Bureau of Mines Information Clrcular/1988

Mine Safety Education and

Training Seminar

Proceedings: Bureau of Mines Technology

Transfer Seminar, Pittsburgh, PA, May 17,

1988; Beckley, WV, May 19, 1988; St. Louis,

MO, May 24, 1988; and Reno, NV, May 26,

1988

Complied by Staff. Bureau of Mines

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Information Circular 9185

Mine Safety Education and

Training Seminar

Proceedings: Bureau of Mines Technology

Transfer Seminar, Pittsburgh, PA, May 17,

1988; Beckley, WV, May 19, 1988; St. Louis,

MO, May 24, 1988; and Reno, NV, May 26,

1988

Compiled by Staff, Bureau of Mines

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Donald Paul Hodel, Secretary

BUREAU OF MINES

T S Ary, Director
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data:

Mine Safety Education and Training Seminar.

Mine Safety Education and Training Seminar.

(Information circular;9185)

Includes bibliographies.

Supt. of Docs. no. 128.27:9185.

1. Mine safety--Study and teaching--Congresses. I. United States.

Bureau of Mines. II. Title. III. Series: Information circular (United

States. Bureau of Mines);9185.

TN295.U4 622 s [622'.8'071] 88-600107
PREFACE

In May, 1988, the Bureau of Mines held technology transfer seminars on mine safety education

and training at Pittsburgh, PA, Beckley, WV, St.Louis, MO, and Reno, NV. The papers presented

at those seminars are contained in thisInformation Circular, which serves as a proceedings volume. The

papers highlight the Bureau's most recent research aimed at improving the effectiveness of mine

safety training in order to reduce workplace accidents. Areas addressed by this research and published

in this volume include training strategies for SCSR donning, a work crew performance model, hazard

recognition, human factors contributions to accidents, a blasters training manual, simulated mine

emergency problems, and first aid role play simulations.

The technology transfer seminar used as a forum for the transfer ofthis research is one ofthe many

mechanisms used by the Bureau of Mines in its efforts to move research developments, technology,

and information resulting from its programs into industrial practice and use. To learn more about the

Bureau's technology transfer program and how it can be useful to you, please write or telephone:

Bureau of Mines

Office of Technology Transfer

2401 E Street, NW.

Washington, DC 20241

202-634-1224
CONTENTS

Page

Preface i

Abstract 1

Effect of training strategy on self-contained self-rescuer donning performance by C. Vaught, M. 1. Broich,

and H. J. Kellner 2

The work crew performance model: Linking training, assessment, and performance by W. J. Wiehagen,

M. J. Brnich, H. J. Kellner, and W. E. Lacefield 15

Roof and rib hazard recognition training using 3-D slides by E. A. Barrett, W. J. Wiehagen, and C. Vaught. 23

Human factors contributing to groundfall accidents in underground coal mines: Workers' views by R. H. Peters

and W. J. Wiehagen 31

Blasters training manual for metal-nonmetal miners by M. A. Peltier, L. R. Fletcher, and R. A. Dick .40

Operations-based training strategy for longwall mining by R. L. Grayson, M. J. Klishis, R. C. Althouse,

and G. M. Lies 45

Miner and trainer responses to simulated mine emergency problems by H. P. Cole and Staff,

University of Kentucky 56

First aid role play simulations for miners by H. P. Cole, R. D. Wasielewski, J. V. Haley, and P. K. Berger 78
UNIT OF MEASURE ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS REPORT

ft

h

in

min

foot

hour

inch

minute

pet

s

st

yr

percent

second

short ton

year
MINE SAFETY EDUCATION AND TRAINING SEMINAR

Proceedings: Bureau of Mines Technology Transfer Seminar,

Pittsburgh, PA, May 17, 1988; Beckley, WV, May 19, 1988;

St. Louis, MO, May 24, 1988; and Reno, NV, May 26, 1988

Compiled by Staff, Bureau of Mines

ABSTRACT

Education and training research is a major component of the Bureau of Mines human factors

research program. The goal ofhuman factors research i's to enhance human performance for the purpose

of improving both safety and the profitability of the minerals industries. This is achieved through the

design of mining equipment, work tasks, management procedures, and development of human

resources. This proceedings volume presents several new developments that are helping to improve the

quality and efficiency of health, safety, and occupational skills training in the mining community.

Several papers address the issue of how to teach and assess miner abilities to deal with underground

mine emergencies. Other papers examine practical procedures for defining and cost-justifying the integration of structured training and other performance improvement strategies to enhance the

proficiency ofthe work system.
2

EFFECT OF TRAINING STRATEGY ON SELF-CONTAINED SELF-RESCUER

DONNING PERFORMANCE

By C. Vaught,l M. J. Brnich,2 and H. J. Kellner3

ABSTRACT

The purpose ofthis Bureau ofMines study was to assess the impact ofthree different instructional

strategies upon trainee ability to don self-contained self-rescuers. The strategies, designed to deliver

the same introductory content, were a live demonstration, a structured lecture, and a computer-based

format. One hundred fifty-five subjects were randomly assigned to groups that had their initial

donning instruction conveyed by one of the three strategies. The trainees performances were then

assessed using a number of different measures. It was found that delivery strategy had a modest initial

influence upon how well people did, but that this effect tended to disappear after one initial hands-on

experience. It was also noted that a significant amount of skill degradation occurred during the first

3 months following training.

INTRODUCTION

Since 1940, there have been over 18 major explosions and

more than 1,000 fires in underground coal mines in the United

States (McDonald and Baker 0),4 and Richmond, Price,

Sapko, and Kawenski (2). In a majority of these incidents,

loss of life and property were minimized by the exercise of

good judgment and the effective use of mining skills on the

part of workers in the situation (McDonald and Baker (1)).

This conclusion is in agreement with much of the recent

literature dealing with human actions in emergencies, which

suggests that people do not necessarily panic and become

incapable of taking effective action (Sime (3)). Rather, they

engage in adaptive behavior based on choices made from

IResearch sociologist, Pittsburgh Research Center, Bureau of

Mines, Pittsburgh, PA.

2Mining engineer, Product Research Incorporated, Pittsburgh,

PA.

3Industrial engineering technician, Pittsburgh Research Center.

among those perceived to be available at any particular time

during the emergency. The variable factor is how well a

person uses all available information to arrive at a choice.

That is one ofthe elements ofjudgment and decision making.

Once a decision is made to implement a specific corrective,

the variable factor may become one's ability to carry out that

course of action successfully. The problem of whether an

individual has the necessary procedural skills involves the

area of task competency. A case in point is provided by a

series of recent studies undertaken by the University of

Kentucky and the Bureau of Mines.

4Underlined numbers in parentheses refer to items in the list of

references at the end of this paper.
3

BACKGROUND

In open-ended interviews with more than 50 mine safety

experts, Cole (i) recorded several accounts of worker failure

to use self-contained self-rescuers (SCSR's) to escape toxic

mine atmospheres. The prevailing assumption among those

respondents offering such accounts appeared to be that workers are generally proficient in donning SCSR's. All new

miners are given training, which includes a demonstration of

the respiratory devices used at their mine. In addition, each

8 h annual refresher class includes a course on the use, care,

and maintenance ofself-rescue and respiratory apparatus. In

the absence ofempirical evidence to the contrary, that instruction has been accepted as being sufficient. Reputed failures of

workers to don the devices in situations calling for their use

were most often attributed to poor judgment, panic, or both.

Other evidence from the investigations, however, has cast

doubt on the adequacy of current SCSR task training and

suggests that lack of procedural skills may be an important

consideration.

The researchers conducted an extensive review of existing training materials and found logical inconsistencies that

suggest that a task analysis might not have been done prior to

training material development. Task analysis would begin

with the function of the apparatus-to enable a miner to

isolate his or her lungs from the ambient air-and determine

empirically the most effective sequence ofactions for getting

the SCSR into operation. The following problems, which are

discussed in detail elsewhere (Vaught and Cole (5)), run

counter to that protocol: First, the recommended donning

position is difficult under most mining conditions, and impossible for miners working in low coal. Second, the donning

sequence appears inefficient, placing nonessential and timeconsuming taskssuch as strap adjustment ahead ofsome ofthe

steps necessary to isolate one's lungs from the ambient atmosphere. Third, the materials do not present a simplified, easyto-remember set of procedural rules to help miners order the

complex array of tasks needed to get the apparatus on in an

emergency.

In the opinion ofthe investigators, those logical problems with instructional content were not the only indicators

that generally available SCSR task training may be insufficient. Summary statistics from 15 mine trainer workshops

supported the widely held notion that a majority of underground miners never have hands-on experience with the

apparatus (Cole and Vaught(Q)). This was a cause for concern

in view of the evidence suggesting that infrequently used

procedural skills must be overlearned if proficiency is to be

maintained, and that the overlearning of procedures having a

motor componentrequires hands-on training (Johnsonill and

Hagman and Rose (8)). Given the critical nature of SCSR

donning as a corrective action, the industry tendency to rely

upon films, slide-tape programs, or demonstrations by an

instructor instead of upon performance trials by the trainees

seemed less than optimal.

As part of their effort to show what an optimized SCSR

training program might include, the researchers conducted a

detailed task analysis using a controlled experiment in which

36 working miners who had recently gotten refresher training

were videotaped in performance trials with the SCSR model

in use at their mine. Assessment of the tapes allowed the

investigatorsto target those steps in the procedure where most

errors occurred and where most time was lost. It was found

that individuals spent a majority oftheir time adjusting straps

and locating goggles that had been dropped on the floor. In

addition, many of the subjects became confused and omitted

tasks such as putting on the nose clips. Only 22 individuals (61

pet) were able to complete the minimum ofsteps necessary to

isolate their lungs, and approximately half of these required

over a minute to do so.

RESEARCH PROBLEM

Based on the experimental findings, an instructors manual and short videotape demonstration were prepared for field

testing. This package presents a generic procedure for the four

SCSR's in common use (CSE, Draeger, MSA, and Ocenco).

It offers the following: (1) a donning position (kneeling) that

is easy and efficient, (2) a donning sequence that moves

critical steps (those tasks necessary to isolate one's lungs)

ahead ofthe others, and (3) a set of"chunked" proceduralrules

that facilitate easy retention. The present study focuses upon

two aspects of the effectiveness of training strategies used to

deliver this new donning method. First, the effect of "frontend" complexity and feedback capability was investigated

using three different treatments. Each of these treatments

required differing levels of involvement on the part of the

subjects. The second part of the study deals with the impact

of the three treatment strategies upon trainee ability to retain

and demonstrate procedural skills 90 days after initial training. It was expected that the type of involvement required to

learn the procedure would affect the subject's proficiency

with the motor tasks during initial performance trials, as well

as his or her capacity to remember and do the procedure at a

later date.
4

METHOD

During a 2-week period in July 1986, professional and

technical employees at the Bureau's Pittsburgh Research

Center, many ofwhom make regular visits to mine sites, were

given 8 h ofannual refresher training for underground miners.

This training was performed according to a plan filed with the

Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), pursuant to

title 30Code ofFederalRegulations, part48. The classes were

conducted by two MSHA approved instructors, and the curriculum conformed generally with that required of the industry. As part of the course of instruction, the students received

task training in the new method of donning an SCSR.

TASK CONTENT

The actual training scheme involved having each subject

put on a Draeger OXY-SR 60B as if he or she were trying to

escape a fire or explosion. There are 19 discrete steps in this

activity, and as might be inferred, it comprises a number of

possible procedural sequences with an extensive motor component. Although there are necessary conditions for beginning certain steps, each step in any possible sequence is

relatively simple from the standpoint that it does not have to

mesh with other steps in orderto be completed. The task itself

is potentially confusing, however, because there are several

sequences in which the complete procedure could be done.

Nevertheless, as was stated earlier, there is a sequence which

is most logical. For the present research the task was made

exacting by the fact that it had to be performed without

prompting, in the sequence that prior analysis had determined

to be most efficient, and within a specific timeframe.

The new 3+3 (three critical and three secondary actions)

donning method taught to the trainees contains a chunked

sequence ofactions that imposes a uniform structure upon the

variable discrete steps that combined make up a particular

action (depending upon the SCSR model being donned). For

example, to fully activate oxygen on the Draeger one is

required to (1) lift the opening lever, (2) remove the metal

closing clamp, (3) grasp the lid and pull until the split pin is out

of the chlorate starter, (4) insert the mouthpiece, and (5)

exhale into the breathing bag to activate the bed of potassium

superoxide. To fully activate oxygen on the Ocenco, a person

would (1) pull the latch rod, (2) release the latches, (3) open

the case, (4) open the oxygen valve, (5) inserting the mouthpiece and (6) inhale deeply to open the demand valve and fill

the breathing bag. The structure that the generic method

imposes upon the donning task not only presents the chunked

actions in a logical sequence, but also constrains the discrete

tasks to be performed in a consistent order.

INSTRUCTIONAL CONTENT

The core ofinformation delivered to trainees learning the

new method provides a two-stage approach to the donning

task. First, it presents an efficient position and orientation of

apparatus designed to make the chunked sequence possible.

Directionsfor the first stage are as follows: (1) Kneel.-place

the SCSR on the floor in front of you-lay your miner's cap

on the floor and shine the lamp on the SCSR-work with both

hands; and (2) Loop.-quickly loop the neckstrap over your

head in order to position it and the case-leave the strap loose

so you will have room to work-now you are ready to begin

the 3+3 donning procedure. Directions for the second stage

divide the chunked sequence into the three critical actions

necessary to isolate one's lungs, and the three secondary

actions needed to prepare an individual to escape: (1) activate

the oxygen, (2) insert the mouthpiece, (3) put on the noseclips,

(4) then put on the goggles, (5) adjust straps, and (6) replace

miner's cap. The strategiesfor transmitting this message were

varied for purposes of the present study, but the content

remained the same.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE THREE

INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES

Treatment A was a computer-based training program that

presented the 3+3 method assequential blocks ofinformation,

each block followed by a series of questions designed to

determine whether the individual had learned and retained the

material. Wrong answers were remediated by looping the

respondent back through the block from which the question

was taken. At the end, a short review exercise reiterated the

critical and secondary donning actions. This approach required the most active involvement in terms of verbal learning, not only because of the amount of interaction necessary

to obtain the front-end information, but also because the

subjects were not cued by either the actual apparatus or the

paper-and-pencil configuration. In order to reinforce what

had been learned, instruction was followed by a videotape

demonstration of a trainer putting on an SCSR as if he were in

an actual emergency.

Treatment B was a structured lecture that utilized an

advance organizer. Using overhead transparencies, the instructor presented the two stages of the new method and

discussed the rationale behind each chunked action. Students

were next familiarized with an evaluation form that utilized a

connect-the-dots configuration and was designed to help
individuals reproduce the procedure on paper. Trainees were

then given copies of the fonn and prepared to watch videotaped demonstrations oftwo trainers donning the apparatus in

real time. Active participation was required in that the

students were asked to evaluate the fIrst perfonnance by

drawing a line to each dot in succession as the trainer completed the action that particular dot represented. In a sense,

this activity competed with the visual stimuli, although it had

the desired goal of involving the students. At the conclusion

of the first demonstration the tape was stopped and feedback

given by the instructor, who accompanied his discussion with

an overhead transparency depicting an accurately completed

evaluation fonn. The trainees were offered another opportunity to practice the sequence by following the actions in the

second perfonnance. Feedback was again provided. The

instructor closed the lecture with an overhead transparency

representing a hypothetical evaluation ofa poor donning trial,

and stressed the consequences of doing the critical actions

incorrectly.

