the 

Director of NIOSH in Washington, DC, 

for approval. Accompanying materials 

to be included with the video were also 

subjected to a technical review. 

 When the Washington office staff 

had approved the video for release, mine 

safety trainers across the country were 

notified through an electronic list serve, 

by notices posted on the NIOSH Website, 

or through distribution of a two-page 

Technology News. Information was also 

made available to the safety community 

through related association newsletters, 

conference exhibits, and presentations 

and talks given at various meetings and 

conferences. 

 Copies of the videos are provided free of charge to safety trainers 

who request them. In order to build and 

maintain an accurate customer database, 

however, SRL controls the distribution 

of the videos. This database allowed us 

to obtain feedback on how the videos 

were being used and whether they met 

the training needs of our safety training 

customers, as well as to collect information for future training topics.
Tell me a Story

32

EVALUATION

By Albert H. Fein

Training evaluation can mean 

many things depending on who is doing the evaluation and what they want 

to find out. Mallett and Reinke (2002) 

note that evaluations can pertain to the 

instructor, the class, the materials, the 

classroom, or just about any other subject about which those who authorized 

the training want to know. Evaluations 

may involve informal conversations, focus groups, or highly structured surveys. 

The controlling factors are the needs of 

the interested parties and the resources 

available to carry out the evaluation.

 Kirkpatrick (2001) offers a fourlevel evaluation scheme in which datagathering progresses from the easiest and 

most informal mode to the most difficult 

and resource-intensive. In this scheme, 

the trainees are evaluated for (1) reaction 

or perceptions about the training, (2) 

knowledge or skills that were improved 

as a result of the training, (3) changes in 

behavior or adoption of new knowledge 

or skills, and (4) overall impact on the 

organization. While gathering perceptions from trainees or even measuring 

what they have learned as a result of the 

training is relatively simple and quick, 

adequately assessing how behaviors have 

changed over time or how an organization has changed as a result of training 

takes a long time and requires a good deal 

of resources. (In the case of mining, this 

would generally translate into a change 

in accident rates in a specific area for 

which the miners were trained.) To truly 

measure the impact of a specific training class or product, Kirkpatrick suggests that measuring the performance of 

trained workers against the performance 

of a control group of untrained workers would be optimal. Obviously, in a 

mining environment where it is legally 

mandated that all workers be trained, it 

is impractical and likely impossible to 

designate an untrained control group for 

the sole purpose of testing the effectiveness of training materials. The ethical 

problem of sending untrained workers 

into a dangerous environment would 

preclude any evaluation measure that 

suggested it.

 A further complication in adequately evaluating the effectiveness of 

individual training products arises when 

the demographics of the worker population is considered. While new miners 

are beginning to enter the industry, for 

the most part, miners in the United States 

are “mature” in that their average age is 

around 50. These are not inexperienced 

workers, and to assume that viewing the 

NIOSH videos on specific required safety 

and health topics is their first exposure to 

that information would be a serious error. 

The videos are used for this worker population as part of their refresher training, 

which could best be described as reminder 

training. This is not new information to 

them, but is merely presented in a new, 

more interesting fashion. The goal of the 

videos in this environment is to remind 

workers of the dangers and of their own 

role in avoiding them.

 In spite of these challenges, Mallett and Reinke (2002) offer several options 

for gathering data about the effectiveness 

of training. Among these are questionnaires, interviews, group discussions, pretest/post-test surveys, and others. While it 

may be argued that some methods provide 

more “truth” than others, all can add to 

the body of evaluation data. Kirkpatrick 

states, “Something beats nothing, and I 

encourage trainers to at least do some 

evaluation of behavior, even if it isn’t 

elaborate or scientific” (2001, p. 128). 
Tell me a Story

33

 In April 2001, NIOSH funded 

an independent research team from 

Gonzaga University, Drs. Fein and 

Isaacson (2001), to evaluate the five 

videos (Handling Explosives in Modern 

Mines, Preventing Rock Fall Injuries in 

Underground Non-Coal Mines, Miner 

Mike Saves the Day–or–Ground Support...It’s Important, Hazards in Motion, 

and Hidden Scars) that 

had been or were about 

to be released. The 

charge to the evaluators was to determine 

whether or not the 

videos were effective 

as teaching tools.

 The first three 

videos had been out 

for 2 or 3 years by the 

time the evaluation began. Other than initial 

technical reviews to 

fine-tune the videos 

before their release, no 

formal in-house evaluations had been 

done. Obviously, exclusive use of a 

pre-test/post-test format was impossible 

because many of the miners in the target 

audience had already viewed them, and 

that would have skewed any data gathered. 

 For these three training videos, 

then, other methods were utilized, including phone interviews with trainers, 

e-mail requests for feedback from trainers, and post-tests for trainees. Obtaining feedback from miners and safety 

trainers about the content and impact of 

the videos was the primary goal. 

 Pre-tests to be used in subsequent 

new miner training were still developed 

for these three videos, however. These 

workers would not have seen the videos 

previously, so while it was too late to 

gather pre-test information from trained 

miners, valid data could still be gathered 

from new trainees using a pre-test/posttest model.

Hazards in Motion and Hidden 

Scars were released after the evaluation 

contract was awarded. Originally, both 

videos were to be released in early June 

of 2001, but on the day of the anticipated “world premier,” one of the miners 

(along with his new partner) who had 

participated in the Hazards 

in Motion video was killed 

in a rock burst similar to 

the one that Don Capparelli describes in Hidden 

Scars. Release of both 

videos was therefore delayed until August of 2001, 

and a statement in memory 

of the miner who lost his 

life, as well as a tribute to 

all miners who had died in 

the mines, was added to 

Hazards in Motion. 

 Pre- and post-test questionnaires were developed 

for both videos and packaged with the 

initial distribution of the videos to mine 

safety professionals. The intent was that 

the trainer would distribute the questionnaires to the miners involved in the annual refresher training, as well as to any 

new hires undergoing their initial safety 

training. A questionnaire was also created to obtain information from the 

trainers themselves about their perceptions of the effectiveness and usefulness 

of the video being shown. A cover letter 

accompanied each video asking trainers 

to administer the survey to their students, 

fill out their own evaluations, and send 

all the completed evaluations back to 

SRL. If trainers chose to add their own 

comments about the videos, these were 

included in the phone interview data 

gathered by the evaluators.

 It is important to note that participation in the evaluation process was 
Tell me a Story

34

entirely voluntary. Miners were not 

required to take either test and were 

not questioned if they opted not to participate. Similarly, trainers were not 

required to respond or to use the assessment tools if they chose not to, and no 

record was kept of which ones did and 

which ones did not participate. 

 Multiple-choice or true-false 

questions were used for evaluating videos 1 through 4. An objective test format 

was chosen for ease of correction, and 

scores for both pre- and post-tests were 

based on the percentage of correct answers (the number of correct responses 

divided by the number of possible responses). (See Appendix B for sample 

pre-tests and post-tests.) Test items were 

developed by the evaluation team based 

on the content of the narration of each 

film. Data gathered from the surveys 

showed that generally, post-test scores 

were higher than pre-test scores and 

that there was a substantial difference in 

learning improvement between miners 

identified as experienced (over 1 year of 

mining experience) and those who were 

categorized as inexperienced (less than 

1 year). As might be expected, inexperienced miners generally showed more 

improvement in knowledge as a result 

of watching the videos than did experienced miners. 

 There were, however, two major 

weaknesses in the design of the numeric 

evaluation method for these four videos. 

The first was that pre-test questions were 

mostly true-false or multiple choice. 

Therefore, it was relatively easy to guess 

correctly just using common sense. In 

fact, a control group of nonminers (college students) taking these tests scored 

as well or better than many of the miners, both experienced and inexperienced. 

(One explanation for the students’ high 

scores on the tests may be that they 

were more comfortable with taking tests 

in general than the miners were.) The 

second weakness in the design was that 

because participation was voluntary and 

the videos had already been used by 

many safety trainers, the number of tests 

turned in was too low to be statistically 

sound. 

 An objective test format was 

not appropriate for Hidden Scars. The 

pre-test and post-test format used for 

this video consisted of open-ended 

questions that had no “right” answers 

(see Appendix C). These tests were 

evaluated using qualitative data analysis 

methods. Responses were analyzed by 

looking for patterns and themes that 

included whether viewers were engaged 

in the story and how they perceived the 

lessons it taught.