One of the simplest ways to introduce a procedural task

is to have a competent person demonstrate the routine. Indeed, much SCSR instruction, especially in the context of

hazard training, consists ofjust that. Accordingly, treatment

C involved having the trainer who had helped perfect the 3+3

method talk groups ofsubjects through the task, step-by-step,

as he slowly donned the apparatus. This live demonstration

wasfollowed by a videotape perfonnance ofthe same individual putting on an SCSR as if he were preparing to escape a

mine fire or explosion. The purpose of the videotape was to

give the trainees a sense ofhow a proficient donning execution

appeared in real time. As is evident, this approach offered

nothing but the basics. First, it did not require the active

participation of the trainee in obtaining the front-end knowledge necessary to carry out the procedural task. Second, it did

not provide any type of advance organizer to help cue the

person's memory when it came time for his or her perfonnance trial. Third, there was no feedback in tenns ofreiteration

of correct steps, or additional infonnation about the consequences of doing a step incorrectly.

PERFORMANCE CRITERION

Ultimately, the act of donning an SCSR is a motor task.

Therefore, it was detennined that the subjects must demonstrate proficiency by donning the apparatus. In the real world,

whether or not one would be considered competent might

actually be decided by whether one could use the SCSR to

escape a toxic mine atmosphere. The experimental corollary

to this practical criterion would probably entail checking to

see ifan individual could isolate his or herlungs and secure the

SCSR adequately within an acceptable length oftime, regardless of the sequence of discrete steps. There were two

problems with using this sort ofindicator in the present study.

First, an important part of the research focuses upon skill

retention. It would be very diffIcult to suggest forgetting as a

5

cause ofsequencing change or errors ifit could not be shown

that the subject had at least one systematic and error-free

perfonnance. Second, and just as important, it is known that

large skill decrements exist with seldom-used procedural

tasks (Hagman and Rose (8). Itseemed advisable, within the

constraints ofthe training situation, to allow as much learning

to take place as possible. The profIciency level established for

the annual refresher trainees was a perfect sequence to be

completed in 90 s or less, with the critical part ofthe sequence

to take no more than 45 s. The fIrst trial in which the subject

recorded a perfect sequence within the acceptable time was

designated the criterion. It was against this criterion that all

subsequent perfonnance would be measured.

EXPERIMENTAL PROTOCOL

One hundred fifty-five subjects are included in the ongoing training experimentofwhich this study is a part. None had

extensive prior experience with any type of self-,contained

breathing apparatus and had never received hands-on SCSR

training. In this respect, at least, they were considered to be

somewhat like working coal miners; there was no preexisting

procedural knowledge that might influence their performance.

At the beginning of each training class individuals were

given serial numbers that were to be used to identify them for

various purposes throughout the course of the research. The

first use of the serial numbers was to enable the trainers to

draw lots for random assignment of subjects to groups that

would have their initial donning instruction conveyed by

different delivery strategies. Following instruction on general

hazards, mine maps and escapeways, checkin and checkout

procedures, and personal protective equipment, class members were randomly divided into two groups and sent to

separate classrooms. There, they were rotated through three

assignments: a fIrst aid simulation using either computerbased training or a paper-and-pencil fonnat; roof and rib

hazard identification utilizing stereoscopic viewers and threedimensional slides; and one of the three instructional treatments for SCSR donning. Each classroom was the site of a

different delivery strategy.

An alternating protocol had been designed that would

enable the trainers to present any two of the three treatments

to each training class. The treatments being given on a

particular day depended upon the rotation plan in effect. For

instance, plan A, which was implemented on the first day,

specified that the structured lecture would be used in one room

and the computer-based training presentation would be used

in the other. Plan B, in effect on the second day of classes,

offered the computer-based training and the live demonstration. Plan C, the strategy for the third day, made provision for

the live demonstration and the structured lecture. On the

fourth day the rotation was repeated.

Immediately following instruction the subjects were

taken, one at a time, to an isolated room for a donning trial.
6

This performance was to serve three purposes. First, an

analysis of initial attempts would permit an evaluation of the

effectiveness of the strategy used to deliver the front-end

donning instruction. Second, the donning trial would provide

the motor component, which was considered to be crucial for

proficiency at the procedural task. Third, by requiring each

person to perform to criterion, the researchers were establishing a baseline from which to assess the magnitude of forgetting over time.

Prior to the performance trial, each individual was

equipped with a miner's belt, cap, and caplamp. An SCSR,

with its neck strap adjusted all the way out, was placed on the

floor approximately four case lengths in front of the subject.

The trainee was requested to await a signal from the trainer,

and at this signal to put the SCSR on as if he or she were in an

actual mine emergency. No questions were answered or

information given at this stage of the process. During the

donning trial, which was performed with no prompts, the

trainer evaluated the subject's proficiency by means of a

specially designed connect-the-dots evaluation fonn intended

to show sequencing errors and actions that were done incorrectly (fig. 1). A helper recorded times for both the critical

actions and the secondary actions. At the end ofthe trial, if an

error had been made, the instructor pointed it out and explained how to do thatparticularstep correctly. The apparatus

was repacked and the student was asked to try again. This

procedure was repeated until each individual reached the

criterion of a perfect sequence within the specified times.

At the conclusion of the 1986 annual refresher training

period, individuals' serial numbers were again randomly

drawn (by treatment) to designate subjects who would get

followup training and a 90-day retention evaluation. The

training, given to half the subjects in each treatment group

who had been selected for the 90-day recall, consisted of a

quick and simple refresher. The refresher was administered

30 days before the recipient was to have his or her 9O-day

evaluation. People who had originally received the computer-based format were brought to a training room where

they worked through an abbreviated version oftheir original.

instruction. Individuals who had gone through the structured

lecture were visited in their workplaces by a trainer who gave

each person a copy of the evaluation form and asked him or

her to reproduce the procedure on paper. After the subject had

connected the dots to indicate the order of actions he or she

believed to be the correct sequence to follow, the trainer

pointed out any sequencing errors and reiterated the correct

procedure. For those who had originally gotten the talkthrough and live demonstration, the refresher entailed having

a trainer visit each person's workplace and do the live demonstration once again.

Seventy-two subjects were chosen to participate in the

90-day retention evaluation. There were 24 individuals for

each of the three treatment conditions: 12 who had been

refreshed and 12 who had not. Each person in the sample was

scheduled to be recalled on or about the 90th day following the

date on which he or she had been initially trained. At the

determined time, the subject was taken to a laboratory room

which contained a videocamera. The purpose ofthe study was

explained briefly, and a one-page interview schedule was

administered by a researcher (fig. 2). Following completion

ofthe interview, the subject was outfitted with a miner's belt,

cap, and caplamp. An SCSR, with its neck strap adjusted all

the way out, was placed on the floor approximately four case

lengths in front of the trainee. The individual was instructed

to await a signal from the trainer, and then to put the SCSR on

as if he or she were in a mine fire or explosion. During the

performance trial, which was done with no prompts, one

trainer evaluated the process while another trainer recorded

critical and secondary times and videotaped the activity.

Following the donning trial, the subject reviewed the evaluation form and then watched his or her videotaped performance. A trainer pointed out any errors and suggested ways to

correct them. The trial was not repeated.

PROFICIENCY MEASURES

There were three means of evaluating the performance

trials. Taken together, they provide a good assessment of the

effectiveness of those training strategies used to deliver the

initial donning instruction. First, it was possible to record both

the number and types of errors committed. This includes sequencing errors, omissions, and incorrect execution of particular steps. Second, there were two measures of time: the

number of seconds a subject required to isolate his or her

lungs, and the amount of time he or she took to complete the

entire procedural task. Third, the number of trials necessary

for each individual to reach criterion were recorded. For

purposes of this study, data on these variables were obtained

for the initial donning trials and the 90-day evaluation. Data

management techniques are discussed in the following section.

DATA MANAGEMENT

During the initial phase ofthe SCSR donning study, 262

records were obtained for the 155 subjects included in the

ongoing training experiment. The reason there are more data

records than subjects is thatsome trainees required more than

one trial to reach criterion. In addition to these initial records,

the project staff planned to collect further information on the

performance ofthe trainees at predetermined dates during the

course ofthe experiment. For this reason the person- oriented

information system for educators (POISE) data management

software was chosen. POISE permits ready expansion so that

additional data may be added, and is flexible enough to allow

easy interfacing with a statistical package for the social

sciences (SPSSx), the statistical package selected for use in

the analysis. Three files are needed to make use ofthe POISE

data management system: a description file, a data file, and a

screen format file. For the present experiment, however, it
Performance Evaluation for Date

1. Did the miner answer the following?

A. Name the exact place where you started working last shift.

7

____yes ____ No

B. Tell me how to get to the nearest SCSRs from that place.

____ yes ____ No

2. Connect the dots in the diagram below to show the steps the miner

took in donning the SCSR. DO NOT TOUCH THE DOT IF HE OR SHE

DID THE STEP INCORRECTLY.

____ Total Time

'\

H~

Straps.

(seconds)

Oxygen

•

o

Start

•

Loop

•

Goggles

• Mouthpiece

Noseclips

r

Part Time (seconds)

3. After the task is completed please list any errors that need to be

corrected and then correct them.

Trainer's Signature _

FIGURE 1.-Evaluation form for use in teaching and assessing the 3 + 3 donning method.
8

Interviewer _

Subject Name

Date _

Serial No.

Time _

Treatment _ Refresher (if yes, date from records) _

1. Person's Age _ 2. Gender _ 3. Education (yr) _

5. How many times have you put an SCSR on •••••••

a. Like this model? __

b. Another model? __ (specifyall) _

6. Explain the circumstances under which it was donned (emergency, training, etc.)

7. Have you ever used any other type of oxygen or compressed air breathing apparatus

such as ••••••.••

a. Mi ne rescue gear? _

b. Fi refight ing gear? __

c. Scuba gear? _

d. Ot he r (explain) _

8. If yes to the above, please explain the circumstance.

9. Have you ever put on and breathed through a FSR? (include no. of time) _

10. If yes to the above, please give model __ and explain circumstances

11. Date of last donning (from records) __ 12. No. of days ago __

FIGURE 2.-lnterview schedule designed to elicit information about trainee background and prior experience with breathing

apparatus.
was necessary to have a way to identify individualrecords. As

a result, field 1 of the data file was designated a key field, and

each record was assigned a key number. A key file was then

created in the add option of the describe program. This file

made it possible to identify each student and the corresponding trial number for a particular treatment.

When the POISE files were created, 31 data fields were

delineated to accommodate the information collected. The

described fields occupied columns 1 through 438 in the data

file. Major fields originally defined include those allocated

9

for student name, identification number, date of training,

treatment, trial number, donning sequence, and errors made.

Fields for recording critical times, escape times, and narrative

comment were also included. An additional 37 fields were

added later in order to provide for data gathered during

subsequent phases ofthe study. Included are fields for demographic information, whether or not the subject had followup

training, the number of days since his or her last donning

performance, and numerous flags to indicate any other types

of breathing apparatus the trainee might have been familiar

with.

ANALYSIS

It was originally expected that delivery strategy would

have an impact upon the subjects first donning trials, but that

the act of putting on an SCSR would override and confound

the effects of the front- end strategy. It was further expected

that the method of giving the brief refresher would influence

trainees' performances on the 90-day trials. Specifically, the

live demonstration was hypothesized to have the greatest

short-term benefit, because that approach, although the same

in content as the other approaches, was the only one that

offerded the students a live view ofthe internal components of

the case as they were talked through the procedure. Also, it

was the only condition that did not have a competing task associated with it. In the area of retention, however, the computer-based training treatment was hypothesized to have the

most impact, since it required the highest degree of involvement in getting the necessary verbal information and was

followed by a motor performance. Ideally, involvement is

expected to foster retention (Johnson (J). Additionally, it

was expected that the computer-based training refresher,

being the most thorough, would have a significant influence

on subjects performances at their 90-day trials.

INITIAL PERFORMANCE

In order to begin an exploration of the results, subjects

performances on the initial trials following instruction were

divided into three categories: (1) failures-those who did not

get their lungs isolated from the ambient atmosphere,

(2)survivors-thosewho succeeded in getting their lungs isolated, butwho did notrecord a perfectsequence (the criterion),

and (3) criterion performers-those who had a perfect sequence on the first trial. Table 1 is a contingency table that

presents the observed (or actual) and expected frequencies of

performances by each delivery system. The expected frequencies are those that one would expect to occur by chance,

given the number of people exposed to each treatment and the

number of performances that fall into each of the three

categories.

It is instructive to examine the data in the table. Essentially, there were more perfectsequences than expected for the

live demonstration, more survivors than expected for the

lecture format, and more failures than would be expected for

the computer-based treatment. Conversely, there were fewer

than the expected number offailures among those who had received the live demonstration, and greater than the expected

number of failures among performances following the computer- based delivery. Itshouldbe noted that this phenomenon

lies in the expected direction: individuals receiving the live

demonstration were hypothesized to do somewhat better

initially, while those who were more involved would be less

likely to forget what they had learned.

A chi-square (X2

) test for independence was applied to

performance by treatment condition in order to test the null

hypothesis of no association between delivery system and

how well subjects did on their initial donning trials. The chisquare value of 13.88 is sufficiently large to enable rejection

TABLE 1. - Chi-square test of performance by delivery

(X2 =13.88, P < 0.01, Cramer's V =0.212)

Performance Computer-based Lecture Demonstration Total

Observed Expected Observed Expected Observed Expected observed

Failure .............................. 17 11.9 7 8.7 9 12.3 33

Survivor............................ 20 18.1 18 13.2 12 18.7 50

Criterion ........................... 19 26.0 16 19.0 37 26.9 72

Totals.............................. 56 NAp 41 NAp 58 NAp 155

NAp Not applIcable.
10

of this hypothesis at the 0.01 level of significance and conclude that there is, in fact, a relationship between the variables

which is not due to chance. The magnitude ofevidence for the

existence of a relationship does not indicate anything about

the strength of that relationship, however. Accordingly,

Cramer's V, a measure of association suitable for nominal

level data, was computed in order to assess how strongly the

variables are interrelated. The coefficient, 0.212, represents

approximately a 5pet association. Thus, although chi-square

was found to be highly significant, there is only a very weak

association between the way in which the 3+3 method was

presented to the subjects and how they fared in their initial

hands-on attempts.

A second measure of performance immediately following treatment is the amount oftime it takes individuals to get

the apparatus on. Given what is known about human behavior

in fires (Marchant (2)), it is quite likely that most of the time

available to don an SCSR in an emergency will be spent in

deciding to take action. When one actually begins the task,

therefore, he or she should be able to do it rapidly. The most

important, or critical, steps are those that are necessary to

isolate one's lungs from the ambient atmosphere. Table 2

provides information about how quickly these critical steps

were performed by those who were able to do them on the first

trial. It should be remembered that those who were not able

to complete the three critical steps do not enter into this part

of the discussion.

A preliminary analysis ofthe time data was conducted in

order to test the homogeneity of variance assumption. In

analyses using the real times, it was found that the null

hypothesis of equal variances could be rejected. For this

reason, the time measures were transformed into reciprocals

(1/X). There is evidence to suggest that reciprocal transformation of time measures is inherently good procedure, because for some subjects the time taken to complete a task

might be overly long. A few extreme measures in anyone

group would increase the variance for a particular treatment,

while the variance for the other treatments would not be

affected. Transforming the times to reciprocals would tend to

make the variances more homogeneous (Edwards (lQ)).

Table 2 includes transformations below the actual means and

standard deviations.

As can be seen, those in the live demonstration group

required approximately 3 s less (on average) to get their lungs

isolated than did those in the othertwo treatments. An analysis

ofvariance (ANOVA) testfor differences between means was

performed in order to determine if there was a statistically

significant difference in times. The ANOVA model essentially allows a comparison of the magnitude of heterogeneity

within samples to the heterogeneity between samples. The

rationale is that if subjects are given a treatment that is the

same for everyone in their group, but that this treatment is

different from the treatment given others, subjects within

groups will be more alike on that variable than subjects

between groups (Loether and McTavish ill)). All this assumes, of course, that the treatments make a difference in the

first place.

The F-ratio (table 3), which indicates the region ofa theoretical sampling distribution in which two sample variances

would reside, is calculated by dividing the between-group

variances by the within-group variances. The larger the Fratio, the farther out on the tail ofa particularF-distribution an

TABLE 2.• Basic statistical data for critical task donning times

Computer-based Lecture Demonstration

Total observations 56

Students successfully

completing critical tasks 39

Mean critical time, s:

Actual 18.13

Transformation 0.0595

Standard deviation, s:

Actual 5.67

Transformation 0.015

41

34

19.12

0.0590

8.69

0.0168

58

49

15.23

0.0705

4.74

0.0175

TABLE 3.• Summary ANOVA for critical task donning times on transformed scores

Surn ofsquares Mean square F-ratio F-probability

.0037 0.019 6.854 0.0015

.0325 .003 NAp NAp

.0362 NAp NAp NAp

Between 20

Within 119

-------------::-::--:~-

Total 121

Source Degrees of

freedom

NAp Not applicable.
11

TABLE 6. - Portion of each group making errors in

Initial donning trial by deiivery, percent

as successfully escaping in table 4. This is because a different

logic was used in compiling the data. The criterion was a

perfect performance. However. some subjects completed all

six tasks. thereby receiving an escape time. but did some ofthe

tasks out of order. Hence. their initial performance was not

their last, or criterion performance. although they were considered to have escaped.

A third measure of performance is errors. Table 6

provides an accounting of errors made on each task by

treatment condition. An examination of the table shows that

the two areas where people seemed to have the most trouble

Computer Lecture Demon- X2

occurrence would fall. At a certain point in the critical region

of the distribution's tail. one is justified in rejecting the null

hypothesis that two sample variances estimate a common

population variance. At this stage. one may conclude that

some type of difference exists between some pairs of groups

in the study. As with the chi-square test, however, the

existence ofa significantF- score does not indicate the reason

for that score. A second analysis must be done in order to determine which pairs ofgroup means are significantly different

from each other. For the presentresearch. Fisher's LSD (least

significant difference) test was used, because it is the most

sensitive to small differences between means. Table 2 reveals

that two of the possible pairs of means are the cause of the

significant F. The pairs are computer-based and demonstration. and lecture and demonstration. Computer-based and

lecture were not significantly different from each other.

Tables 4 and 5 present the same information for escape

times (the number ofseconds traineesrequired to complete all

six tasks in the donning procedure) that table 2 and 3 contain

TABLE 4. - Basic statistical data for escape times

Computer- Lecture Demonstration

based

Error

based

Loop 1.8 9.8

Activate 19.6 14.6

Mouthpiece 5.4 12.2

Noseclip ,...." 7, 1 9,8

Goggle 21.4 26.8

Strap 12.5 22.0

Hat. 7.1 14.6

stration

3.4 3.73

10.3 1.95

5.2 2.19

1,7 3,12

19.0 .88

5.2 6.29

8.6 1.64

p

0.155

.377

.333

.210

.644

.043 1

.441

for critical times. These tables are self-explanatory and will

not be discussed in detail. Itshould be noted. however. that the

degrees offreedom for the within- subjectssource of variation

is 86 rather than 119. as given in table 3. Degrees offreedom

for within-subjects variation are calculated by taking the

number of subjects minus the number of groups. The difference in degrees of freedom. then, reflects the fact that fewer

people were able to complete all the procedural tasks than

were able to complete just the critical steps. It might also be

noticed that the total number of criterion performances listed

in table 1is different from the total number ofpeople recorded

23

Total observations 56 41

Students successfully escaping 25

Mean critical time. s:

Actual 65.28 63.94

Transformation 0.0170 0.0166

Standard deviation. s:

Actual 24.88 18.52

Transformation 0.0052 0.0037

58

41

53.49

0.0203

15.76

0.0059

'Significant at or below P <0.05.

were in activating the oxygen and in donning the goggles

correctly. Both of these omissions are relatively serious.

Failure to activate the chlorate candle on the Draeger means

that the apparatus does not provide an initial burst of oxygen

that the miner uses while activating the bed of potassium

superoxide with his or her breath. The bed of potassium

superoxide must then be activated by breathing in and out of

the air bag several times without the benefit of a fresh oxygen

supply. Rebreathing one's own air while waiting for the bed

of potassium superoxide to begin delivering oxygen presents

the danger of oxygen depletion. which would lead to unconsciousness. In the same vein. failure to put the goggles on

properly would result in eye irritation in heavy smoke. and

might impair a person's ability to escape. A series of significance tests were performed on the errorsreflected in table 6 in

order to ascertain if there were any differences in proportions

of errors by treatment. As can be seen. the only chi-square

score large enough to justify rejection of the null hypothesis

ofindependence was in the number of errors made in trying to

adjust the neck and waist straps.

Source

TABLE 5. - Summary ANOVA for escape times on transformed scores

Degrees of Sum of squares Mean square F-ratio F-probability

freedom

Between 2 0.0003 0.0001 4.973 0.0090

Within ,--=8-=-6 -------=.--=--OO-=--2--=-3 ~.OOOO----__::'N_=_A-:-"pL--_----=-N:-:A.",..,p _

Total 88 .0026 NAp NAp NAp

NAp Not applicable.
12

NINETY-DAY TRIALS

As with the initial trials, subjects performances 90 days

after having received their hands-on training were divided

into failures, survivors, and those recording criterion sequences. Table 7presentsthe observed and expected frequencies ofperformances by delivery strategy. The effect offrontend treatment was expected to disappear following the trainees hands-on experiences. The chi-square test for independence suggests that this is what happened. An unexpected

finding is that the brief refresher given 30 days before the

students were brought back in had minimal impact upon those

who received it. As can be seen in table 8, there is almost no

difference between observed and expected performance in

any of the categories. Although not anticipated, the absence

of a refresher effect on performance has a straightforward

explanation: (1) the researchers deliberately kept the refresher presentation at the level one might reasonably expect

to be given at a monthly safety meeting, (2) the refresher was

administered to allow a long period of forgetting under the

assumption that if workers received these presentations

monthly, the worst casewould beadisasterjustbefore the next

scheduled refresher, and (3) everyone in the sample had gotten

the best hands-on training possible just 90-days before these

trials. Therefore, most people did relatively well, refresher or

not.

Time is the second indicator of training effectiveness

examined in thissection. Table 9 shows comparisons between

how rapidly subjects were able to complete their criterion

trials and how they did when they were recalled 3monthslater.

As the left halfofthe table indicates, 58 ofthe 72 trainees were

able to complete the tasks necessary to isolate their lungs. The

standard deviation for their 90-day trials reveals that not only

had their average critical time increased, but that they were

much more variable in the amount of time taken to complete

the tasks. This finding was expected, and reflects what is

known about skill degradation: forgetting invariably takes

place over time, especially the forgetting of nonroutine tasks.

Arepeated-measure ANOVA test for differences between the

two means resulted in a significant F ratio.

The right half of table 9 follows a different logic in the

compilation of data, and must be interpreted cautiously. The

mean times and standard deviationsdenote how all 72 subjects

in the sample did from the time their hands touched the case

of the SCSR until they signalled that they were ready to

escape. Since the comparisons are being made between

criterion trials and 90-day performances, the numbers under

the heading original are derived from a complete and perfect

sequence achieved by each trainee. The numbers under the

heading 90-day are, with the exception of 13 individuals,

obtained from incomplete and imperfect sequences. The

difference between the two means in this case is not statistically significant, but it is qualitatively significant.

TABLE 7. - Chi-square test of 90 day trial performance by delivery

(X2 = 6.40, P = 0.1712, Cramer's V =0.218)

Performance Computer-based Lecture Demonstration Total

Observed Expected Observed Expected Observed Expected observed

Failure ................................ 8 4.7 4 4.7 2 4.7 14

Survivor............................ 14 15.0 14 15.0 17 15.0 45

Criterion ............................. 2 4.3 6 4.3 5 4.3 13

Totals.............................. 24 NAp 24 NAp 24 NAp 72

NAp Not applicable.

TABLE 8. - Chi-square test of 90 day trial performance by comparing refreshed and nonrefreshed subjects

(X2 = 0.892, P =0.6401, Cramer's V =0.1113)

Performance

Refreshed Nonrefreshed Total

Observed Expected Observed EXDeCted observed

Failure .................................. 7 7.0 7 7.0 14

Survivor. ........................... 21 22.5 24 22.5 45

Criterion ............................... 8 5.6 5 5.6 13

Totals ............................... 36 NAp 36 NAp 72

NAp Not applicable.
TABLE 9.. Repeated measures of critical and

secondary donning times

Critical Secondary

Original 90-day Original 90-day

Observations................... 58 58 72 72

Mean, s:

Actual ...................... 15.22 23.76 54.68 66.20

Transfonnation ........ 0.069 0.015 0.020 0.018

Standard deviation, s:

Actual...................... 3.690 15.56 16.48 33.95

Transfonnation........ 0.052 0.020 0.005 0.007

F ratio:

Actual ...................... 20.14 NAp 10.77 NAp

Transfonnation........ 49.97 NAp 2.24 NAp

Probabili .................. NA <0.01 NA <0.05

NAp Not applicable.

A series of ANOVA tests were run to detennine the net

effect of the treatment and refresher factors on both critical

and secondary donning times. The proportion of variation

explained by ihe additive effects of training strategy and

whether or not subjects had received a refresher presentation

was negligible, and will not be discussed further.

13

The third variable ofinterest from the 90-day trials is the

percent of each group making at least one error. Table 10

shows that, as with the initial attempts after instruction (see

table 6), the trainees consistently had difficulty activating the

oxygen and donning their goggles. Strap adjustment was also

a problem at the 3-month interval, especially for the computer-based training subjects, and resulted in the only significant chi-square score in the table. Adequate strap adjustment

is important, because the SCSR must be secured in order to

allow the maneuverability necessary to enable a miner to

escape once he or she has succeeded in isolating his or her

lungs from the ambient atmosphere.

TABLE 10.. Portion of each group making errors

In 90 day donning trial by delivery, percent

Error Computer Lecture Demon- X2 P

based stration

I.,oop ................... 16.7 0.0 8.3 4.36 0.113

Activate .............. 20.8 16.7 8.3 1.50 .472

Mouthpiece ........ 12.5 16.5 4.2 1.27 .531

Noseclip ...............4.2 0.0 0.0 2.03 .363

Goggle ............... 25.0 20.8 20.8 .16 .963

Strap ................... 66.5 12.5 20.8 15.84 .0004 1

Hat. .................... 20.8 12.5 0.0 5.34 .069

ISignificant at or below P<O.05.

DISCUSSION

This paper has dealt with one of the most critical and

nonroutine of all mine health and safety skills: the ability to

put on an SCSR in the event of an emergency. The results

clearly illustrate that donning an SCSR is not easy, and that

miners must have hands-on training ifthe apparatus is to be of

any benefit when circumstances dictate its use. What the

content of this training should be has been resolved through

extensive field testing: the new 3+3 method has shown itself

to be an efficient and highly effective procedure. The question

of how the 3+3 method should be delivered has been addressed here: it seems to make little difference (Zsiray Ql))

as long as the content is presented thoroughly and systematically, and followed up with hands-on experience. The problem of how often, and at what level, miners should be refreshed is still open to exploration.

As was mentioned in the "Experimental Protocol" section, there was no overlearning involved in the initial training.

Once a subject had reached criterion, he orshe was dismissed.

There is evidence that overlearning increases retention, and

that had the subjects in this study been required to repeat their

criterion (or perfect) perfonnances several times, there would

have been fewer failures and fewer errors on the 90-day trials

(Hagman and Rose (ID). What is not so evident is whether

anything short of relearning the task, in the same way it was

learned the first time (by hands-on training), would have

resulted in significant differences between refreshed and

nonrefreshed trainees on any of the performance measures

used here (Johnson OJ).

There are some interesting implications in both of these

observations. First, ifoverlearning is the key to proficiency in

SCSR donning, there must be a substantial front-end investment ofboth time and effort on the part oftrainers and trainees

alike. With the time constraints of annual refresher training,

and the scarcity of either training models or real SCSR's used

for training, the logistics of making this investment become

challenging. A hands-on session, with remedial instruction

following the trial, takes from 5 to 10 min per trainee, and

requires the participation of at least one trainer. Cleaning,

sanitizing, and repacking the apparatus in order to get it ready

for the next student entails another 5 min or more (depending

upon the model being used). When the overtraining factor is

added in, this time cost increases significantly. Second, if

hands-on relearning is the key to skill maintenance, it may

have to be done more often than once a year. Almost 20 pel

ofthose recalled for their 90-day trials failed by not completing one or another of the critical tasks. The encouraging note

is that almost 20 pet were still able to do a perfect sequence.

In a mine fire or explosion, however, a trainer undoubtedly
14

wants no failures, and many more people in the perfect

category. This goal may well require giving at least some of

the workforce additional training during the year.

Given the findings of this series ofstudies to date, there

are some obvious areas for further research. First, of course,

the forgetting curve needs to be charted in order to assess the

magnitude ofskill degradation between one annual refresher

class and the next. Second, the benefits of overtraining must

be investigated. Third, a determination should be made as to

what kind of interim refresher, up to and including hands-on

relearning, would be effective in helping miners retain their

proficiency in donning the SCSR. Fourth, and most important, a device should be developed that would allow some of

the training burden to be assumed outside the traditional 8-h

annual refresher session (if that is needed). There are at least

two components to this device: (1) an instructional package

(perhaps a videotape and short computer-based training program) that would enable miners to take self-paced remediation; and (2) a simple, durable, hygienic, inexpensive dummy

SCSR that would have the adaptability to be practiced with in

situations ranging from annual refresher training classes to

preshift safety talks.