 Again, a control group of college-age nonminers was invited to view 

Hazards in Motion and Hidden Scars

and to participate in the pre- and posttests. These people had little experience 

with mining operations or safety issues 

and provided a control 

group that was a good 

match for the minimal 

knowledge base of new 

miners. Because the 

raining videos were 

ntended for use by both 

new and experienced 

miners, it was important 

o differentiate the two 

groups and to gather 

Table 1.— Mean improvement 

and inexperienced miners

score among experienced 

Title Experienced Inexperienced

 miners, % 

Explosives 

Underground 11.30 

Rock Falls 0.40 

Miner Mike 

 miners, %

12.60

14.60

t

i

Saves the Day 

Hazards in 

6.10 9.40 t

Motion 11.60 9.60
Tell me a Story

35

data on both. A sample of responses 

for Hidden Scars is given below.

 Experienced miners:

 • I found this movie to be 

 emotional and honest. It 

 makes a person take a 

 look at the small things 

 most people take for 

 granted as well as showing 

 how fragile life really is.

 • It was really good. It really

 made me think about the 

dangers of mining. It made 

 me think about what it 

 would be like to be buried 

 and lose a partner and how 

tough and hard that could be.

 • I may not be the one hurt 

 or killed but may have to 

 live the rest of my life with 

 the memory of another 

 person’s injury or death.

Inexperienced miners:

 • It’s a scary thought and 

fact that this does happen. 

 That’s why you must be 

 prepared and aware.

 • I thought it was a good 

 reality check for what really 

 goes on in mines. It was 

 a very touching video that 

 makes you realize the 

 importance of safety.

 • Through no fault of their 

 own, one person literally 

 lost his life and another 

 lost the type of life he 

 had. The survivor will have 

 to deal with that accident 

 for the rest of his life... 

 emotional scars are 

 sometimes more destructive 

than physical ones. We 

 all need to be aware that 

 things can happen and be 

 on our toes all the time. 

 Characteristics of adult learners 

and of miners in particular were taken 

into account during the production of 

these safety videos, so the evaluation 

assessment attempted to measure miners’ attitudes regarding the videos in 

addition to evaluating their effectiveness in increasing knowledge about 

mine safety. To this end, each post-test 

contained three statements to which the 

test taker could respond on a five-point 

Likert scale. 

 

 • [Name of video] taught 

 me something I did not 

 know.

 • [Name of video] “talked 

 down” to me.

 • [Name of video] was 

 enjoyable to watch. (Fein 

 and Isaacson, 2001, p. 5)

 A space for comments was also 

provided. These statements allowed 

the test takers to offer their own assessments about the worthiness of the 

content, whether the tone of the video 

reflected the characteristics of adult 

learners and miners, and whether they 

found the video engaging.
Tell me a Story

36

Interviews of Mining Safety Trainers and Safety Experts

 Phone interviews were conducted with a representative sample of 

the 554 individuals who had requested 

copies of one or more of the films at the 

time the study began. The participants 

for phone interviews were selected by 

the interviewers using a table of random 

numbers. If the individual selected by 

this procedure worked at a mine outside 

the United States or no e-mail address 

or phone number could be found, the 

next name on the list was selected. Five 

of the technical experts and safety leaders in mining who had been consulted 

when the videos were developed were 

also interviewed by phone. 

 Phone interviews were conducted between August and November 

2001. Of the 554 names, 70 (12.6%) 

were selected for phone interviews. 

The length of time of interviews ranged 

from 5 to 25 minutes and averaged 10 

minutes. The interview questions were 

open-ended. Participants were asked 

which of the five videos they had seen 

and/or used in training. If the video had 

been used in training, participants were 

asked whether it had been shown to 

new and/or experienced miners. Participants were then asked to give their 

general impression of the individual 

videos or all the videos taken together. 

Follow-up questions about the quality 

or effectiveness of the video for training and how the audience responded 

to the videos were also asked. Interviewers sought for specificity without 

leading the participant. For example, if 

participants made a generally positive 

comment, such as “Good movie,” the 

interviewer might follow up with “Say 

more about that” or “What specifically 

made it good?” Interviewers took handwritten notes during interviews and 

transcribed them immediately afterward 

into electronic Word documents. 

 Thirty-nine of the 70 people 

contacted agreed to be interviewed. Of 

the 31 individuals who were contacted 

but not interviewed, about a dozen 

declined because they had requested 

mining safety video(s) but had never 

received them, two declined because 

they worked for NIOSH, and the rest 

never responded to the messages left by 

the interviewers. Except for one individual, whose phone number was incorrect, all 70 potential interviewees were 

either interviewed or received at least 

one message requesting an interview. 

All sources of evaluative data were 

triangulated to offer the most complete 

picture of the efficacy of each video.

 Of the 39 completed phone interviews, four (10.2%) were with female 

participants and 35 (89.8%) were with 

males. This finding matches Miller’s 

(1998) description of the characteristics 

of miners as predominantly male. 

 Most of those interviewed were 

mining safety trainers or individuals 

who were responsible for mining safety 

training but who held other titles (mine 
Tell me a Story

37

supervisor, director of public outreach, 

safety specialist, foreman, manager, 

supervisor of transportation, human 

resources director, mine inspector, underground safety mining engineer, professor, and geologist). One participant 

was the owner of a gold mine that had 

been in his family for three generations 

and did not consider himself to be a 

full-time professional miner. However, 

the majority of individuals interviewed 

worked for mines. Participants from 

outside the United States were not included in the evaluation. 

 Nineteen different states are 

represented in the phone interview data. 

Thirty-three percent of the interviewees 

were located in either Idaho or Nevada, 

and 23% were located in Arizona, 

Colorado, Washington, or Utah. States 

where only one phone contact was made 

included California, Georgia, Kansas, 

Louisiana, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and Wyoming. 

Therefore, although mines in both the 

eastern and western United States were 

represented in the phone interview 

sample, over 80% were located west of 

the Mississippi River. This result may 

be due to the types of mines that would 

be interested in underground hard rock 

mining safety videos, although some 

of the participants interviewed for this 

evaluation did work in above-ground 

mines or at coal mines.

 In addition to the phone contacts, e-mail requests for feedback were 

sent to approximately 60 individuals. 

About half the e-mails came back as 

undeliverable, and of those that were 

delivered, only a portion generated 

responses. For those who did respond, 

the e-mails were printed and added to 

the data set. 
Tell me a Story

38

General Overview of Evaluation Results

 Five video training films 

were included in the initial evaluation 

study—Explosives Underground, Rock 

Falls: Preventing Rock Fall Injuries in 

Underground Mines, Miner Mike Saves 

the Day-or-Ground Support...It’s Important, Hazards in Motion, and Hidden Scars. Most of the participants had 

seen more than one of the videos, and 

many reported having seen all five.

 Participants who had seen more 

than one of the videos commonly offered their opinions about all the videos 

they had seen rather than speaking about 

one particular title. Sometimes this was 

because they had viewed the videos 

months prior to the interview, and they 

were unable to recall details about each 

title. (Since annual refresher training is 

generally held once a year, it was possible that nearly a year had elapsed between the time the trainer had watched 

the video and the time when he or she 

was contacted by the evaluation team.) 

 Some participants remarked 

that the videos were of a similar quality 

and that it was easier for them to comment upon them collectively. While 

several individuals were very articulate 

and offered detailed analyses of the videos, others found it difficult to provide 

reasons for their views when asked to 

elaborate on their comments. 

 As the evaluation process proceeded, several themes emerged from 

the written comments and interviews. 

What follows is a compilation of the 

major themes expressed without reference to specific titles. For confidentiality purposes, none of the safety experts 

or miners interviewed by phone or in 

person will be identified by name or 

location. No names or addresses were 

collected on the forms mailed to trainers soliciting written responses. Participants were asked only to provide their 

years of experience in the industry, so 

that evaluators could separate new miners from those who had over 1 year of 

mining experience. The purpose was to 

determine if a difference could be detected between the two groups with regard to how they related to and learned 

from the videos.

Quality

 A strong theme that emerged 

from these general assessments of the 

videos was their high quality. One participant noted that he had produced his 

own safety films and appreciated how 

well done these videos were. He said 

they had good story lines and provided 

good information. Another individual, 

who had seen all the films and used one 

in his training program, said he would 

use others. He stated—

Excellent films. On a scale of 

one to five, these are 10 stars. 

The use of real miners who 

tell their own story or explain 

how to do things was very 

effective. These films serve 

their purpose well and are well 

done. Miners who view them 

enjoy and understand the films.
Tell me a Story

39

 He added that other films he had 

used had cheap production values, were 

out of date, or were very expensive to purchase. Another participant stated, “These 

were among the best training films I’ve 

ever used. Certainly the best training films 

in 30 years because they are by miners, in 

mines, and very relevant to their needs.” 