In the coming months, the Bureau will be addressing

each of these problems. The aim is to discover a training

regimen that will allow miners to achieve and retain proficiency in donning SCSR's while not intruding unduly upon a

mine's production activities. It is expected that a major focus

of this future research will be on the development of a means

for integrating certain aspects of SCSR training with established practices such as scheduled fire drills and walking the

escapeways. In this way, not only will SCSR training be

strengthened, but the routine preparation for emergency escape procedures will take on an added dimension.

REFERENCES

1. McDonald, L., andR. Baker. An Annotated Bibliography

ofCoal Mine Fire Reports (contractJ0275008, Allen Corp. of

America). BuMines OPR 7(1)-(3)-80,1979, 1147 pp.; NTIS

PB 80-140197 (set).

2. Richmond, J. K., G. C. Price, M. J. Sapko, and E. M.

Kawenski. Historical Summary of Coal Mine Explosions in

Lhe United States, 1959-81. BuMines IC 8909, 1983,53 pp.

3. Sime,J. TheConceptof"Panic." Ch. in Fires and Human

Behaviour, ed. by D. Cantor. Wiley (Chichester), 1980, pp.

63-81.

4. Cole, H., C. Vaught, H. Kellner, and E. Chafin. Miner's

Proficiency in Donning SCSR's. Pres. at the 13th Conference

on Training Resources Applied to Mining, Wheeling, WV,

Aug. 17-20, 1987; available upon request from H. Cole, Univ.

KY, Lexington, KY.

5. Vaught, C., and H. Cole. Problems in Donning the SelfContained Self-Rescuer. Paper in Mining Applications of

Life Support Technology. Proceedings: Bureau of Mines

Technology Transfer Seminar,Pittsburgh,PA, November 20,

1986. BuMines IC 9134,1987, pp. 26-34.

6. Cole, H., and C. Vaught. Training in the Use of the SelfContained Self-Rescuer. Paper in Mining Applications of

Life Support Technology. Proceedings: Bureau of Mines

Technology Transfer Seminar, Pittsburgh, PA, November 20,

1986. BuMines IC 9134,1987, pp. 51-56.

7. Johnson, S. Effect of Training Device on Retention and

Transfer of a Procedural Task. Human Factors, v. 23, No.3,

1981, pp. 257-272.

8. Hagman, J., and A. Rose. Retention of Military Tasks:

A Review. Hum. Factors, v. 25, No.2, 1983, pp. 199-213.

9. Marchant, E. Modelling Fire Safety and Risk. Ch. in

Fires and Human Behaviour, ed. by D. Cantor. Wiley (Chichester), 1980, pp. 293-314.

10. Edwards, A. Experimental Design in Psychological

Research. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1972, p. 107.

11. Loether, H., and D. McTavish. Inferential Statistics for

Sociologists. Allyn and Bacon, 1974, p. 176.

12. Zsiray, S. A Comparison of Three Instructional Approachesin Teaching the Use ofthe AbridgedReader's Guide

to Periodical Literature. J. Ed. Techno!. Systems, v. 12, No.

3, 1984, pp. 241-247.
15

THE WORK CREW PERFORMANCE MODEL:

LINKING TRAINING, ASSESSMENT, AND PERFORMANCE

By William J. Wiehagen,l Michael J. Brnich,1

Henry J. Kellner,3 and Warren E. Lacefield4

ABSTRACT

This paper discusses a conceptual model developed by the Bureau of Mines for evaluating the

training and performance of underground equipment operators. The need for such a model is

demonstrated by a review of the limitations of present industrial skills training and performance

evaluation procedures, particularly as these relate to cost-justifying perfonnance improvement

strategies. A computer simulation program to profile the performance of underground shuttle car

operators was developed. Implications are drawn for use of the simulation program as a practical

diagnostic and prescriptive tool for structured on-the-job training, job design, supervision, and

management policy. Current avenues ofjointresearch with a cooperating coal company to apply and

further develop the model are discussed.

INTRODUCTION

McKeon WS estimates that organizations in the United

States annually spend at least $137 billion for training. This

training, commonly referred to as human resource development (HRD), is broadly intended to enhance the profitability

of organizations and improve the quality of worklife (2).

While the training literature abounds with testimonials regarding the value ofHRD efforts, few studies have attempted

to tie that training specifically to the performance of the

workers and to ways improvements in performance translate

into additional profits and/or costsavings within their organizations 0). As Cascio® points out, "the adage 'millions for

training but one cent for evaluation' may be an exaggeration

but is not altogether an untrue characterization of many

organizations."

Conducting tightly controlled studies oftraining value is a

formidable and expensive task for any organization and the

shortage ofsuch studiesis certainly understandable. Why, for

example, should a company that has just spent $10,000

ISupervisory industrial engineer, Pittsburgh Research Center, Bureau of Mines, Pittsburgh, PA.

2Mining engineer, Product Research Inc., Pittsburgh, PA.

lIndustrial engineering technician, Pittsburgh Research Center.

4Research psychologist, Pittsburgh Research Center.

defining needs and developing and conducting a wellthought-out training program spend additional dollars for a

structured evaluation that goes beyond perhaps a questionnaire assessing the reaction of participants? Simply defining

the value of additional information provided by the formal

evaluation is, by itself, a speculativeand somewhatqualitative

task. If one cannot define the benefit, then there is little

incentive to spend the money. For those organizations that

rely on informal on-the-job training (OJT), either for the sake

of tradition or economies of scale, there is little chance that

money will be allocated for evaluation. However, money

saved by taking training outcomes on faith (i.e., not establishing empirical links between training and profit) oftentimes

results in HRD activities being the first to be cut when profits

decline (1). As Campbell (5) points out, the recurring admonition to 'evaluate' training programs is a gross misrepresentation ofthe empirical question. Itstrongly implies a dichotomous outcome; to wit, either the program has value or it

sUnderlined numbers in parentheses refer to the items in the list of

references at the end of this paper.
16

doesn't. Such a question is simple-minded, unanswerable,

and contributes nothing to practical or scientific understanding.

These remarks imply that more useful and realistic training

and performance assessment methods need to be developed.

More attention should be given to the use of dependent

variables that reflect cost-benefit components ofinvestments

in performance improvement strategies (training, job design,

environmental modification, supervision, etc.) within the

context oforganizational performance. Modeling an individual worker's performance within the context ofthe work crew

and linking that performance to organizational accomplishment is one approach that appears to hold much promise from

both the viewpoint of the individual and the organization.

MINE TRAINING ISSUES

Safety and skills training activities have long been recognized as essential elements in programs for reducing injuries

and improving productivity within the minerals industry (Q).

Unfortunately, as in other work organizations as well, the

impact of mine training investments on injury rates and

productivity is largely unknown.

Most mine managers recognize that training is a fundamental condition of organizational life. But the failure to

allocate the resources to establish the connection between

training outcomes and organizational goals (e.g., improving

profit, reducing injuries), over time, diminishes the training

function and its respect within the organization. This often

leads to a cyclical pattern of training investments paralleling

the profit curve. Training becomes a useful notion for creative

ways to spend or invest money when profits are high. Likewise, when profits decline, many organizations view training

as an expendable item since it does not pay wages and can be

purchased if really necessary.

Perhaps the problem is not so much the role of in-house

training or the philosophies of management, but rather more

with how theeffectiveness oftraining is demonstrated. Again,

the issue is not whether to evaluate, but perhaps what are

suitable criterion outcome measures (i.e., dependent variables) when evaluation is done. Typical bottomline evaluations oftraining in the mining environment (e.g., Morris (]j,

Adkins (8)) tend to focus on improving both profit (measured

through prOductivity) and the quality of worklife (measured

through injury frequency, severity, and health risk). Often,

however, these measures are simply too generic and broadly

defined for single-site studies to be useful in justifying longterm, performance improvement programs. The following

discussion illustrates these points.

INJURY DATA

A fundamental problem with injury data as measures of

training effectiveness is the appearance that the attempt is to

teach miners not to have accidents. In fact, injuries are rare

events for particular mine sites. For example, the expected

frequency rate for a lost-time injury in an underground coal

mine is approximately 0.06. This means that an underground

mine employing 100 miners would be right at the national

average if 6 of those miners sustained a lost-time injury for a

given year. With such small samples and expected frequencies, even ifstatistically significant changes could be shown,

the generalization of the results would be suspect at best.

Moreover, using injury data collected long after training to

measure the effectiveness ofthat training would imply a belief

that the treatment (whatever it was) would have more impact

on performance than extended practice and day-ta-day reinforcements that are partofthe normal work environment. This

"necessary but not sufficient" rule of training has been rediscovered and described by many researchers and practitioners.

Organizations do depend on bottomline evaluations and

rightfully should expect training to influence injury rates.

However, proving this impact is another matter (2), especially

where experienced miners and machine operators are involved. The basis for HRD investments needs to be more in

tune with real purposes for training, e.g., to develop a capability that does not yet exist or maintain and reinforce an existing

high level of skill.

For example, Adkins (8) conducted an aggregate assessment of mine safety training on the frequency and severity of

lost-time injuries. Using first aid training as a case in point,

one could reasonably hypothesize that increasing the investment in first aid training should have some effect on the

severity ofmining injuries. However, in Adkins' study shown

in figure 1, no clear relationship existed at the aggregate level

to support this hypothesis. In fact, until the characteristics of

successful training programs are determined, the data provide

little insight as to why training did or did not appear valuable.

The data in figure 1 show that there is considerable variance from one yearto the next in injury rates after adjusting for

production differences. Clearly, concomitant changes in the

number of training courses offered do not appear to be

significant factors helping to explain this variance. While one

could argue that it is not what you do but how you do it, the

facts remain that injury data are (1) too broad and too easily

influenced by other effects and (2) too rare for easy capture

and explanation using simple analytical methods.

Many alternative factors that could markedly influence

injury rates other than training could be advanced. For

example, a mining firm could significantly reduce its injury

rate simply by working with the local medical and mining

communities to encourage individuals to return to the work

site at the earliest possible date. Differential utilization of

human factors technologies to reduce or eliminate the consequences of human error would influence the exposure of
40 I I I

30 - • -

20 - • -

VJ • 0 10 - - 0 • • 0 .. • • • 5 - • • - •• 0:::

w .I .... • 0- 2 - .... • (f) .- ••••• • I - . ••• • •• •• • - a .<:-.~ •• • • • .. . .. .. • r o - • • - (f) • :'$ ••••• 0 ... • • •• .....I - I - • • .... -

• ••• • .. z

-2 - • .,. - w • • .Jt (9 ,

z • • • • <1 -5 • I • • • u -10 • • ••

-20 I J I I I I

0 -1.0 -0.5 0 0.5 10 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0

CHANGE IN EMPLOYEE COURSES PER 11 000 st

17

where specific methods for upgrading perfonnance might be

better employed. They provide no clues as to whether a

performance improvement strategy should be based on better

teacher training, modified training content and/or methods,

more frequent skill maintenance training, increased supervision, job analysis and redesign, better equipment, or modified

company policies. Compounding the problem is the observation that actual improvements in production and safety are

rarely the result of a single treatment implemented in isolation.

For example, a study conducted by McDonnell Douglas

(Morris (]j) under contract with the Bureau of Mines, examined production rates of continuous miner operators who

participated in a highly structured training program utilizing

a part-task trainer in conjunction with structured OlT. Generally following Kirkpatrick's model (lQ), four different

training outcomes were studied: (1) reaction (questionnaire),

(2) learning (pretests and posttests), (3) behavior or training

transfer (section supervisor evaluations), and (4) results

(productivity, downtime, and product quality). These researchers reported significant improvements in organizational performance (fig. 2) as well as favorable employee and

supervisor reactions.

FIGURE 1.-Changes (1973 minus 1972) in lost days as a function of rates of training (1).

miners to environmental and task-specific hazards at the work

site and hence the likelihood ofinjuries. On the other hand, a

mining firm could have an outstanding training program

solidly based on job skills and worker competence, yet still

show no statistical changes in injury patterns. This could be

due to an already low injury rate or to the law of diminishing

returns from training or practice, or anyone or combination of

other possible explanations completely divorced from training issues. These arguments simply point out the difficulties

in designing studies focusing upon injury rates. Even welldesigned research efforts can lack the resolution necessary to

separate effects due to training and those due to otherintervening variables.

PRODUCTIVITY DATA

10

-

u

a.. 9 ... W 8

Iz 7

0 6 0

5

-(J) 200

1-'- 180

I.L

-

I 160 (J)

I- 140

z

120

Mine productivity measures-tons of coal per shift or per

full-time equivalent employe~are as problematic if not

more so than injury and loss time measures when used as

assessments oftraining effects. A key problem is that productivity measures are often based on estimates of efforts rather

than on calculations of actual costs of producing. Too often,

only aggregate measures are available. Frequently, this information is based on poorly organized data and/or merely

reflects static, cross-sectional conditions at specific points in

time. Moreover, such measures are notoriously insensitive to

differences in training and provide no help to identify areas

where human perfonnance could or should be improved or

- 45 I I I I I U

a..

40 - .... - --- - u - ..... w 35 - Av decrease of - J

w 1.0 pct per month

0::: 30 I I I I I

2 3 4 5 6 7

ELAPSED TIME1 months

FIGURE 2.-Effects of highly structured training program on

downtime (top), productivity (middle), and product quality

(bottom).
18

In spite ofthese positive fmdings, limitations in using these

data as measures of training effect include the following:

1. Performance of other crew members.-For example,

the miner operator, independentofhis or herskill level, cannot

(and should not) mine coal if the roof bolting operation is not

providing a secure and safe work environment.

2. Machine maintenance...-Factors such as the age of

equipment and policies and practices regarding preventive

maintenance also influence downtime, productivity, and

quality.

3. The effect of supervision.-In the study (]j, section

supervisors also received instruction regarding operation of

the equipment and were acutely aware of the type of training

provided to their employees. In part, this training feature (a

good management practice highlighted by the needs assessment procedure) helped assure the success of the program as

reflected in the data.

4. Possible changes in the mining environment.-Changing roof conditions as mining operations progressed could

easily have been a more persuasive alternative explanation for

the data trends shown in figure 2.

This list represents only a few ofthe possible threats to the

validity of an experiment like this one. Many arguments like

these can be (and were) addressed by good research design

and prior attention to possible intervening factors. Nevertheless, the need for efforts to control other factors that can affect

traditional measures, such as safety and productivity, introduces many difficulties when attempting to use these variables as measures of training effectiveness.

The uncertain impact of training on classic measures of

organizational performance calls into question traditional

methods for evaluating training and cost-justifying perfonnance improvementstrategies. Production and safety statistics

collected at the job site for the purpose of assessing organizational accomplishment are not useful indicators of training

effectiveness unless they can be broken down and shown to be

logical antecedents of still more specific sets of employee

competencies and skills upon which training objectives, instructional methods, and performance evaluation techniques

are based. This is not usually the case. Instead, job site

measurements too often tend to reflect not only the perfonnance of an individual machine operator but also variability in

the work environment (e.g., roofcondition, seam height, etc.),

the condition of machinery and equipment, the perfonnance

ofother crew members, the availability ofsupplies, and so on.

What is needed for measurement and evaluation purposes

are cost-related variables that reflect individual competencies

but also are relatively independent of day-to-day circumstances. Such variables would be related to the primary job

accomplishment defined for a specific job role orposition. For

example, the primary job accomplishment of a shuttle car

operator might be described in terms ofproductivity, as hauls

300 tonspershift. However, a bettermeasure is, simply, minimizes the miner operator's waiting time for an empty shuttle

car. The problem can then be defined in terms of operations

research and performance improvement strategies (including

training and evaluation). A cost-benefit assessment of

operator skill would be based on observing those activities

under the direct control of the equipment operator that increase or reduce waiting time for the miner operator. An

analysis oferror patterns and associations between errors and

factors related to injuries, downtime, and property damage

becomes a critical element in such an assessment. These

considerations provide the basis for the work crew performance model described in the following section.

WORK CREW PERFORMANCE MODEL

The work crew perfonnance model (WCPM) seeks to integrate procedures for conducting job analyses, evaluating

worker perfonnance, and using cost information as a basis for

decision making within the context of organizational goals

(e.g., profit, safety, growth). Since profit, for instance, is

directly tied to production cost per unit, key variables used to

define, measure, and evaluate worker perfonnance should

emphasize those specific behaviors that can have marked

impact on the unit cost. Of specific interest are behaviors

under an individual crew member's control that can be described in terms ofdeviations from a criterion (e.g., nonnative

error profiles or prescribed proficiency standards) and corresponding probabilities ofdowntime, injuries, and/or damaged

property. In effect, the WCPM seeks to focus attention on the

criticality ofperformance errors for individual jobs within the

work crew. By successfully modeling an individual worker's

performance and linking that performance to the accomplishments of the work crew, the WCPM provides a potentially

strong empirical foundation on which to base decisions concerning improvements in training, supervision, job design,

management policy, or modifications to the working environment Ql.).

Implementation of the model includes provisions for

1. Job definition through task, skill, context, and performance analyses.

2. Observational techniques to establish performance

baselines useful for the conduct ofperformance evaluations or

measuring learning outcomes.

3. Cost linkages between performance profiles and resultant costs (measures ofinjuries, downtime, and maintenance

overhead).

4. Intervention strategies concerning improvements in

training, supervision, job design, management policy, or

modifications to the working environment.

This approach is unique in that it seeks to integrate these

typically exclusive provisions within a work organization.
For example, common methods used to define standard operating procedures, establish job performance requirements and

evaluate operators' work behaviors have been based primarily

on activities deemed necessary to accomplish the job, i.e.,

checklists of appropriate or desired behaviors. Such lists of

behaviors have been prepared by many developers and users

ofindustrial training programs but are typically divorced from

day-to-day records of production downtime, lost-time injuries, and maintenance overhead. The WCPM provides a

framework for integrating various types of data and using

information from a variety of sources to guide decisionmaking. An integrated approach also allows the model to be used

as an evaluation tool with veteran as well as novice equipment

operators.

ASSUMPTIONS

The WCPM rests on a set of assumptions about the nature

ofthe worker and the job that need to be made explicit. A key

assumption is that performance errors lie outside the person.

This is to say that for the most part individuals make errors

without intent to incur personal injury, induce downtime, or

damage property. In other words, employees come to work to

be productive. Performance differentials between individuals

are often nebulous and ill-defined (12). The model does not

simply attempt to classify individuals as exemplars or average

performers, but seeks to attend to those common errors or

differences in error profiles that can markedly affect the unit

cost Use of the model to profile operational errors and the

selection of an intervention strategy are tempered by making

the following realistic assumptions regarding work:

1. All individuals will make errors, regardless of the level

of training or experience. Error rates of individuals are

dependent upon a host ofthings that mayor may not relate to

the quality of initial training.

2. Error rates can be observed, measured, and managed.

Although there may be cognitive componentssuch as errorsin

judgment and decisionmaking, resultant behaviors and outcomes can, in most cases, be observed and quantified in terms

of cost consequences to the organization and the individual.

These assumptions are the basis for the WCPM and parallel research work conducted by the U.S. Department of

Transportation to develop methods for visual detection and

discrimination of driving errors committed by individuals

driving while sober versus errors committed by those driving

under the influence of alcohol ill).

Thus, at a minimum, the WCPM can be thought of as a

visual detection method to identify critical components of

complex job performances such that wide differentials in

performance for high-consequence tasks are identified and

treated. Viewed this way, it is possible that the total set of

errors of the exemplar may exceed the error rates of average

operators, but the types of errors committed may be quite

different

19

MODEL COMPONENTS

Taking the operation of a shuttle car in an underground coal

mine as an example, a job analysis might reveal as many as 40

to 80 specific activities an operator is to perform in order to

fulfill the job requirement. The result ofthe analysis would be

organized into hierarchies oftask and subtask categories, with

descriptions of the skills involved and the typical working

conditions for each task. A performance criterion for each

category, based on typical, practical, or ideal work standards,

should also be included in the analysis CW.

Job De'finitions

Examples of major task categories for shuttle car operation

might include preshift inspections, tramming, loading, idletime activities, etc., whereas a subtask in the tramming category might be switching the headlights to the opposite direction after reaching the continuous miner. However, the

practical utility of these lists is limited without associated

information about the relative fre,quencies of these behaviors

and the probabilities that deviations in performance will have

a direct and important impact on safety and on the unit cost of

the underground mine section. For these and other reasons, a

comprehensive model of worker or work crew performance

must look ahead to the consequences of performance errors

and the accumulated effects of these consequences on organizational goals within which work performances take on

meaning.

Behavioral Observations

Behavioral observation is a technique for systematically

monitoring performance over a period of time and during

typically variable work conditions. This procedure can provide detailed and accurate estimates of proficiency but requires observers with knowledge of the nature of the job or

task and experience to make sound judgments about the

quality of observed performances. In addition, observers

should be persons whose presence is unobtrusive in the

workplace. In underground mines, the supervisor or section

boss is the individual best situated to observe members of the

work crew.

Unfortunately, frontline supervisors have limited resources for the evaluation of performance. Observing and

rating an operator's performance on 40 to 80 steps repeatedly

during day-to-day operations strains the supervisor's time and

opportunity and may not efficiently focus attention on those

areas of performance that most significantly affect unit cost

(including safety). As a result, supervisors often evaluate

performance at the level oftasks rather than subtasks, e.g., the

conduct of a preshift inspection (10-25 steps), tramming (10-

20 steps), loading (8-12 steps), dumping (l0-15 steps), etc.
20

Assuming enough observations are made, evaluating performance at the task level can yield good estimates of proficiency, adequate for administrative purposes and for establishing benchmark criteria and charting changes in proficiency as a function of experience or training. Too often,

however, this sort ofaggregate information is oflittle value to

the trainer or the employee without further attention to the

components of proficient performances and the identification

and consequence of critical errors. It is only through an

increasing awareness of mistakes and methods to avoid them

that workers become able to assess and improve their own

behavior on the job. The WCPM provides a rational and

efficient means for identifying costly errors and relating these

to production variables and matters of safety and health.

Cost Linkages

A key issue for WCPM development concerns the identification and ranking of observable behaviors that affect unit

cost. A useful performance evaluation model would account

for correlations and causal relationships among observable

behaviors and general competencies that contribute to reductions in the unit cost and lead to improvements in traditional

measures ofsafety and productivity. Such a model would not

only identify errors, but also suggest the monetary value of

concrete solutions that could be implemented to enhance

performance via the elimination of costly errors. In the case

of the shuttle car operator,the goal is to minimize the amount

of time that a continuous miner operator has to wait for an

empty shuttle car. Factors that have negative impacts on

waiting time include errors (behaviors) that, only as a matter

ofchance, lead to injuries, downtime, excessive maintenance,

and property damage. Once these factors are identified, the

task becomes one of (1) enhancing supervisor's abilities to

discriminate between significant and nonsignificant performance errors by associating those errors with their cost consequences and (2) identifying performance improvementstrategies to reduce the frequency of costly errors at the work site.

The latter might involve job redesign, supervision and coaching, formal training and OIT, corporate policy or modifications to the work environment.

Computer Simulation

A computer simulation was developed for use in profiling

and evaluating shuttle car operator performance. The simulation is designed to accept input on operator performance

collected during observations at the work site. The simulation

begins with a series ofquestions abouteach activityassociated

with shuttle car operation. The activities are grouped under

six major task categories: preshift activities, tramming, loading, dumping, idle-time activities, and end-of-shift activities.

After completing one sequence of questions about one activity, the user is prompted to respond to the next sequence. The

simulation requires the user to respond to all questions about

each activity. The user is prompted to check entries and make

changes or correct errors within each sequence of questions

before advancing to the next activity area.

For each shuttle car operation step, a probability is assigned to reflect the likelihood of a costly consequence if that

activity is not performed correctly. These probabilities were

derived through observations, time-and-motion studies, and

discussions with experienced shuttle car operators and supervisors. For each step, a downtime value also is assigned to

reflect the potential production loss associated with the occurrence of a costly error. Based on descriptive data about

specific operations at the mine site and on input performance

data (from observations) as well as the probability and cost

value associated with each activity, the simulation estimates

the number of costly errors that an operator may incur over a

specified time period. Likewise, total estimated downtime for

the period, along with anticipated resultant costs, can be

predicted.

Two versions of the computer simulation have been written in FORTRAN. One operates on a Digital Equipmenr>

VAX minicomputer while the other is designed to operate on

IBM and IBMcompatible personal computers. Both versions

of the simulation prompt the user for the name of the shuttle

car operator and for information about the operator's performance by asking concise questions about each specific activity.

The user is offered six response choices and selects the one

that most accurately reflects his or her own level of performance. Alternatively, the section supervisor can use the observation system and enterthis information directly as data about

individual employees. The user is then told what error probability and production downtime values have been assigned for

each particular operation and is offered the opportunity to

modify one or both of these values. Figure 3 illustrates a

typical question sequence.

TASK AREA: Pre-Shift Activities

Activity: Checks cable snub location

1. Never ( 2% )

2. Seldom (30°1<,)

3. Half time (50% )

4. Nearly always (70% )

5. Always (98°1<,)

6. Does not apply

Please select a number and press return key ==>

Error probability is 1/100

Do you think it is correct? (type Y or N) ==>

An error will cause 17 minutes of delay

Do you think this is correct? (type Y or N) ==>

FIGURE 3.-Typical activity question sequence.

6Reference to specific products does not imply endorsement by the Bureau of Mines.
21

SHUTILE CAR OPERATOR PERFORMANCE

Column 3. Accident-error (probability of costly error

occurring assigned to each activity).

COlumn 4. Number of errors made (estimated totaerrors).

Column 5. Number of accidents happened (est. costly

errors).

Column 6. Downtime loss (in minutes).

After the questions related to shuttle car operation have

been answered, the simulation prompts the user to enter the

number of shifts the simulation is to run. Next, the user is

asked for the number ofloads the operator being studied hauls

on an average shift Finally the user is asked to input the

average cost ofa lost minute of production downtime at his or

her mine. (The default value is $12 per minute.) At this point,

the simulation input is complete and the routine begins processing the information entered. Once processing is completed,

the output is available as a screen display, text file written to

disk, or as a printout for later study.

The output text consists of four pages. The first is a

summary page (fig. 4) that provides information on the

following variables:

1. Total number ofshifts.

2. Total number of trips.

3. Estimated number of errors.

4. Estimated number of costly errors.

5. Estimated total downtime (in minutes).

6. Estimated monetary loss (in dollars).

Operator: Paul

Total shifts: 100

Total tramming, loading,

and dumping trips:

Estimated error total:

Estimated total costly errors:

Estimated total downtime (minutes):

Estimated total downtime loss ($):

See next page for detail

5000

44460

78

84

3770

The remaining output provides a detailed analysis of the

simulation run that lists each shuttle car task area and activity

and indicates the probable number of errors and number of

costly errors projected for that activity. The information

provided in the detailed output (figure 5) consists of:

Column 1. Activity description.

COlumn 2. Performance rate (rank assigned by observer).

FIGURE 4.-Typical summary printout.

This detailed analysis permits the user to rank errors and

establish a cost base for a proposed treatment. Possible

performance improvement strategies might consist of combinations of training, environmental modifications, and

changes in job design, equipment, supervision, or management practices.

TRAMMING OPERATIONS

ACTIVITY PERFORMANCE ACCIDENT ERROR ACCIDENT DOWNTIME

RATE /ERROR MADE HAPPENED LOSS(MIN)

Trams appropriately for haul road

conditions; rounds corners smoothly;

uses care to prevent banging ribs. .70 1/1800 1489 0 0

Trams carefully watching for CM

cable and water hose, roof-bolter,

and other cables. .70 1/100 1192 3 51

Makes certain there is sufficient

cable on reel to reach CM. .98 1/1500 190 0 0

Slows shuttle car when approaching

the CM. .50 1/1000 2200 2 20

Stops behind CM when the boom

is low. .98 1/1000 200 0 0

Watches for the ventilation curtain. .70 1/5000 1835 0 0

FIGURE 5.-Typical detailed printout: Tramming activities section.
22

EXTENDING AND APPLYING THE WCPM

The development of the WCPM, fIrst for shuttle car

operations and later for other mining machinery and work

crews, is part of an ongoing Bureau program ofresearch. This

paper is the second in a planned series of research reports

describing the development and validation of model components and potential applications for training, supervision, job

design, and management policy.

In 1987, with the support and cooperation of a mediumsized coal company in eastern Kentucky, Bureau researchers

completed an initial time-motion study of underground

shuttle car operations in these particular mines. A thorough

job analysis was prepared and shared with experienced equipment operators, trainers, supervisors, and other experts.

These persons assisted in the identification of critical activities and errors with high likelihoods of downtime, injury, or

otherwise costly consequences. A behavioral observation

system has been developed and tested to provide an effIcient

way to gather onsite performance data for analysis and proficiencyestimation. In addition, preliminary studies ofmining

company records and data collection methods are underway to

examine relationships among operator, equipment, productivity, and safety variables. The WCPM computersimulation

has been fIeld tested during regular and special training

sessions and revisions are planned to improve the speed,

interactivity, and instructional potential ofthe program. Other

components for implementing performance improvement

strategies that have extended duration and involve structured

training, OJT, supervision and coaching emphasis, and followup activities are being assembled.

These developments and extensions of the WCPM are

leading to a full-scale, longitudinal study and fIeld test in

several mines with the cooperation ofseveral shifts ofminers,

theirsupervisors, and the training staffat the eastern Kentucky

site. This study will involve three 3-month periods ofbehavioral observation and productivity data collection and two

different training intervention strategies. It is hoped that this

work will further demonstrate the validity ofWCPMconcepts

and will provide supervisors and trainers with useful tools to

assist equipment operators improve safety, proficiency, and

productivity in their working environments.