Another commented, “It is very hard to 

find good quality, up-to-date videos to 

train with and these were perfect.” One 

participant expressed gratitude for the videos and commented that new videos were 

a welcome change. He said, “Audiences 

appreciate that the videos are up to date. 

They just get sick of same old videos.”

Credibility

 One of the comments repeated 

almost universally throughout the 

study related to the credibility of the 

videos. According to participants, 

the videos were credible because 

they were filmed underground in real 

mines with real miners as actors and 

presented realistic situations to which 

miners could relate. Comments 

included—

• Real-life story made them 

effective. Touches home. 

The audience never fell 

asleep. Videos kept them 

interested the whole time. 

• They were realistic. The 

audience loved that they 

were real miners. 

• Miners respond to and relate 

to the films because they 

are down to earth and realistic. Miners as actors added 

credibility. 

• Use of real miners—not paid 

actors—and real mines—underground—are key factors. 

• Real guys. Real mines. Real 

situations. 

• They are not studio films. 

They are filmed underground 

in real settings. 

• I liked the use of miners to 

tell stories. Nice approach. 

Liked the miner-to-miner 

tone. Gets the point across. 
Tell me a Story

40

 These comments would seem 

to corroborate the research done by 

Zemke (2000) in which he claims that 

adults are much more likely to pay 

attention to and to learn by watching others if those others are similar 

to themselves. From the comments 

gathered by the evaluation team, the 

miners enjoyed watching “actors” 

who were real miners and appreciated the fact that the videos were shot 

in real mines and showed situations 

that could occur in those mines. 

 Another key factor appeared 

to be that the language spoken in the 

videos was that commonly used by 

real miners. All of the actor-mentors 

told their stories or instructed the 

younger miners in language they use 

every day, not in language that was 

scripted by outsiders. This provided 

an authenticity to the videos that 

would not have been possible if more 

technical language had been used or 

if the actors were nonminers. These 

comments also proved the validity of 

allowing miners to talk about their 

subjects in their own words rather 

than following a scripted text.

Content

 Many comments praised the 

videos for their content. Participants 

in the evaluation appreciated that 

a lot of information was presented 

in a fairly short time and that mining issues were well-depicted. One 

participant praised “the specifics and 

up-to-dateness of the films.” Another 

appreciated how the videos “demonstrate right and wrong practices.” 

Another participant stated that the 

videos “address important safety issues. The content is appropriate to 

the work [miners] do. They are not 

generic safety films. That is important to the miners.” 

Effectiveness of Videos as 

an Educational Tool

 Another strong theme was 

the effectiveness of the videos as 

educational vehicles. Many participants felt they could be used successfully with both new and experienced 

miners or even with other types of 

audiences. One participant stated, 

“Excellent refreshers for experienced 

folks and for new miner indoctrination. Great for introducing people 

with no underground experience to 

that work setting. Very effective 

for preparing new miners before 

they are taken underground.” One 

interviewee reported that he uses the 

videos extensively in training with 

new and experienced miners and 

that after viewing the films, miners 

ask questions and “they remember 

details.” Many commented that the 

safety messages came through, such 

as the need to use safety gear. One 

participant stated, “The videos made 

a sometimes difficult topic (safety) 

entertaining while communicating 

important information.”

 A mining professional, who 

was one of the stakeholders who 

participated as a technical advisor in 

the preproduction stages, felt that the 

films met the needs expressed by the 

stakeholders during the stakeholder 

meetings. He felt that more such 

films were needed and that “training 

and education are the best tools to 

prevent injuries and accidents.” 

 Quite often the participant 

who viewed or used the video did not 

work in an underground mine, but 

nevertheless found the videos to be 

of value. One stated, “Even though 

the video shows miners using jacklegs—we use different equipment in 

this mine—it still hits home.”
Tell me a Story

41

Engagement

 Participants generally found 

the videos to be engaging due to their 

relevance, appropriate length, use of 

humor, and ease of understanding. The 

stories were “told from the employee 

point of view.” Other comments that 

reflected this theme include—

• They were short, to the 

point and interesting.

 

• I appreciated the use of 

humor. 

• Very effective, to the 

point; not repetitious or 

boring. They reinforce 

important ideas. 

• Miners really liked the 

films. Not too long.

 

• We have 8 hours of 

mandatory training. The 

miners usually fall asleep. 

They don’t with these 

films. Good mix of humor 

and serious. Keep making 

these. 

• The films do not contain a 

lot of charts and diagrams, 

yet they speak about 

important issues in simple 

terms—miner to miner. 

• The comedic tone is almost 

hokey, yet it keeps your 

interest and allows miners 

to laugh at themselves 

while still pointing out how 

[wrong] decisions can put 

you at risk. 

 The researchers who produced 

the videos made it a primary goal to 

honor the work and life experiences of 

the miners who would be viewing them 

and to show respect for the expertise 

these people had gained. One participant addressed this aspect of the training videos by saying, “The audience 

didn’t feel talked down to.”

Value to Other Audiences

 Not all the trainers and audiences who viewed the videos worked 

in underground mines. Many users 

represented surface or preparation plant 

operations or even nonmining industries. The videos have proven to be of 

interest to these audiences and in fact 

have found their way into many training rooms that have little, if anything, 

to do with mining. One participant 

reported that his work often called for 

providing historical documentation 

of abandoned mines. He said that he 

would share films with his peers. Many 

participants were eager to see other 

videos produced: “Keep up the good 

work.” “Don’t change what they’ve 

got.” “Just keep making more.” “They 

are on to something unique and need to 

keep it up.” 
Tell me a Story

42

YOU ARE MY SUNSHINE

By Elaine T. Cullen

 In 2001, work began on a video 

with an entirely different focus. The 

advisory group had expressed a need 

for materials that could be used to train 

mine rescue teams. Knowing that the 

Sunshine Mine, located east of Kellogg, 

ID, had been the site of a disastrous 

fire in 1972, the principal investigator decided to use the Sunshine as a 

backdrop for a mine rescue video. Don 

Capparelli, who played the angel of 

safety in the video Hazards in Motion, 

was a supervisor at the Sunshine Mine 

in 2001 and was working at the mine 

when the fire broke out in 1972. He had 

also been a member of the rescue and 

recovery crew during that time, knew 

everyone still working at the mine who 

had been employed there in May 1972,6

6

This fire was the catalyst for passage of the Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977—known in the mining industry as “the Act”—that 

brought metal and nonmetal mining under the same rigorous health, safety, and training requirements that governed coal mining.

and was both able and willing to act as 

an intermediary for the project. 

 Don obtained support for the 

project from Sunshine management and 

arranged interviews with 27 people. 

These participants fell into four main 

categories: (1) survivors of the fire who 

had escaped the mine, (2) rescue and 

recovery workers who had searched for 

survivors, worked to bring the fire under control, restored critical systems to 

the mine so that recovery efforts could 

continue, or brought out the bodies 

of 91 of their friends and co-workers, 

(3) the two men (Tom Wilkerson and 

Ron Flory) who had survived the fire 

and were rescued after being trapped 

underground for 8 days, and (4) family 

and community members who waited 

at the surface for word of their loved 

ones. 

You Are My Sunshine (Cullen, 

2002a) (figure 7) incorporates the many 

stories told by the interviewees into a case 

study of the fire itself. It discusses what 

happened, what went wrong, and most 

importantly, what lessons were learned. 

In many cases, the stories told by the Sunshine survivors and their friends and families had never been voiced before. The 

culture of hard-rock mining prohibited, 

to some degree, their sharing these stories 

with wives or loved ones, and although 

the mine and its subsystems (ground control plan, ventilation system, evacuation 

plans, etc.) had been extensively studied 

after the fire by state and federal agencies, 

for the most part no one had ever asked 

the miners themselves about their experiences. (A few individuals had been asked 

to testify at Congressional hearings or 

Figure 7.—You Are My Sunshine video 

poster.
Tell me a Story

43

during the trials that followed the fire, 

but most of the men interviewed for the 

Sunshine video were not in this group.) 

 Wilkerson and Flory had been 

interviewed extensively by journalists 

as a result of their “miraculous” survival 

and rescue. Because of their perception 

that the news media were often overly 

aggressive and intrusive when covering 

the Sunshine story, they were apprehensive at first. By the time most of their 

co-workers had been through their own 

interviews and were able to reassure 

Wilkerson and Flory that the process was 

not invasive, they agreed to participate.

 The Sunshine Mining Company 

was in the last stages of bankruptcy at 

the time You Are My Sunshine was being 

filmed. It was difficult, if not impossible, to get information from corporate 

offices (headquartered in Boise, ID, 

and in Texas), but local management 

couldn’t have been more cooperative. 