REFERENCES

1. McKeon, W. J. How to Determine Off-Site Meeting

Costs. Train. Dev. J., May 1981, pp. 116-122.

2. Mills, T. Human Resources-Why the New Concern.

Harvard Bus. Rev., March- April 1975, pp. 120-134.

3. Goldstein, I. L. Training in Work Organizations.

Annu. Rev. Psychol., v. 31, 1980, pp. 229-272.

4. Cascio, W. F. Costing Human Resources: The Financial Impact of Behavior in Organizations. Kent Publ. Co.,

1982, 244 pp.

5. Campbell, J. P. Personal Training and Development.

Annu. Rev. Psychol., 1971, pp. 565-602.

6. National Research Council, Committee on Underground Coal Mine Safety. Toward Underground Coal Mine

Safety, NAS, 1982, 190 pp.

7. Morris, C. W., and E. Conklin. Development and Fabrication of a Continuous Miner Training System. Volume 2

(contract H0377025, McDonnell Douglas Electronics Co.).

BuMines OPR 140(2)-83, 1982, 79 pp.

8. Adkins, J., R. Akeley, P. Chase, L. Marrus, W. Prince,

R. Redick, C. Rogne, J. Saalberg, and L. Szempruch. Review

and Evaluation of Current Training Programs Found in Various Mining Environments; Volume I, Summary. (contract

S0144010, Bendix Corp.) BuMines OPR 110(1)-76, 1976,

67 pp; NTIS PB 259410.

9. Kirkpatrick,D.L. EvaluatingTraining Programs: Evidence vs. Proof. Train. Dev. J., v. 31, No. 11, 1977, pp. 9-12.

10. Kirkpatrick,D.L. EvaluatingTraining Programs. Am.

Soc. Train. and Devel., 1975,318 pp.

11. Wiehagen, W. J., R. M. Digman, and P. E. Goeke. A

Method for Assessing Equipment OperatorTraining and Performance. Soc. Min. Eng. AIME Preprint 83-349,1983,8 pp.

12. Gilbert, T. F. Human Competence: Engineering Worthy Performance. McGraw-Hill, 1978, 376 pp.

13. Harris, D. E. Visual Detection While Driving While

Intoxicated. Hum. Factors, v. 22,1980, pp. 725-732.

14. Salvendy, G. The Prediction and Development of Industrial Work Performance. Wiley, 1973,351 pp.
23

ROOF AND RIB HAZARD RECOGNITION TRAINING

USING 3-D SLIDES

By Edward A. Barrett,! William J. Wiehagen,2 and Charles VaughtJ

ABSTRACT

Unplanned falls ofroof and rib have been historically a leading cause of work-related deaths in

the underground coal mining industry. One possibility for a reduction in roof-fall fatalities is to

improve the ability of miners to recognize salient visual cues associated with geologic or mininginduced irregularities. Such perceptualskills are generally acquired through underground experience

and/or training and, consequently, will vary considerably among miners. The hazard recognition skills

of underground workers may be improved in the classroom through effective training ifinstructional

aids are used that realistically portray the actual mine environment. Because stereoscopic (3-D) slides

are a high-fidelity medium that can accurately represent real underground conditions, they are an

excellent proxy for miners to learn to recognize the characteristics of unstable mine roof and rib.

Even though worker knowledge of ground hazards may be extensive due to years of mining

experience, workers may not be competent in assessing potentially hazardous conditions. The truly

competent miner in the area of ground hazard awareness must have the ability to perceive, recognize,

and correct dangerous groundfall conditions.

The state-of-the-art of 3-D photographic equipment and procedures for documenting underground roof and rib conditions has been significantly advanced by the Bureau of Mines. Most mine

training departments can now independently provide and regularly update their own 3-D instructional

materials at minimal cost.

INTRODUCTION

The roof and ribs of an underground coal mine confront

management and workers with a transient situation that requires constant vigilance. For example, slickensides or slips

(smooth, polished, and sometimes striated surfaces that result

from movement ofrock on either side of the surface) are one

of the most common geologic hazards in coal mine roof. The

normal roof control plan may provide for adequate control of

small slickensides extending less than 3 ft. However, large

slickensides must receive additional support, such as wood

headers, straps, extra bolts, etc. Slips may be exposed during

mining or develop at a later time, but in either case, they are

potentially very dangerous and should be treated with extreme

caution. Remediesforthis type ofroof hazard and most others

'Mining engineer.

2Supervisory industrial engineer.

3Research sociologist. Pittsburgh Research Center, Bureau of

Mines, Pittsburgh, PA.

are seldom total or final, and corrective procedures change as

mining conditions change.

In room-and-pillar mining, falls of roof and rib may be

either planned, as in the case ofretreat mining, or unplanned.

Obviously, it is the unplanned failures that presentthe greatest

concern. The problem is to anticipate the failure and deal with

it in such a way that a margin of safety can be maintained.

Limited data exist with respect to the frequency of the unplanned failure. In a study conducted by Peters and

Wiehagen, 88 of 143 miners interviewed reported that they

had either been injured or startled by a rockfall at least once

during the past year ill.4 This suggests that unplanned rock

falls are a relatively common event.

4Underlined numbers in parentheses refer to items in the list of

references at the end of this paper.
24

In a recentreview ofMine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) accident and fatality reports, it was noted that

groundfall accidents may have been prevented in many ofthe

cases had the worker been able to detect the presence of

potentially hazardous features and properly assessed the risk.

For example, the following conclusions were filed by MSHA

inspectors following two investigations: "the accident occurred when a piece of undetected roof(horseback formation)

fell from between the roof bolts causing fatal injuries to the

victim" and "the contributing factor to the accident and

resultant fatality was the presence of an undetected kettlebottom near the face of no. 5 entry".

Of course, it is impossible to ascertain the perceptual

capabilities of the persons involved with any degree of accuracy. The visual information available to the miners at the

moment of the accident may have been occluded (rock dust,

bad viewing angle, inadequate lighting, etc.), or perhaps the

persons did indeed recognize the hazards but failed to assess

the degree ofdanger. Thissuggests, then, that the opportunity

may exist for improvement in the perceptual skills of the

persons involved in recognizing and responding to hazardous

roof conditions.

This paper is concerned with the visual skills of underground miners in the recognition ofroof, rib and floor hazards

and the utilization of stereoscopic slides for improving their

ability to perceive these hazards. Hazardous ground conditions, in most cases, have cues or warning signs associated

with them and the safety ofthe worker is highly dependent on

his or her ability to observe these warning signals. Understandably, miners possess varying degrees of hazard recognition skills that have been acquired throughout their working

years from both job experiences and training. Ofcourse, new

miners must rely almost entirely on training, at least initially,

for the acquisition of adequate hazard recognition skills

needed to safely perform work duties underground. It is

important for the health and safety of the miner that hazard

recognition skills be taught and reinforced on a regular basis.

The manner in which this can be accomplished more effectively is the subject of this paper.

GROUND-CONTROL PERFORMANCE DOMAINS

In any problem solving situation where information must

be gathered and action taken, the persons involved must

coordinate and use a number of learned capabilities. Gagne

andBriggs have summarized these capabilitiesinto five major

areas: (1) the gathering and recall of information, (2) the use

of intellectual skills, (3) the development of cognitive strategies, (4) attitudes, and (5) the possession of requisite motor

skills (2). The existence and correct use ofthese capabilities

as they relate to roof and rib control would lead to the

anticipation and correction or avoidance of the impending

fall; the absence or incorrect use of these capabilities would

result in human error, and as a matter of chance, perhaps result

in a serious lost-time accident or fatal injury. The following

account of a fatal accident will be used to illustrate this

concept.

On April 2, 1985, a miner helper was killed by a fall of

roof while installing temporary support for setting line brattice inby permanent support. The accident involved a 7-ft by

7-ft by 7-in-thick slab ofthe immediate roofshale. Investigators reported that although the fallen slab was not a true

kettlebottom, it was similar in shape. It was nearly circular in

plan view and was bounded on one edge by a slickensided

surface. One side of the slab coincided with a portion of a

flattened, carbonized fossil tree trunk that was oriented parallel to the shale bedding and was approximately 20 in wide. It

appeared that the rock separated along the outby (slickensided) edge, along the plant fossil, and along a shale lamina.

The rock then sheared along the inby edge near the rib. The

investigators concluded that the victim, who had 36 yr of

mining experience, failed to detect the loose rock and placed

himselfin an unsafe position while advancing the line brattice.

The victim, for whatever reason, did not bring an

adequate combination of capabilities to that particular situation to allow him to perceive a warning, recognize the

warning, assess the risk adequately, and respond in an appropriate manner. Consider how a better mastery of the skills

patterned from Gagne's performance domains might have

prevented the accident. Obviously, the following discussion

is based on speculation. None ofthe authors was present at the

scene of the fatality, and the investigators did not couch their

report in tenns of the quality of performance across skill

categories. In other words, it is not known, empirically, at

what stage in the process the miner's failure actually occurred.

First, a worker obtains certain information from the

work activity. This information may be gotten by associating

the present circumstances with prior learned information

about such circumstances, or it may be derived from the task

itself, in the form ofvisual or audible stimuli. In the case being

discussed, kettlebottoms, while not common, had been encountered on the section. The section was also known to

contain slickensided roof. Therefore, the victim should have

associated that knowledge with the fact that he was preparing

to move past permanent support. It is not known whether the

slip was clearly visible, but in most cases there is some

"potting" along a slickenside (1). It is likely that a kettlebottomlike slab would provide some visual stirnuli to the attuned

observer.

Second, a worker must use his or herintellectualskills in

the discrimination of relevant cues inherent in the situation

and in the recall and identification of an appropriate ordering

of rules for dealing with those cues. The fallen slab was

bounded on one side by a fossilized tree trunk, which was

probably visible, and on another side by a slickenside. The

visual stimuli should have warned the victim that he was
encountering a section ofnonuniform or discontinuous top. In

addition, it is customary to sound the roof before entering a

place beyond the last row ofpermanentsupport. Sounding the

roof may well have provided an audible indication that the

rock was loose. Assuming that a warning was perceived, the

next step would have been to recognize it for what it was: an

indication that the victim should not go past the permanent

supports because roof conditions had changed.

Third, a worker must develop cognitive strategies that

allow him or her to evaluate the consequences of alternative

actions. There are two types of actions the victim might have

taken if he had recognized the warning: (1) effective direct

action or (2) secondary action. One direct action could have

been to place the head ofthe continuous miner against the roof

for extra support, as mandated by company policy. This was

not done. A secondary action would have entailed issuing an

appropriate warning to some other worker, such as the miner

operator. This was not done, presumably because the miner

helper did not recognize the warning. In sum, the victim took

no action, although there were almost certainly some cuesthat

might have served as an indication that potentially hazardous

conditions had developed.

Fourth, a worker possesses attitudes that are brought into

play in choosing to act on a specific alternative. In this

incident, it is not known whetherthe victim examined the roof

before going inby permanent support. It is known that he did

not place the head of the mining machine against the top for

additional protection (a safety procedure that was supported

by company policy). It is also known that the victim was

working further from the rib than allowed by the roof control

plan at the time he was killed. It might be inferred, therefore,

that the individual chose to take shortcuts, either for personal

convenience or in order to finish the task more quickly.

Fifth, a worker must have, to some degree, the motor

skills necessary to carry out a particular procedure. The miner

helper obviously had the skill required to set temporary

supports and hang curtain. More importantly, however, he

had the skill to operate the continuous miner. Therefore, he

could have taken the extra precaution of placing the machine

head against the roof while he was setting the jacks. What is

not revealed in the investigation is any information about the

victim's physical condition. It is possible that the manner in

which he was working was partially to compensate for a

relative lack ofmobility oragility, as he did notrestrict himself

to the limited workspace allowed by the roof control plan, or

perhaps the task at hand could not be performed within the

restricted workspace.

The victim did not, for whatever reason, exhibit mastery

of the immediate task with which he was confronted, thus

leading to a fatal error. The question naturally arises as to

whether he could have been trained to a level ofskill in all five

domains that would have prevented his making the error that

25

led to his death. Theoretically, the answer is yes. However,

simply giving him more training than he had already received

would not have sufficed. Gagne established conclusively that

training without evaluation, or a training and evaluation

program that does not cover performance across the five

capability domains, tends to be inadequate. Applied to roof

and rib training, a teaching and testing situation would need to

allow the full exercise of intellectual skills, cognitive strategies, and attitudinal capabilities that involve hazard perception, recognition, assessment, variable response to a warning,

and the consequences that these responses produce (1).

But how can a teaching and evaluation program be

carried out - especially one that deals with situations as fluid

as the underground environment? Cole, using Gagne's paradigm, began by defining people's task performance in terms

of verbs that describe the necessary capabilities and the

conditions under which the performance isto occur(5). These

capability verbs show what it is the trainee must do in order to

perform a particular task to a criterion ofmastery. A listing of

these verbs as they apply to desired performance will clearly

outline the instruction needed to teach the targeted skill and

will also reveal the means for evaluating the student's competence. In terms of a problem scenario based on the fatal

inci4ent discussed, the trainee would exhibit mastery when he

or she could, among other things: (1) perceive a warning

embodied in the potting along a slickensided slip, (2) recognize the warning by defining the condition as a slickenside, (3)

assess adequately the risk of venturing past permanent support at that point, and (4) demonstrate an appropriate response

in that situation.

The appeal of designing a training program using a

paradigm adapted from Gagne is that there is no distinction

made between teaching and testing. They are one and the

same. Only the emphasis changes: if the trainer is interested

primarily in enhancing trainee skill in a given domain, the task

is instruction. If the instructor is concerned with assessing

trainee level of proficiency, the task is evaluation. Research

has shown that administration oftasks that give the instructor

information about the present proficiency ofstudents, while at

the same time providing them an opportunity to practice (and

get better at) the capabilities demanded by the task, is a valid

approach in several technical fields. Recentstudiessupported

by the Bureau have shown that it is an equally valid approach

in mine training (0). However, providing this instruction

systematically in a fluid, on-the-job training environment is

not always practical, nor is it very efficient, particularly for a

large class of trainees or for the small mine operator. In

addition, teaching and testing on the job carries certain risks,

as the penalty for errors may be extremely high. The problem,

then, becomes one of how to transfer real-world conditions to

the classroom and selecting an aspect of those conditions on

which to focus.
26

TEACHING AND ASSESSING HAZARD PERCEPTION IN THE CLASSROOM

In a South African study of 405 fatal gold mining accidents, Lawrence noted that 75 pet of the fatalities were the

result ofrockfalls Q). In addition, the single biggest category

of error (36 pet) involved failures to perceive warnings.