Free access was given to the miners and 

the mine, and a dedicated guide and assistant (Don Capparelli) was provided 

to help with anything we needed to do. 

 It is worth noting that the bankruptcy of the company and imminent 

closure of the mine may have played 

a role in the willingness of the miners 

to finally talk about their experiences 

during the fire. The Silver Valley is a 

geographically and, to some degree, 

socially isolated place. Its citizens 

can be suspicious of outsiders, and 

they have no great love for “gommint 

people” who are perceived by them as 

trying to control their lives. In addition, 

there were numerous “legends” that 

had grown up around the fire, most of 

which were far from factual, but tended 

to be quite negative and hurtful. 

 When the Sunshine miners were 

asked why they agreed to participate in 

the filming of this video, many stated 

that it was time to tell the story and that 

by sharing their experiences with others 

in the mining industry, it was their hope 

that no one else would ever have to go 

through a similar experience. They 

feared that if the mine were closed, their 

last chance to tell their stories would be 

lost. Many had seen the safety training 

videos SRL had produced and enjoyed 

them very much. They believed that (1) 

we understood mining, (2) we wouldn’t 

make them look stupid, and (3) unlike 

members of the news media who had 

descended on them at the time, we 

would tell the truth about the fire. 

 Interviews (figure 8) were conducted primarily at three sites: a littleused battery barn on the 2700 level of 

the mine just off the Jewel shaft station 

(which is the main entrance to the mine), 

the safety training room on the surface, 

and the back room of Sweets Tavern, a 

favorite local bar. The separate locations assured that everyone could be 

interviewed, whether underground 

workers, surface workers, or retired 

workers and community members. 

Figure 8.—NIOSH conducting interviews at the Sunshine Mine.

 The same format and questions 

were used for each group when appro-
Tell me a Story

44

priate, although the interviews themselves tended to be flexible in order to 

capture the range of experiences. In all 

cases, the interviews were private. Only 

the film crew, the interviewer, and the 

interviewee were present. Not only did 

this reduce the anxiety of the miners as 

they sat in front of the cameras, it also 

assured that they did not “play to their 

co-workers” when telling their stories 

and made it possible to triangulate the 

data to some degree. 

 The miners were asked to talk 

about what they were doing when the 

fire broke out, what conditions were 

like underground during the fire, what 

actions people took when they realized 

there was a serious problem, and how 

they escaped. For those not working 

underground, information was gathered 

on what their role was in the rescue and 

recovery, what conditions were like on 

the surface as the community came to 

realize the extent of the disaster, what 

was included in the rescue effort, and 

what the long-term impact of the fire 

was on the mine and the community. 

The two men found alive after 8 days 

were asked to provide a detailed description of their experiences. 

 None of the miners knew what 

others had said in their interviews, 

and although it is likely that there was 

some talk and information-sharing as 

the men waited for their turn outside 

of the interview areas, most miners did 

not see the finished product until it was 

premiered nearly 18 months later. (A 

representative group of participants, 

managers, and safety professionals was 

asked, however, to participate as technical reviewers as the video began to 

take shape. Comments and suggestions 

from this group were incorporated into 

the final version of the video.)

 This video has been distributed 

widely both inside and outside the mining industry. It is being used by many 

emergency rescue teams as a stark 

reminder of what can happen when 

the unexpected becomes a reality. The 

video was awarded a national Telly 

Award in 2003 (generally considered 

to be the “Oscar” for broadcast media 

such as TV, cable, and other commercial 

productions). You Are My Sunshine has 

been the most widely distributed of all 

the training videos produced, including 

to over 30 countries. It quickly reached 

an audience outside the mining industry 

and is being used in many other industries such as tunneling, firefighting, and 

the military. It has been aired repeatedly on the regional public TV station. 

You Are My Sunshine was evaluated separately from the other NIOSH 

mine safety videos. This particular film 

was substantially different in nature 

from the others, and while responses 

to the evaluations did mention lessons 

learned, it became obvious that the film 

had touched a very personal place for 

many of the viewers. Because of the 

difference in audience and in the intent 

of those who showed the video, the 

analysis of You Are My Sunshine will 

not be included in this report, but will 

be reported in a separate document. 
Tell me a Story

45

EVALUATION OF ZEN AND THE 

ART OF ROCK BOLTING

By Elaine T. Cullen and 

Albert H. Fein

 The seventh video produced under 

the NIOSH research project was entitled Zen 

and the Art of Rock Bolting (Cullen, 2002b) 

(figure 9). This video was made in response 

to an issue that was heard repeatedly from 

safety trainers across the country. Because 

workers in the mining industry in the United 

States are aging, the industry is anticipating 

a significant exodus of experienced miners 

within the next few years (Kowalski-Trakofler et al., 2004, p. 2). Some experts believe 

this is already happening. One of the results 

of the retirement of these master miners is 

that fewer mentors will be left to train the 

influx of new employees. In an industry that 

has relied heavily on the master-apprentice 

relationship for training new miners, this has 

the potential for disaster.

Figure 9.—Zen and the Art of Rock 

Bolting video poster.

 Safety trainers are, quite reasonably, concerned about the situation. It 

is generally agreed that inexperienced 

workers have more than their share 

of accidents when compared to more 

experienced workers, particularly in 

blue-collar industries, and in an inherently dangerous industry such as mining, the number of accidents among 

new miners can run especially high. 

Consequently, trainers came to us with 

a question: Is it possible to capture 

the wisdom and expertise of a master 

miner and use these strengths to train 

new hires long after the master has left 

the mine? The Zen video is an attempt 

to answer that question.

 Before filming could begin 

on this project, it was crucial to find 

a master miner who would be willing 

to work with us and who had the charisma to effectively teach what he knew 

while working in front of a camera. Jim 

Mortensen, a life-long veteran of the 

Sunshine Mine, filled these criteria. In 

the complicated world of the gypo miners, he was considered the best of the 

best. He had held the position of being 

the “top money man” at the Sunshine 

for nearly 37 years, and in spite of the 

fact that he was 58 when he agreed to 

work with the project, few miners at the 

mine believed they could out-mine him. 

Jim had the added trait of being a born 

storyteller with a wry sense of humor. 

Even though working on the film would 

slow him down and possibly keep him 

from “making the round” (thus denying him his bonus for the days we were 

working with him), he agreed to do it.

 Robert Pirsig, in his book Zen 

and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, discusses what it is that makes 

the masters different.
Tell me a Story

46

Sometime look at a novice 

workman or a bad workman 

and compare his expression 

with that of a craftsman whose 

work you know is excellent and 

you’ll see the difference. The 

craftsman isn’t ever following a 

single line of instruction. He’s 

making decisions as he goes 

along. For that reason he’ll 

be absorbed and attentive to 

what he’s doing even though 

he doesn’t deliberately contrive 

this. His motions and the machine are in a kind of harmony. 

He isn’t following any set of 

written instructions because 

the nature of the material at 

hand determines his thoughts 

and motions. (1974, p. 148)

 This is a perfect description of 

a master miner at work. He is totally 

absorbed with his work, reading the environment constantly as he works, and 

making decisions about how he works 

as that environment changes. It was 

this mastery that we hoped to capture 

as we filmed Jim Mortensen at work.

 By the time filming on the new 

video began, we had learned enough to 

know that it would be a waste of both 

our time and Jim’s to script the story. 

Our plan was just to let him talk and 

demonstrate what he knew. Jim was 

very good at this, having trained more 

than his share of new hands over the 

years, but when we gave him a “new 

hire” to teach, he truly shone. The 

Zen video does not use the storytelling 

method employed in the other videos, 

although Jim does tell several stories. 

It is based only on what he would teach 

a new hire about how to stay alive in the 

mines long enough for him to become 

a good miner. Thus, Jim instructs his 

new trainees in two important ways—

through what he says and through what 

he does. 

 Fein, from the team of Fein 

and Isaacson that had assessed the 

effectiveness of the first five videos, 

was hired to evaluate Zen. During the 

initial stages of the first evaluation, the 

team determined that quantitative data 

collection methods did not provide the 

best means of assessing the effectiveness of the videos. The pre-test/posttest, true-false format designed for 

these videos was moderately successful in measuring trainees’ knowledge 

of the content of each video, but it did 

not take into account how effectively 

the videos served as a reminder or 

reinforcement of knowledge that the 

miners already possessed but might 

not practice. The core question about 

each video was not really the amount 

of knowledge gained as measured by a 

true-false test, but how effectively the 

video affected miners’ behavior. What 

the evaluators concluded from the first 

set of video evaluations was that the 

information provided by the miners to 

the three open-ended questions at the 

end of the tests provided much more 

accurate and authentic data than did the 
Tell me a Story

47

more formal test questions. 

 Using answers to the openended questions as a guide, and with 

a greater understanding of the occupational culture of mining, Fein designed 

the evaluation instrument for Zen to 

be more open-ended, briefer, and less 

structured than the tests used for the 

other videos. In other words, this evaluation was designed to be qualitative in 

nature. 

 Creswell confirms the value of 

using qualitative methods when— 

• The nature of the question 

begins with a “how” or 

“what.”

• When the variables are not 

easily identified.

• When the topic calls for 

exploration.

• When the researcher is 

studying individuals in their 

natural setting. (1998, p. 17)

 In the evaluation of Zen, the research questions to be answered were—

1. How effectively did Zen 

 and the Art of Rock Bolting 

capture the wisdom and 

 experience of a master 

 miner? and 

2. How effectively did Zen and 

 the Art of Rock Bolting 

 provide information to new 

 and experienced miners?

 Fein (2003) decided to again 

use a pre-viewing/post-viewing format 

for the evaluation, but with some significant differences to the instruments 

used for the evaluations of the first 

five videos. On the pre-test, only the 

following three questions were asked.

 

1. What needs to be done 

 before a miner begins 

 drilling or bolting?

2. What is important to 

 remember about operating 

 a jackleg?

3. What is important to 

 miners who are working 

 underground? 

 Additional questions were added to the post-test. The fourth question 

asked miners to write down anything 

they had learned from the video that 

hadn’t been covered in the first three 

questions. The fifth question asked 

whether, after watching the video, the 

respondent would like Jim Mortensen to 

be his or her trainer. This question was 

meant to get at the efficacy of capturing 

a master miner on video and whether 

his expertise would be as evident if he 

were not there in person. 

 The trainers who participated in 

the pre-test also suggested adding a final 

question in which trainees were asked 

to choose whether the video had taught 
Tell me a Story

48

them “nothing,” “a little,” “quite a bit,” 

or “a lot.” As before, miners were also 

invited to provide any additional comments on the video. (See Appendix D 

for the final pre- and post-tests used to 

evaluate Zen.)

7

Details of the analysis of the evaluations are available in the report Evaluation of Zen and the Art of Rock Bolting (Fein, 

2003). 

 When the video was completed 

and approved, the mine safety community was notified via e-mail, Technology 

News mailings, the Website, and personal contacts. As before, the videos 

were free to safety trainers, but were 

sent only to those who requested them. 

Evaluation surveys were sent out with 

each video requested. Trainers were 

asked to administer the pre-test before 

showing the video and the post-test afterward. No verbal interview data were 

gathered from the trainers, although a 

separate questionnaire was sent to them 

to gather their thoughts on how effective the video was and whether they 

believed Jim’s wisdom and expertise 

were obvious to the viewers (see Appendix E). 

 It was expected that after seeing 

the video, viewers would have more 

information and would thus provide 

more answers to the three open-ended 

questions about what miners should do 

and what things were important to keep 

an eye on. This was, in fact, the case. 

Post-test responses showed significant 

improvement over pre-test responses in 

both number of answers and completeness of answers and for both inexperienced and experienced miners. In 

addition, the majority of both inexperienced miners and experienced miners 

responded that the video taught them either “quite a bit” or “a lot.” Comments 

from the inexperienced miners revealed 

the respect they had for a miner who 

had obviously mastered the art.

• You can only get so much 

from a video, but he does 

convey a lot of information. 

I could learn a lot from him.

• I think Jim would be an 

excellent teacher.

• I thought that this was one 

of the best training videos I 

have ever seen. I definitely 

would like to learn from 

Jim. He is not so formal or 

proper.

• Overall I enjoyed Jim. I 

think he was a very helpful teacher. It was nice to 

have a video where a person 

actually shows you how to 

do things instead of just tells 

you about it.

• Jim Mortensen would be a 

good teacher because he 

knows what he is talking 

about and explains it well.

• I think he was a good 

teacher because he has 

experienced everything there 

is to experience in a mine. 

He knows what to do and 

what can happen if you do 

something wrong. (Fein, 

2003, p. 22)
Tell me a Story

49

 In general, experienced miners, 

while recognizing the expert that Jim 

is, were more critical of the things they 

saw that were different than how they 

themselves mined. They were particularly critical of the safety violations 

they saw, even though Jim explains in 

the video that these were acceptable 

practices in the past but are no longer 

tolerated. The experienced miners 

recognized safety hazards and were 

vocal in their support for good safety 

practices.

• Very realistic...no sugar 

coating. While it is a good 

tool for training someone 

to be a productive bolter, 

safety was questionable.

• Very well done, but needs 

to watch some bad habits, 

like standing on the D ring.

• Obviously he knows his 

way around a mine and a 

jackleg.

• Good video with lots of 

good advice.

• He should use his glasses 

more. (Fein, 2003, p. 21)

 Comments from the trainers 

concerning this video were also quite 

positive. They were asked to respond 

to whether or not they thought the video 

was an effective training tool and while 

three people did mention Jim’s “bad 

habits,” the others stated that the video 

was effective as a training tool.

• This video was effective 

as it shows the basics to 

miners who have never 

been around rock bolting.

• Effective. Experienced 

miner, one you would look 

up to, giving you advice. 

It was good having the 

young guy in the movie.

• Everyone liked it and 

would like to have Jim 

Mortensen be their instructor.

• It was an extremely effective video....I feel this 

real-world approach is 

a good way to go about 

promoting safety. Who 

better to hear it from than 

someone with years of 

experience?

• Showed actual practice. 

Noted some bad habits in 

addition to good ones.

• In general I have heard 

only positive reactions. 

We have had several 

dozen people view the 

film and every one of them 

have liked it. Yesterday 

four different miners said 

as how it was the best experienced-based effective 

film they had watched. 

Each experienced miner 

indicates that Jim is a true 

expert...a miner’s miner. 

(pp. 23, 26)
Tell me a Story

50

 Trainers were asked how they 

handled differences in policies or procedures between what Jim discussed or 

showed and what they expected at their 

mines. Most of them used the video as 

an opportunity to discuss those differences and to go over them. Where local 

policies differed from what was shown 

in Zen, it seemed easy for trainers to 

point out the difference and use them 

to clarify local standards and why they 

were set that way.

 One of the more interesting 

things from the data analysis was that 

the post-test responses for inexperienced 

miners reflected a kind of “Aha!” for 

many of them. They had already heard 

many of the things that Jim discussed, 

but hearing them from an expert and 

watching him perform made the lessons much more meaningful. Learning 

these things from a miner they saw as 

very credible enhanced their readiness 

to learn. 

 The two questions that the Zen 

video was seeking answers to were 

“whether or not it was possible to 

capture the wisdom and expertise of a 

master miner on film” and “whether a 

film of this type could effectively provide information to both new and experienced miners.” From the responses 

gathered from both kinds of miners 

and the professional safety trainers, it 

would seem that the answer to both of 

these questions is “yes.” If the right 

expert is found, a person who can share 

his wisdom and experiences with credibility and personality, it is possible to 

capture that expertise and use it to train 

future generations of miners. 
Tell me a Story

51

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

By Elaine T. Cullen

 The NIOSH research project 

“Development and Evaluation of Effective Safety Training for Miners” was 

designed to investigate what effective 

training tools would look like. Many 

social scientists have proposed theories 

about adult learning and the strong role 

that occupational culture plays in how, 

what, and why workers choose to learn. 

The popularity and positive attitude 

that the mining industry has toward the 

SRL/NIOSH videos proves that there 

is something to be learned from these 

theories. As adult learners, miners 

expect their training to be necessary, 

related to what they do in their work, 

and help them deal with the many environmental hazards and challenges they 

face on a daily basis. They also expect 

it to be interesting and enjoyable, even 

if it deals with technical topics. Miners have a greater need than many other 

workers to develop expertise, not just 

to absorb data from their training. The 

dynamic, dangerous nature of the work 

requires them to be able to draw on 

myriad lessons in order to survive. Effective training may play a critical role 

in that survival.

 The mining industry has a long 

tradition of using a master-apprentice 

relationship in training new workers. 

These miner-mentors are effective 

because they are credible. They have 

learned their lessons through years of 

successfully surviving in an often-hostile underground environment. In addition, they talk and walk and act like 

miners. They are believable. A leading 

theorist, Albert Bandura, believes that 

this is a primary key to effective learning. New hires learn by listening to and 

believing the stories told by older miners, and in doing so, they do not need to 

repeat those experiences (often “close 

calls” or worse) in order to learn. Storytelling, an age-old method of teaching new hires in the mining industry, 

is also an extremely effective means 

of conveying often-complex information in a way that is understandable and 

memorable. Storytelling has a crucial 

role to play in successful training.