Although it is not known precisely what percent of error

involves failures to perceive warnings, the same sort of

situation seems to prevail in underground coal mining in this

country. During the 5-yrperiod 1980-84, for instance, 16,352

groundfall accidents were reported to MSHA. These accidents resulted in 181 fatalities and caused 5,323 nonfatal

injuries (ID. It would seem, therefore, that a fruitful area for

systematic training and assessment in the classroom would be

the perception and recognition of roof and rib hazards.

The expected benefit from such an effort would be fewer

unplanned falls ofroof and rib, resulting in fewer production

delays and, more importantly, a base reduction ofinjury risk.

Ideally, there would be a more efficient transfer of learned

skills and knowledge from the classroom to the mine if

training were to be focused on the development and evaluation

of specific skills (perception, recognition, and action) composing competence in the performance of the underground

task. Since the miner must constantly divide his or her time

between the task at hand and environmental conditions affecting both personal safety and the safety ofthe crew, considerations of task loading are important. Teaching miners to efficiently "read" the underground environment, including the

use of cognitive strategies to direct the decision for action,

then becomes an important training objective.

Most safety training programs teaching hazard recognition are based on the ideal of enhancing miner knowledge of

underground hazards, with little if any emphasis on skill

evaluation. The lack ofrigor in pursuing a competency-based

program aimed at perception and recognition skills has resulted in a training system overly dependent on real-world

conditions to both teach and assess the ability ofminers to deal

with roof and rib problems. The only viable dependent

measure in this case would be the use of injury data and

investigations offatalities, as noted in the introduction to this

paper. There are certain limitations to the use of these kinds

ofdata as an index oftraining effect. For instance, injuries are

fairly rare events for any particular mine site; the average

frequency rate for a lost-time injury in an underground coal

mine is 0.06. Obviously, an attempt to show the effect of a

training treatment on these small numbers would be suspect

and would be very difficult to prove.

Ideally, the best way to assess the effect of a training

treatment would be to sample a person's performance in the

work setting. In the case of ground hazards, however, assessing an individual's perceptual, recognition, and decisionmaking skills would be difficult at best. The training and evaluation task would be totally dependent upon the existence ofan

adequate and representative sample of roof and rib hazards.

Observer error would be a major obstacle as the behavioral

implication of perceptual and recognition skill domains are

not always obvious.

What is needed in the training and assessment of groundhazard perception and recognition, then, is a training device

that will simulate, to a high degree of fidelity, ground condilions that the trainees are intended Lo perceive and recognize.

The need for classroom simulations ofreal conditions haslong

been recognized. Gibson for instance, suggested that in

industrial training there should be devices that would simulate

particular dangers while allowing subjects to act safely or

unsafely (2). The problem with simulations, however, is that

they often have an artificiality that is difficult to surmount.

Confounding the simulation problem is the enormously

complex mine environment where the visual cues, in many

cases, are subtle and not readily apparent to the observer.

These cues may be inhibited because ofsevere angles ofsight

(common in low-coal mine roo!), abundance of rock dust,

insufficient lighting, etc.

One attempt to simulate ground hazards in mining was

carried out byBlignaut, who had subjects perform motor tasks

while simultaneously looking for "loose rock" in a stope

simulator00. Although Blignautreported that the simulator

was viewed as realistic by the participants, such a device

would be relatively difficult and expensive to build with any

degree of fidelity. A second attempt to simulate ground

hazards, also by Blignaut in 1979, appears to offer more

promise to mine safety trainers.

STEREOSCOPIC SLIDES

Blignaut attempted to simulate ground hazards using

stereoscopic slides for training underground miners. The

results of his study, involving South African gold miners,

suggest that the ability of underground miners to discriminate

between dangerous and safe rock conditions can be significantly improved by exposing them to stereoscopic (3-D)

slides of groundfall hazards. Although Blignaut's results

were encouraging, they failed to provide a set ofguidelinesfor

the use of 3-D training aids to teach recognition skills and

measure perceptual competence. Therefore, the Bureau

undertook a pilot study to determine the efficacy of using

stereoscopic slides for ground-hazard awareness training.

The first step was to generate a set of (3-D) slides of

hazardous roof and rib conditions typically found in mines

throughout the major coal producing areas of the eastern

United States. For example, 3-D slides were taken ofspecific

geologic features, such as joints, bedding planes, and kettlebottoms; inadequate support conditions, such as spalling ribs,

loose or hanging bolLS, and incorrect bolting patterns; and

loose rock occurrences such as overhangs.
These 3-D slides were then used in an experiment involving a group of 20 experienced miners (minimum 1 yr at the

face) and 20 persons with very limited or no underground

experience. The slides with embedded hazards were judged

to be rather common and somewhat obvious hazards by roof

and rib experts. The subjects were presented with 15 slides of

varying roof and rib conditions and asked to describe what, if

anything, in the slide appeared hazardous. Half of each of

these two groups of miners were shown the areas ofroof and

rib using 3-D slides, and the other half were shown the same

areas using identical, standard two-dimensional (2-D) slides.

A 2 by 2 analysis of variance was applied to determine the

significance of the main effects of level of experience and

mode ofstimulus presentation. Both main effects were found

to be highly significant (p <0.01), indicating that (1) in

comparison to the group of persons with very limited or no

underground experience, the proportion of correct responses

was significantly higher among those with at least 1 yr of

experience working at the face, and, (2) in comparison to the

27

group who viewed the 2-D slides, the proportion of correct

responses was significantly higher among those who viewed

the 3-D slides.

The first of these two findings suggests that significant

differences exist between the ability of new versus experienced miners to correctly identify groundfall hazards. However, on the average, even the experienced miners failed to

correctly identify 2.5 out of 15 hazards. These data suggest

that better training in recognizing groundfall hazards could be

beneficial for all miners, and that it would have the greatest

impact on miners who have little or no experience working at

the face.

The second finding strongly suggests that 3-D slides are

more effective than 2-D slides for the purposes of illustrating

groundfall hazards. Combined, the findings suggest that 3-D

slides are a more effective tool for illustrating groundfall

hazardsthan 2-D representations and, therefore, offerpromise

for enhancing the perceptual skills of the miner.

PHOTOGRAPHIC EQUIPMENT

Authentic commercially available stereoscopic-slide

cameras are 35-mm slidefilm cameras (print film cannot be

used in these cameras to make stereoprints) that have dual,

matched objective lenses with mechanically coupled iris

diaphragms. The distance between the lenses is fixed at 2.75

in. They have a normal range of aperture settings, shutter

speeds, hot-shoe adapters for flash cords, and focus adjustments. The slidefilm is commercially developed and mounted

by an experienced person who is familiar with left and right

balance of stereo pairs.

Stereoscopic slides can either be projected on a screen or

viewed through hand-held devices. The equipment required

to project 3-D slides on a screen includes a 3-D slide projector

and a lenticular beaded screen. The projected image is not as

clear as that observed in a hand-held 3-D viewer. Polarized

glasses must be worn to see projected slides in 3-D, but the

glasses are not required with a hand-held viewer.

Because of decreasing demand as well as limited utility,

the manufacture of 3-D slide cameras terminated over 30 yr

ago. However, the cameras may still be purchased from usedequipment and secondhand photographic supply stores; some

have even become collector's items among camera enthusiasts. In addition to uncertain availability, the original 3-D

cameras have several operational limitations. These include

built-in lenses that cannotbe interchanged, antiquated manual

controls, and difficult focusing adjustments (particularly in

the minimally lighted underground environment).

To overcome the limitations of3-D cameras noted above,

the Bureau designed and fabricated a stereoscopic 35-mm

camera slide bar for producing 3-D slides using just one 35-

mm, single lens reflex camera. This apparatus can be used to

take pairs of individual slide chips (left slide and right slide)

from two preset locations that correspond exactly to the

interocular distance (2.75 in) used on the dual lens stereocameras.

The unit basically consists of three horizontal bars situated one above the other (fig. 1). The lower bar is used for

mounting on a tripod and for holding a simple line level. The

middle bar holds the 35-mm camera, which is attached to a

track-mounted sliding plate, and the upper bar supports the

strobe light that is secured at a location central to each camera

position.

The 35-mm slide chips can be mounted individually in

slide holders, in the conventional manner, or combined in

specially made stereomounts for viewing in the hand-held

viewer. The matched slide pairs can be projected on a

lenticular screen, from any convenient distance, using two

conventional slide projectors positioned vertically (fig. 2).

The lenses used on the projectors should be identical and

polarizing filters are required for each lens. If hand-held

viewers are used, then the 35-mm film chip pairs are mounted

in aluminum stereoslide holders and cardboard stereomounts.

Both of these items are available in photographic supply

stores. The mounting procedure is quite simple and can be

accomplished with very few problems by a novice.

Alignment ofthe film chips in the mounts is critical and must

be done carefully. It will be obvious when the proper stereo

balance of the slide chips is achieved because the image in the

viewer will have depth and be clear throughout.

The equipment and procedures for generating stereoscopic slides are quite basic and involves just a minimum

investment ofresources. Fabrication ofthe Bureau-developed

slide bar is relatively simple and inexpensive (detailed design

drawings can be obtained from the author). The slide bar,

unique in its own design, has several operating features that

insure quality slides that have proper lighting and adequate

stereo-balance. These include a central, fixed flash or strobe

light location, a track-mounted camera slide plate, use of a

single 35-mm camera, and a leveling device.
28

FIGURE 1.-Slide bar for use in generating stereoscopic slides

with conventional 35-mm camera.

FIGURE 2.-Two slide projectors positioned vertically on twotier stand.

USING STEREOSCOPIC SLIDES IN THE CLASSROOM

In order to create optimum interest among trainees and to

motivate them for maximum involvement in the learning

process, mine trainers may prefer to generate customized sets

of 3-D slides ofthe groundfall hazards found throughout their

own mines. The customized slides, perhaps even depicting

hazards that exist in the current working sections, could be

assembled and updated to meet training objectives by inhouse personnel.

A typical classroom training session could begin with

each trainee having a hand-held viewer and the same set of

slides depicting the ground hazards selected for study. In a

group discussion format, everyone would observe the same

slide and talk about the important features. For example, a

kettlebottom is defined as a smooth, rounded, sometimes oval

piece of rock, cylindrical in shape, the surface of which

usually has a striated or slickensided appearance. From this

definition, the cues that the miner would be taught to look for

in recognizing this potentially hazardous feature are as follows: rounded piece of rock within mine roof. different in

nature from surrounding roof material, and shining or glossy

edge. Since kettlebottoms can range from a few inches in

diameter to more than 4 ft, it is important for the worker to be

cognizant of the entire viewing area of mine roof in order to,

perhaps, notice one small, isolated kettlebottom. To address

this latter concern, expanded views, beyond the individual

feature, may need to be developed (not necessarily 3-D) and

used to supplement the training lesson. This would likely

involve different angles, different degrees of lighting, and

multiple distances from the target area.

In addition to being used for training, 3-D slides could be

utilized for screening miners, before or after instruction, to

determine their level of competence in recognizing roof and

rib hazards. By asking miners to identify the presence of

hazards in a series of 3-D slides, one can determine (1) which

types of hazards are not recognized by a significant number of

people, and (2) which miners seem to be particularly deficient

in their ability to recognize groundfall hazards. Given this

baseline information, the trainer can better determine which

types of groundfall hazards need to be emphasized in the

present or future training, and which miners need additional

instruction to become proficient at recognizing the hazards.

Because of the high fidelity of 3-D slides and the realism thus

portrayed, there can be no confusion in the process of accurately identifying hazards.
29

DISCUSSION

The fact that mine workers can improve their groundhazard awarenessskillsfor recognizing potentially dangerous

conditions was demonstrated by Blignaut using 3-D slides as

an experimental tool. This development, combined with the

experimental results in the Bureau's field evaluation studies,

indicates that 3-D slides have the potential to be a very

effective training aid. It is unlikely that conventional means

for representing roof and rib hazards would provide similar

results. Drawings, photographs, and standard slides provide

visual cues in two dimensions only; consequently, realism is

lost. The only other alternative for transferring basic concepts

of ground control to the miner is to go to the underground

workplace and point out each detail as it is encountered. Of

course, the dilemma here is that many hazards will never get

taughtsimply because they do not exist in a particular mine or,

ifthey do exist, their nature will be different from that under

study. For example, consider the condition known as cutter

roof. Cutter roof will initially appear as a short separation in

the mine roofrunning in the direction ofthe opening along the

rib line and will eventually develop into much longer separations that run on both sides ofthe entry. Ultimately, an entire

area affected by cutter roof could fail in shear and fall in at the

roofbolt horizon level. Obviously, all stages ofthis hazard do

not exist in any given mine at one particular time.

The miner who is competent in all aspects of ground

control is one who consistently demonstrates knowledge,

procedures, and skill in the perception, recognition, and

correction of every potentially hazardous condition. Using

the preceding example, the miner must be able to observe the

preliminary indicators of cutter roof as well as any of the

intermediate signs, and then respond appropriately. This

pattern of performance corresponds with that developed by

Gagne and, in effect, suggests the structure necessary for

completely training the miner.

Training for competency in this expanded mode has

further payoffs. The obvious benefit ofimproved safety in the

mine is amended by a more accurate account ofthe allocation

oftraining resources. Management can see where the emphasis is being placed and what the results are.

The use of 3-D slides for conducting ground-hazard

training in the classroom presents an ideal learning situation.

No otherinexpensive and readily available classroom training

aids that have the same fidelity as 3-D slides could be utilized

for this purpose. The slides ostensibly take the miner into the

mine without leaving the classroom. This feature makes them

valuable as a training aid because training effectiveness and

training transfer depend on materials that physically simulate

the real-world environment.

Once an acceptable level of proficiency is established,

poor recognition skills can be ruled out as a reason for

continuing groundfall hazard problems in the working area.

Other causes would then need to be considered. For example,

miners may not know when to correct groundfall hazards or

may be insufficiently motivated to correct them. Strategies

for dealing with these problems include training designed to

ensure that miners know when potential hazards become

actual problems, training designed to emphasize how dangerous it is if they fail to correct such hazards, and establishing a

system ofrewards to motivate miners to take the time to look

for groundfall hazards and correct them.

SUMMARY

Evidence exists that miners often fail to recognize areas

ofhazardousroofand rib. Mine safety and training personnel,

miners, and ground- control specialists who have examined 3-

D slides of groundfall hazards report that the slides could

significantly improve miner ability to identify hazardous roof

and rib. There are a number ofadvantages to using 3-D slides

instead ofconventional slides or other two-dimensional techniques for illustrating groundfall hazards to miners. Perhaps

the most important advantage is that 3-D slides provide a more

realistic and accurate representation of roof and rib hazards.

From a motivational standpoint, another advantage to

stereoscopic slides is that, because of their novelty, they are

intrinsically interesting to most viewers. Miners are more

enthusiastic about training that involves 3-D slides and seem

to enjoy looking at this type ofslide. Based on the responses

ofvarious miners and mine trainers, it appears that 3-D slides

would be very well received as a training aid throughout the

industry. Also, the equipment needed to generate and use

stereoscopic slides for training is relatively inexpensive and

easy to obtain and operate.