 A major factor in bringing 

about effective change in any culture is 

to work inside it, rather than to stand 

outside it. To truly change a person’s 

behavior to incorporate a safer way of 

working, it is crucial that the locus of 

control be moved from external (the 

boss or the inspector who will punish unsafe behavior) to internal (the 

worker chooses the safe way to work 

because he/she realizes it is the better 

choice). Culture is the gatekeeper, 
Tell me a Story

52

however, and the filter through which 

all options are viewed. If training is 

provided by respected mentors who 

have been successful as miners and 

who understand the language and the 

norms of the mining culture, then 

training will be much more readily 

heard and adopted by the trainees, 

and they will make the choice to alter 

their behavior to be more like their 

mentors. 

 The training videos created 

by the SRL/NIOSH make use of the 

culturally acceptable constructs of 

miner-mentors, storytelling, and assurances that the lessons included 

are relevant as well as interesting. 

Evaluations of the videos have shown 

that they are valued by trainers and 

trainees alike because they are seen as 

credible and respectful of the mining 

culture. Viewers particularly appreciated the fact that the “actors” were 

real miners, and they were filmed doing real mining activities in real operating mines. There are many ways 

to measure effectiveness of training 

materials, but the fact that trainers 

report that their miners are asking 

for the NIOSH videos and that they 

discuss them for weeks after seeing 

them is an indication that the miners 

paid attention. One surprising result 

of this interest is that many trainers 

are reporting that the videos are disappearing from training rooms. Miners, it seems, are “borrowing” them 

and taking them home to show their 

families. 

 SRL will continue to evaluate 

the training videos it produces. Much 

has been learned about how to do 

this in a meaningful way, and these 

lessons will be applied to the development of future effective training 

products. 
Tell me a Story

53

REFERENCES

Billett, S. (1994). Situated learning in the workplace: Having another look at apprenticeships. Industrial and Commercial Training, 26(11), 9-16.

Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Camm, T. W., & Cullen, E. T. (2002). Releasing the energy of workers to create 

a safer workplace: The value of using mentors to enhance safety training. 

In R. H. Peters (Ed.), Strategies for improving miners’ training (Information 

Circular 9463, pp. 35-38). Pittsburgh, PA: National Institute for Occupational 

Safety and Health.

Caudron, S. (2000). Learners speak out. Training & Development, 54(4), 52-57.

Cole, H. P. (1997). Stories to live by: A narrative approach to health-behavior 

research and injury prevention. In D. S. Gochman (Ed.), Handbook of health 

behavior research methods: Vol. 4 (pp. 325-349). New York: Plenum.

Cranton, P. (1994). Understanding and promoting transformative learning: A guide 

for educators of adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among 

five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cullen, E. T. (Producer and Director) (1999). Explosives underground - Handling 

explosives in modern mines. Video. Spokane, WA: Spokane Research Laboratory/NIOSH.

Cullen, E. T. (Producer and Director) (2000). Miner Mike saves the day - or- Ground 

support, it’s important. Video. Spokane, WA: Spokane Research Laboratory/

NIOSH.

Cullen, E. T. (Producer and Director) (2001a). Hazards in motion. Video. Spokane, 

WA: Spokane Research Laboratory/NIOSH.

Cullen, E. T. (Producer and Director) (2001b). Hidden scars. Video. Spokane, WA: 

Spokane Research Laboratory/NIOSH.

Cullen, E. T. (Producer and Director) (2002a). You are my Sunshine. Video. Spokane, WA: Spokane Research Laboratory/NIOSH. 

Cullen, E. T. (Producer and Director) (2002b). Zen and the Art of Rock Bolting. 

Video. Spokane, WA: Spokane Research Laboratory/NIOSH. 

Darwin, A. (2000). Critical reflections on mentoring in work settings. Adult Education Quarterly, 50(3), 197-211.

Fein, A. H. (2003) Evaluation of Zen and the Art of Rock Bolting. Report prepared 

for the Spokane Research Laboratory, Spokane, WA. 38 pp.

Fein, A. H., & Isaacson, N. S. (2001). Video-based training program for underground miners evaluation report. Report prepared for the Spokane Research 

Laboratory, Spokane, WA. 105 pp. 

Forster, N., Cebis, M., Majteles, S., Mathur, A., Morgan, R., Preuss, J., & Tiwar, V. 

(1999). The role of story-telling in organizational leadership. Leadership & 

Organizational Development Journal, 20(1).

Gargiulo, T. L. (2002). Making stories: A practical guide to organizational leaders 

and human response specialists. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays by Clifford Geertz.

New York: Basic Books.
Tell me a Story

54

Hansen, C. D. (1995). Occupational cultures: Whose frame are we using? Journal 

for Quality and Participation, 18(3), 60-64.

Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. New York: 

McGraw-Hill.

Jerome, T. Personal communication, February 2002.

King, J., & Down, J. (2001). On taking stories seriously: Emotional and moral 

intelligences. Teaching Business Ethics, 5(4), 419-437.

Kirkpatrick, D. (2001). The four-level evaluation process. In L. L. Ukens (Ed.), 

What smart trainers know: The secrets of success from the world’s foremost 

experts (pp. 122-132). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.

Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (1998). The adult learner (5th 

ed.). Woburn, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Kowalski, K. M., & Vaught, C. (2002). Principles of adult learning: Application 

for mine trainers. In R. H. Peters (Ed.), Strategies for improving miners’ training (Information Circular 9463, pp. 3-8). Pittsburgh, PA: National Institute for 

Occupational Safety and Health.

Kowalski-Trakofler, K., Vaught, C., Mallett, L., Brnich, M., Reinke, D., Steiner, L., 

Wiehagen, W., & Rethi, L. (eds.), (2004). Safety and health training for an evolving workforce: An overview from the mining industry (Information Circular 

9474). Pittsburgh, PA: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Livo, N. J., & Rietz, S. A. (1986). Storytelling: Process and practice. Littleton, 

CO: Libraries Unlimited, Inc.

Lucas, R. A. (1969). Men in crisis: A study of a mine disaster. New York: Basic 

Books.

MacDonald, M. R. (1993). The story-teller’s start-up book: Finding, learning, 

performing and using folktales. Little Rock, AR: August House.

Mallett, L., & Reinke, D. (2002). An overview of the evaluation process for mine 

trainers. In R. H. Peters (Ed.), Strategies for improving miners’ training (Information Circular 9463, pp. 13-17). Pittsburgh, PA: National Institute for 

Occupational Safety and Health.

McCarl, R. (1997). Contested space: The above and below ground landscape of 

Idaho’s Coeur d’Alene Mining District. Salt Lake City: University of Utah 

Graduate School of Architecture.

Miller, A. (Producer and Director) (1999). Preventing rock falls in underground 

mines. Video. Spokane, WA: Spokane Research Laboratory/NIOSH. 

Miller, A., Oaks, M. M., Akmal, T. T. (1998). Criteria and rationale for development of a video based training program for underground miners. Internal 

report, Spokane, WA: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.

Miller, P. (1993). Theories of Developmental Psychology . New York: W. H. Freeman.

Mitchell, B. Personal communication, February 2001.

Neuhauser, P. C. (1993). Corporate legends & lore. Austin, TX: PCN Associates.

Owenby, P. H. (1992). Making case studies come alive. Training, 29(1), 43-47.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand 

Oaks, CA: Sage.
Tell me a Story

55

Pegg, M. (1999). The art of mentoring. Industrial and Commercial Training, 31(4), 

136-141.

Pirsig, R. M. (1974). Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance. New York: Bantam New Age Books.

Schein, E. H. (1996). Culture: The missing concept in organization studies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(2), 229-239.

Simmons, A. (2001). The story factor: Inspiration, influence, and persuasion 

through the art of storytelling. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing.

Slater, M. D. (2002). Entertainment education and the persuasive impact of narratives. In T. Brock, J. J. Strange, & M. C. Green (Eds.), Narrative impact: 

Social and cognitive foundations. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Stone, D. (1999) Social cognitive theory [Web Page]. 

 URL www.med.usf.edu/Ekmbrown/Social_Cognitive_Theory_Overview.htm. 

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 30 CFR Part 46.4, 30 CFR 46 & 48, 30 

CFR 56/57/58, (2001). Federal Metal and Nonmetal Mine Safety, Health & 

Training Regulations. 

Van Maanen, J., & Barley, S. R. (1984). Occupational communities: Culture and 

control in organizations. In Staw & Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior: Vol. 6 (pp. 287-366). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Voynick, S. M. (1978). The making of a hardrock miner. Kearney, NE: Morris 

Publishing.

Whyatt, J., Williams, T., & White, B. (2000). Ground conditions and the May 13, 

1994 rock burst, Coeur d’Alene Mining District, northern Idaho. In J. Girard, 

M. Leibman, C. Breeds, & T. Doe (Eds.), Pacific rocks 2000: Rocks around 

the rim: Proceedings of the 4th North American rock mechanics symposium

(pp. 313-318). Rotterdam: Balkema.

Wlodowski, R. J. (1985). Enhancing adult motivation to learn. San Francisco: 

Jossey-Bass.

Wylie, A. (1998). Story telling: A powerful form of communication. Communication World, 15(3), 30-32.

Zemke, R. (1990). Storytelling: Back to a basic. Training, 27(3), 44-50.

Zemke, R. (2002). Who needs learning theory anyway? Training, 39(9), 86-91.
Tell me a Story

56

APPENDIX A

Zen and the Art of Rock Bolting

Technical Review

The purpose of this video is to “capture the wisdom and knowledge of the expert 

miner before he leaves the industry”. How well do you think this was done?

The primary audience for this video is young miners. Do you think it is an appropriate training tool for new hands?

Do you think there is value in the video for reminding more experienced miners?

Does this video generally demonstrate acceptable practices?

What do you think of the idea of using experienced miners to help train others? Is 

this an effective training technique?

What topics do you think would be valuable for additional “expert miner” videos?

Additional comments?
Tell me a Story

57

APPENDIX B

Hazards in Motion

Pretest

I am: A new miner (less than one year)______ An experienced miner _______

DIRECTIONS: 

Circle the letter of the correct response.

1. Which is NOT necessary before operating mine vehicles?

 A. Check to see if the lights and brakes work.

 B. Check to see if the fuel, transmission fluid, and oil levels are okay.

 C. Check the tires for proper inflation.

 D. Check fire extinguisher(s) dates and to see if they’ve been used.

 E. None of the above

2. When using LHDs

 A. Pedestrians must yield.

 B. Hang on with both hands when riding in the bucket.

 C. Drive with the bucket downward behind the vehicle.

 D. Watch out for pinch points

 E. Drive as fast or slowly as you want.

3. Which is NOT true about working in mines?

 A. A head lamp moving up and down means “back up.”

 B. A head lamp moving side to side means “stop.”

 C. Horseplay and joking around help break the tedium.

 D. Always check with the person in charge of a work zone before entering it.

 E. There may be red and green traffic signals.

4. Which is NOT true about rail cars?

 A. Will have trip lights on the last car if it’s pulling or on the first car if it’s 

 pushing. 

 B. Block wheel if parking the cars

 C. Can be used to carry a few tools and equipment if not a mantrip.

 D. Have locomotive cars that are convenient for carrying small tools.

 E. Operators can’t see ahead easily.

5. When using mine elevators

 A. Always wear safety glasses.

 B. Wait a minimum of five feet from the shaft.

 C. Lock both latches after closing the cage door.

 D. Keep hands (and other body parts) inside the cage at all times.

 E. Establish a solid footing because the cages moves quickly.
Tell me a Story

58

Hazards in Motion

Posttest

I am: A new miner (less than one year)________ An experienced miner _______

DIRECTIONS: 

Mark T if the statement is TRUE and F if the statement is FALSE

_____ 1. Before operating mine vehicles check to see if the lights and brakes work.

_____ 2. Before operating mine vehicles check the transmission fluid, oil, and fuel 

 levels.

_____ 3. Before operating mine vehicles check fire extinguishers to see if they’ve been 

 used and the date.

 

_____ 4. Before operating mine vehicles check the tires for proper inflation

_____ 5. When using LHDs ignore pinch points.

_____ 6. The best place to ride in an LHD is in the bucket.

_____7. When using LHDs the bucket should be in front of the vehicle.

_____ 8. LHDs have the right of way over pedestrians. 

_____ 9. LHDs may be operated at any speed.

_____ 10. Mines often have red and green traffic signals--just like streets.

_____ 11. A head lamp moving side to side means “stop.”

_____ 12. A head lamp moving up and down means “come ahead.”

_____ 13. A head lamp moving up and down means “back up.”

_____ 14. Always check with the person in charge of a work zone before entering it.

_____ 15. Horseplay and joking around in mines is OK because they help break the 

 tedium.

_____ 16. Rail cars always have the right of way. 

_____ 17. People and equipment should be carried in separate cars.
Tell me a Story

59

_____ 18. The locomotive is a convenient spot to carry small tools.

_____ 19 Locomotive operators sit up high and therefore generally have good 

 visibility of the track ahead.

_____ 20. Always wear safety glasses when using mine elevators.

_____ 21 When waiting for the elevator, stand 15 feet from the shaft.

_____ 22. Lock both latches after closing the cage door.

_____ 23. Establish a solid footing in a mine elevator because the cage moves quickly.

_____ 24. Always block wheels if parking a vehicle.

_____ 25. When rail cars are coupling, use a coupling device to avoid injury.

_____ 26. When uncoupling rail cars, beware of pinch points.

_____ 27. Air doors should be left open for proper air circulation in the mine.

_____28. When mine cars are dumped, stand near the grizzly to make sure they 

 empty properly.

_____ 29. Signal the hoistman when you are ready to exit the mine elevator.

_____ 30. Never operate any equipment you have not been trained to operate.

PLEASE GIVE US SOME FEEDBACK ON THIS VIDEO

(Circle the NUMBER that best describes YOU)

Hazards in Motion taught me something I did not know: 

NO 1 2 3 4 5 YES

Hazards in Motion “talked down” to me: 

NO 1 2 3 4 5 YES

Hazards in Motion was enjoyable to watch: 

NO 1 2 3 4 5 YES

Comments:
Tell me a Story

60

Miner Mike Saves the Day

Pretest

I am: A new miner (less than one year) ______ An experienced miner _______

DIRECTIONS Part I: 

Circle the letter of the correct response.

1. Which is NOT a reason that rocks may fail?

 A. Cooling hot lines increase rock stress.

 B. Blasting loosens the rock.

 C. Over-barring down.

 D. Exposure to air dries out the rock.

2. Which is NOT true about scaling rock?

 A. Use the right length bar.

 B. Stay in safe ground.

 C. Pay attention to where the rock will fall.

 D. Bar in any direction.

3. Which is NOT true about operating a jack-leg

 A. Let the bolt extend no more than six inches from the surface.

 B. Barring down is unnecessary.

 C. Look at the ground to determine how many bolts are needed.

 D. Keep the machine leg balanced and in line with the drilling surface.

4. Which is NOT true about operating a jumbo bolter?

 A. Keep the area clear of tools and debris.

 B. Always use a scaling bar before operating the machine.

 C. Turn off the machine at the first sight of rock movement.

 D. None of the above.

5. Which is NOT true about jumbo drills and rock bolters?

 A. Are not as safe as jack drills.

 B. Should be operated slowly in muddy ground.

 C. Require the operator to use judgment.

 D. Provide protection under unbolted areas.

6. When installing mechanicals

 A. Check tightness with a torque wrench.

 B. Never use expanding anchors.

 C. Any size bit will do.

 D. Never drill the hole too short.
Tell me a Story

61

7. Bolts

 A. Should be installed only according to the design plan.

 B. Increase ground support.

 C. Sometimes are used with plywood.

 D. Usually have metal plates at the bottom. 

DIRECTIONS Part II: 

Mark “T” of the statement is TRUE and “F” if the statement is FALSE or PARTIALLY FALSE.

_____1. It is more important to be safe than to make the round.

_____2. Skipping a few bolts saves time and does no real harm.

_____3. Most mines use the same kind of ground support.

_____4. Following the company’s bolt design plan will guarantee safe working conditions.

_____5. There can be quite a bit of variation in ground conditions.

_____6. There is more tension when the rock is pulled than when it is compressed.

_____7. Blasting rock changes ground conditions by increasing tension.

_____8. Point anchor bolts and grouter bolts with plates are active supports.

_____9. Installing passive bolts puts the rock back into tension.

_____10. Grouted cable bolts and grouter bolts without plates are active supports.

_____11. Passive supports prevent additional relation of the rock from occurring.

_____12. A properly installed bolt creates a zone of compressed rock.

_____13. Leaving out one bolt is dangerous.

_____14. Miners have to use their own judgment about how many bolts to install.

_____15. Barring down takes time but makes installing bolts safer.

_____16. Once a miner has scaled, it is safe to install bolts and it won’t be 

 necessary to scale again.

_____17. Friction bolts are most suitable for broken ground.

_____18. The bolt design plan represents the maximum number of bolts that are 

 safe to install. 
Tell me a Story

62

_____19. The only way to stabilize rock is to use timbers, bolts, or steel sets.

_____20. The best way to keep track of dangerous situations when using a jumbo 

 bolter is to listen for strange or unusual sounds.

_____21. Safety glasses are a must when using the scaling bar.

_____22. If you see faults or seams, consider using shorter bolts.

_____23. Grouted bolts that use resin should be drilled fairly deep.

_____24. Once a bolt that uses resin or cement is set, the bolt should not spin.

_____25. Use wire mesh or welded wire panels to make breaking ground safer.

_____26. Once bolts, wire mesh, timbers, or other safety measures are installed, 

 miners can relax and be safe.

_____27. A wire mesh properly bolted and full of broken rock is safe.

_____28. If a bolt has pulled through the plate, enough compression is main-

 tained to insure safe conditions.

_____29. Broken rock on the floor of the mine just means someone didn’t clean 

 up their area.

_____30. If you see signs of failing ground, and you have the right tools, you 

 should repair the problem immediately.
Tell me a Story

63

Miner Mike Saves the Day

Posttest

I am: A new miner (less than one year) _______ An experienced miner _______

DIRECTIONS: 

Mark “T” of the statement is TRUE and “F” if the statement is FALSE or PARTIALLY FALSE.

_____1. It is more important to be safe than to make the round.

_____2. Skipping a few bolts saves time and does no real harm.

_____3. Most mines use the same kind of ground support.

_____4. Following the company’s bolt design plan will guarantee safe working 

 conditions.

_____5. There can be quite a bit of variation in ground conditions.

_____6. There is more tension when the rock is pulled than when it is compressed.

_____7. Blasting rock changes ground conditions by increasing tension.

_____8. Point anchor bolts and grouter bolts with plates are active supports.

_____9. Installing passive bolts puts the rock back into tension.

_____10. Grouted cable bolts and grouter bolts without plates are active supports.

_____11. Passive supports prevent additional relation of the rock from occurring.

_____12. A properly installed bolt creates a zone of compressed rock.

_____13. Leaving out one bolt isn’t very dangerous.

_____14. Miners have to use their own judgment about how many bolts to install.

_____15. Barring down takes time but makes installing bolts safer.

_____16. Once a miner has scaled, it is safe to install bolts and it won’t be 

 necessary to scale again.

_____17. Friction bolts are most suitable for broken ground

_____18. A bolt design plan represents the maximum number of bolts that are 

 safe to install. 
Tell me a Story

64

_____19. The only ways to stabilize rock are to use timbers, bolts, or steel sets.

_____20. The best way to keep track of dangerous situations when using a jumbo 

 bolter is to listen for strange or unusual sounds.

_____21. Safety glasses are a must when using the scaling bar.

_____22. If you see faults or seams, consider using shorter bolts.

_____23. Grouted bolts that use resin should be drilled fairly deep.

_____24. Once a bolt that uses resin or cement is set, the bolt should not spin.

_____25. Use wire mesh or welded wire panels to make breaking ground safer.

_____26. Once bolts, wire mesh, timbers, or other safety measures are installed, 

 miners can relax and be safe.

_____27. A wire mesh properly bolted and full of broken rock is safe.

_____28. If a bolt has pulled through the plate, enough compression is 

 maintained to insure safe conditions.

_____29. Broken rock on the floor of the mine just means someone didn’t clean 

 up.

_____30. If you see signs of failing ground, and you have the right tools, you 

 should repair the problem immediately.

_____31. Rocks may fail because cooling hot lines increase rock stress.

_____32. Over-barring down loosens the rock and increases stress.

_____33. Exposure to air dries out the rock and may cause increased stress.

_____34. When scaling rock, the length of the bar used doesn’t really matter.

_____35. Never bar downward; only upward.

_____36. When operating a jack-leg, let the bolt extend no more than six inches 

 from the surface.

_____37. Keep a jack-leg balanced and in line with the drilling surface.

_____38. When operating a jumbo bolter turn off the machine at the first sight of 

 rock movement.

_____39. Jumbo drills are not as safe as jack drills.
Tell me a Story

65

_____40. Because of their design, jumbo drills provide protection under unbolted areas

_____41. When installing mechanicals use expanding anchors and the right sized bit.

_____42. For added safety, check tightness of the first and last mechanical you 

 install with a torque wrench. 

_____43. Never drill the hole too short when installing bolts.

_____44. Bolts usually have metal or wood plates at the bottom to increase 

 ground support.

PLEASE GIVE US SOME FEEDBACK ON THIS VIDEO

(Circle the NUMBER that best describes YOU)

Miner Mike taught me something I did not know: 

NO 1 2 3 4 5 YES

Miner Mike “talked down” to me: 

NO 1 2 3 4 5 YES

Miner Mike was enjoyable to watch: 

NO 1 2 3 4 5 YES

Comments:
Tell me a Story

66

APPENDIX C

Hidden Scars 

Pretest

I am: 

A new miner (less than one year experience)________ 

An experienced miner_______

There are no “right” answers to these questions:

Imagine yourself in a mine disaster. Your co-workers are hurt or worse. You are 

trapped in fallen earth. 

What might be your thoughts and feelings?

You survive, but how might such an experience impact you? 

your family? 

Your community?
Tell me a Story

67

Hidden Scars 

Posttest

I am: 

A new miner (less than one year experience________ )

An experienced miner_________

There are no “right” answers to these questions:

You have just watched a video about a mine disaster that caused injury and a 

fatality.

1. What are your thoughts and feelings about what you saw and heard?

2. What did you learn from watching this video?

3. In what way(s) will this video impact your work?

Please give us some feedback on this video

(Circle the NUMBER that best describes YOU.)

Hidden Scars taught me something I did not know:

NO 1 2 3 4 5 YES

Hidden Scars “talked down” to me:

NO 1 2 3 4 5 YES

Hidden Scars was enjoyable to watch:

NO 1 2 3 4 5 YES

Comments:
Tell me a Story

68

APPENDIX D

Zen and the Art of Rockbolting

BEFORE VIEWING THE VIDEO

NAME How long have you been a miner? 

 _____Less than 1 year

 _____1 to 3 years

 _____Longer than 3 years

DIRECTIONS:

In “Zen and the Art of Rockbolting,” Jim Mortensen describes how to get mining 

work done efficiently and safely. Early in the video Jim says “There’s always 

ten ways to do one job.” Given that, there are many possible right answers to 

the questions that follow. For every question, imagine that you are the expert 

talking to a complete novice.

1. What needs to be done before a miner begins drilling or bolting? 

2. What is important to remember about operating a jackleg?

3. What is important to miners who are working underground?
Tell me a Story

69

Zen and the Art of Rockbolting

AFTER VIEWING THE VIDEO

NAME How long have you been a miner? 

 _____Less than 1 year

 _____1 to 3 years

 _____Longer than 3 years

DIRECTIONS:

Add any additional information that would help a new miner be more efficient 

or safer. You may refer back to what you wrote BEFORE VIEWING THE 

VIDEO, but do NOT repeat what you wrote on the first page. Use the back of 

this page if necessary

1. What needs to be done before a miner begins drilling or bolting? 

2. What is important to remember about operating a jackleg?

3. What is important to miners when working at the face?

4. Write anything else you learned from the video that isn’t already written above.

5. Would you like Jim to be your trainer?

CIRCLE ONE: The video taught me: Nothing A little Quite a bit A Lot

Your comments about “Zen and the Art of Rockbolting”:
Tell me a Story

70

APPENDIX E

Zen and the Art of Rockbolting

TRAINER’S QUESTIONNAIRE

1. In general, what were your reactions to the video? Was it an effective 

training tool? Why or why not? 

2. Methods of operation vary from mine to mine. Did you address any differences in your mine’s operation from Jim’s ways? Would these differences get 

in the way of using the video for training again?

3. What materials could accompany this video that would make it a more 

effective training tool for you?

4. Does Jim Mortensen come across as an expert? Is he credible as a 

teacher? Why or why not?

5. Would you like to see NIOSH produce additional “Expert Miner” type 

videos? If so, on what topics?
Tell me a Story

71
To receive documents or more information about 

occupational safety and health topics, contact NIOSH at:1-800-35-NIOSH (1-800-356-4674)Fax: 513-533-8573E-mail: Pubstaft@cdc.govor visit the NIOSH Web site at www.cdc.gov/niosh

SAFER HEALTHIER PEOPLE TM

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICESCenter for Disease Control and PreventionNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health4676 Columbia ParkwayCincinnati, OH 45226-1998Delivering on the Nation’s promise:Safety and health at work for all peoplethrough reseach and prevention.

DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2005-152