In conclusion, the information the Bureau has gathered

on the feasibility and effectiveness of using 3-D slides as a

training aid strongly suggests that it is both feasible and

advisable for the coal mining industry to use stereoscopic

slides of hazardous roof and rib conditions as an aid to

improving miner ability to recognize potential hazards.
30

REFERENCES

1. Peters, R. H., and W. J. Wiehagen. Human Factors

Contributing to Groundfall Accidents in Underground Coal

Mines: Workers' Views. BuMines IC 9127, 1987,24 pp.

2. Gagne,R. M., and L.J. Briggs. Principles ofInstructional Design. Holt, 2d ed. 1979, pp. 117-135.

3. Chase, F. and G. Sames. Kettlebottoms: Their

Relation to Mine Roof and Support. BuMines RI 8785, 1983,

12pp.

4. University of Kentucky. Exercises for Teaching

and Assessing Non-Routine Mine Health and Safety Skills.

Ongoing BuMines contract H0348040; fodnf. contact W. J.

Wiehagen, BuMines, Pittsburgh, PA.

5. Methods for Assessing Critical Non-Routine Mine

Health and Safety Skills. Ongoing BuMines contract

H0348040; for inf. contact W. J. Wiehagen, BuMines, Pittsburgh, PA.

6. DiCanio, D. G., A. H. Nakata, D. Colvert, andE. G.

LaVeque. Accident Cost Indicator Model To Estimate Costs

to Industry and Society From Work-Related Injuries and

Deaths in Underground Coal Mining. Volume III. Supporting Data (contract J0255031, FMC Corp.). BuMines OFR

39(3)-77,1976, 104 pp.; NTIS PB 264 440.

7. Lawrence, A. C. Human Error As a Cause of

Accidents in Gold Mining. 1. Saf. Res., 1974, pp. 74-88.

8. Barrett, E. Behavioral Aspects ofRoof/Rib Injuries

- Implications for Training Utilizing Stereoscopic Photography. Paper in Proceedings of Fifth Conference on Ground

Control in Mining (WV Univ., Morgantown, WY., June lIB, 1986). WY Univ., 1986, pp. 213-220.

9. Gibson, E. J. Principles of Perceptual Learning and

Development. Meredith, 1969, pp. 163-193.

10. Blignaut, C. The Perception ofHazard: The Contribution of Signal Detection to Hazard Perception. Ergonomics, v. 22, 1979, pp. 1177-1183.
31

HUMAN FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO GROUNDFALL ACCIDENTS IN

UNDERGROUND COAL MINES: WORKERS'VIEWS

By Robert H. Peters1 and William J. Wiehagen2

ABSTRACT

Groundfall accidents are the most common cause of accidental death among underground coal

miners, and in many mines, they are a significant part ofthe total cost ofoperating the mine. This paper

presents results of a Bureau of Mines study on barriers that may prevent miners from correcting and

avoiding groundfall hazards. Such barriers stem from four basic types of problems: (1) inability to

recognize groundfall hazards, (2) inability to correct groundfall hazards, (3) lack of motivation to

search for groundfall hazards, and (4) lack of motivation to correct groundfall hazards.

Interviews were conducted with 143 miners and 9 Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA)

coal mine roof and rib inspectors to detennine the perceived importance of these four categories of

barriers, and what should be done to overcome them. Tije issues covered in these interviews were (1)

why miners sometimes fail to do anything about potential roof hazards, (2) walking beneath

unsupported roof, and (3) what should be done to help miners to avoid rock fall injuries. Participants'

beliefs about these issues were detennined by asking them to respond to a series of open-ended and

forced-choice questions. The frequencies with which response categories were chosen to reply to

each question are presented. It is concluded that those who work underground consider all four types

of barriers to be important contributors to groundfall accidents.

INTRODUCTION

In many underground coal mines, the economic costs

associated with falls of roof and rib are a substantial proportion ofthe total costs of operating the mine. During the 1982-

86 5-yr period, 14,863 groundfall accidents were reported to

the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA).

These accidents often require that labor, supplies, and

equipment be diverted from coal production and used for

cleanup, recovery and repair of mine equipment, and resupport of the mine roof. The costs of these activities are quite

substantial. But ofeven greatersignificance are the intangible

losses and the emotional anguish suffered by the families of

miners who have been killed orseriously disabled by groundfalls. During the 1982-86 period, groundfall accidents

1Research psychologist.

2Supervisory industrial engineer. Pittsburgh Research Center,

Bureau of Mines, Pittsburgh, PA.

claimed the lives of 154 coal miners and caused 4,249 nonfatal

injuries. According to an accident cost model, the direct cost

of these fatalities and injuries alone exceeds $2OG million.]

(Clearly, there is a great need to further reduce the numher of

miners being injured and killed by groundfall accidents.)

The Bureau performed the research described in this

report in order to (1) better define the types of barriers

preventing miners from correcting or avoiding groundfall

hazards, (2) provide direction for future research, and (3)

identify promising approaches for preventing this type of

accident. Data were collected using structured interview

guides. Interviews were conducted with various personnel

from three underground coal companies (nine sites) and with

MSHA coal mine roof and rib inspectors.

3DiCanio, D. G., A. H. Nakata, D. Colvert, and E. G. LaVeque.

Accident Cost Indicator Model to Estimate Costs to Industry and

Society From Work-Related Injuries and Deaths in Underground

Coal Mining. Volume m. Supporting Data (contract 10255031,

FMC Corp.). BuMines OFR 39(3)-77, 1976, 104 pp.; NTIS PB

264 440.
32

BARRIERS TO MINER PREVENTION OF GROUNDFALL ACCIDENTS

FIGURE 1.-Barriers to miner prevention of groundfa"

accidents.

Stage of barrier's occurrence

Inability to Inability to

recognize correct

groundfall hazards groundfall hazards

Lack of motivation Lack of motivation

to search for to correct

groundfall hazards groundfall hazards

Geological factors relating to the inherent stability of the

roof and rib influence the likelihood of a groundfall accident.

Although geological history cannot be changed, there are

several other factors that influence the probability of groundfall accidents over which people potentially have some control. This study focuses primarily on assessing the things

miners can potentially do to avoid groundfall accidents, and

on gaining a better understanding of the types of barriers that

prevent them from performing these activities.

Figure 1 highlights a conceptual framework for addressing these barriers. The model assumes that in order for miners

to do an effective job of preventing groundfall injuries, they

must not only recognize the existence of the hazard but also

must be willing and able to take corrective action. Barriers can

be differentiated on the basis ofwhether they occur at the stage

of hazard recognition or hazard correction, and on the basis of

whether they are due to miner lack of ability or lack of motivation. 4 Data were co]Jected to determine whether the people

who work underground consider the barriers identified in

figure 1 to be important contributors to groundfall accidents.

Source of

barrier

Ability

Motivation

Recognition Correction

METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION

TABLE 1.• Breakdown of mine employees

Interviewed, by job title

Belt worker 4

Bridge worker 2

Continuous miner operator 16

Continuous miner operator helper 10

General inside labor 10

Mechanic 11

Roof bolter operator 27

Roof bolter helper , 10

Scoop operator 2

Section supervisor 14

Shuttle car operator 25

Supply worker 2

Timber worker 5

Utility worker

Total 143

Miners and MSHA inspectors were asked to respond to a

variety of questions about the causes and prevention of

groundfall accidents in one-on-one interviews. Interviewers

asked questions concerning the following issues: (1) Recent

experiences with roof falls, (2) why miners sometimes fail to

do anything about potential roof hazards, (3) walking beneath

unsupported roof, (4) the degree to which various changes

would help miners to avoid rock fall injuries. Participants

were asked to respond to both open-ended and forced-choice

questions.

Data were collected from February 1984 to April 1985. A

total of 143 employees from three underground coal mining

companies located at nine sites in Pennsylvania, Virginia, and

Kentucky participated in the study. All mines in this study

were using the room-and-pillar method of extraction and

continuous mining machinery. Table 1 breaks down the total

sample ofmine employees by job title. The average length of

time spent working as an underground coal miner was 10.5 yr.

Of the 143 employees in the sample, 85 pet had some experience working as a bolter or bolter helper. All 143 employees

work underground on a daily basis. Data were also collected

from nine MSHA coal mine roof and rib inspectors using the

instruments and methods previously described.

4For a more detailed discussion of this model see: Peters, R. H., and

W. J. Wiehagen. Human Factors Contributing to Groundfall Accidents in Underground Coal Mines: Workers'Views. BuMines IC

9127, 1987,24 pp.

Job title Number
33

PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS

Thissection presents participants' responses to interview

questions concerning nonresponse to possible roof hazards,

walking beneath unsupported roof, and the effect of various

changes on preventing groundfall accidents. Simple frequencies of the response categories miners chose to answer each

forced-choice question in the interview are presented. Summaries ofresponses to several open-ended questions are also

presented.

NONRESPONSE TO POSSIBLE ROOF

HAZARDS

Each participant was initially asked to respond to an openended question on this topic. This question was followed

by eight forced-choice questions.

Open-Ended Questions

Participants were asked for their opinions about why

miners sometimes neglect correcting hazardous roof conditions. This question was asked as follows:

At one time or another, most miners have seen

areas of the roof that look like they may not be

entirely safe, but for some reason, do not do

anything about it. What are the major reasons

why miners sometimes fail to do anything about

potential roof hazards?

The miners' replies and (in parentheses) number of

respondents wereIn a hurry (22)

Laziness (15)

The area is traveled infrequently (11)

Too busy doing other work (10)

Don't want to delay production (10)

Careless or don't care (8)

Don't believe it's hazardous (7)

It's not their job (7)

Complacency (6)

I know it's there so I'll just stay away from it (4)

Tools or supplies not readily available (4)

Afraid of getting hurt (4)

Put off doing it but forget (3)

Lack of knowledge or experience (2)

Taking shortcuts (2)

Not important; it's just "extra work" (2)

Inspectors gave several different types of responses to

this question. The most common response was that miners do

not think it is worth the time and effort required; i.e., they are

insufficiently motivated to perfonn this type of activity.

Another reason frequently mentioned by mine inspectors

was that miners do notrealize how dangerous the hazard really

is. Several inspectors also said that because nothing usually

happens to miners who occasionally decide to risk working

beneath hazardous roof, many tend to become complacent.

Apparently, the failure to experience negative consequences

for deviating from a safe work practice may promote continued deviation. Other factors believed by mine inspectors to

contribute to miner failure to correct roof hazards were (1)

miner inattentiveness caused by preoccupation with off-thejob problems (e.g., family, medical) and (2) the temptation to

let the next shift deal with the hazards when it is close to

quitting time.

Forced-Choice Questions

Miners were asked to indicate the extent to which they

agreed or disagreed that each of a list ofreasons explains why

miners might sometimes decide not to do anything about

potentially hazardous roof conditions. The reasons were--

1. They do not have the tools or materials with them that

are needed to correct the roof problem.

2. They think it is someone else's responsibility to take

care of roof problems.

3. They do not want to risk getting hurt while fixing the

roof.

4. They dislike doing the type of work necessary to

correct the roof problem.

5. They believe that their supervisor thinks that taking

care of roof problems is unimportant.

6. They do not know how to correct roof problems.

7. They do not realize how dangerous roof problems

reallyare.

8. They do not take enough time to look for roof problems.

A six-point rating scale ranging from strongly agree to

strongly disagree was used to respond to each statement. The

rating scale contained the following options:

Strongly agree

Agree

Slightly agree

Slightly disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

The number ofminers who chose each point on the rating

scale to respond to each of the eight questions in this section

is presented in table 2. The percentage of miners in each

subgrouping who chose slightly agree, agree, or strongly

agree to answer the question are summed to allow one to
34

TABLE 2.• Rank ordering of reasons for neglect of roof fall hazards, according

to percentage of persons expressing agreement

Total Strongly Agree Slightly Slightly Disagree Strongly

agree agree agree disagree agree

responses

A-8. They do not take enough

time to look for roof problems................ 80.7 11.4 55.0 14.3 5.0 14.3 0.0

A-7. They do not realize how

dangerous roof problems really are......... 68.4 13.7 43.2 11.5 2.9 20.9 7.9

A-4. They dislike doing the

type of work necessary to

correct the problem................................. 57.7 8.1 31.1 18.5 5.2 33.3 3.7

A-2. They feel it is someone

else's responsibility................................ 51.5 9.2 32.4 9.9 10.6 31.7 6.3

A-I. They do not have the

tools or materials to

correct the problem................................. 51.0 7.1 32.6 11.3 7.8 32.6 8.5

A-3. They do not want to

risk getting hurt. ....................................47.9 5.0 25.0 17.9 6.4 40.0 5.7

A-6. They do not know how

to correct the roof problem..................... 36.5 2.9 20.7 12.9 5.7 45.7 12.1

A-5. They believe that their

section supervisor thinks that

taking care of roof problems is

unimportant. ............................................ 11.3 0.7 7.8 2.8 2.8 56.7 29.1

quickly understand the general results of the data without

having to perfonn additional calculations.

With the exception of statement A.5, a significant number of miners agreed that each of the factors listed in this

section are important deterrents to the prevention of groundfall accidents. This suggests that further attention should be

given to devising better ways to lessen the influence of these

seven barriers.

WALKING BENEATH UNSUPPORTED

ROOF

The victims of roof falls are often found in areas of

unsupported roof. MSHA fatality reports indicate that more

than half of the 97 deaths due to groundfalls in coal mines

during 1979 and 1980 occurred in areas of unsupported roof.

This series of questions were directed toward better defining

the reasons why miners fail to avoid unsupported roof, how

many miners go beneath unsupported roof, and how often.

Reasons for Going Beneath Unsupported

Roof

MSHA roof and rib inspectors were asked what motivates miners to illegally go beneath unsupported roof(theonly

legally pennissible reason for going beneath unsupported roof

is to set temporary supports before installing permanent

supports). The most common reply to this question was that

miners do it to save time and/or effort; i.e., they want to take

a shortcut.

Inspectors mentioned several factors that sometimes

contribute to miner willingness to risk working beneath unsupported roof. Among them are the following:

They are in a hurry to get more coal out, especially ifthey

think they are behind.

They want to cut down the walking distance to a place

they need to go.

They think that the unsupported roof looks good.
35

TABLE 4.· Estimates of the frequency with which

someone In a typical crew of miners goes beneath

unsupported roof

They do it inadvertently.

They have done it before without getting hurt.

They are unwilling to set temporary supports.

In order to fmish loading a shuttle car, continuous miner

operators might go a little beyond the edge of properly

supported roof.

Participant

estimates

Frequency of

estimates

Frequency,

pet

Proportion of Miners Going Beneath

Unsupported Roof

At least once

per shift. . 48 43.6

In orderto roughlyestimate the proportion ofminers who

go beneath unsupported roof, miners were asked, "During a

typical month, what percent ofminers who work at the face go

beneath unsupported rooffor reasons other than to set temporary supports?" Miners' responses to this question are given

in table 3. The median of the estimates for the percentage of

miners who go beneath unsupported roof during a typical

month was 10 pet. This means that half ofthe estimates were

greaterthan 10 pet and halfthe estimates were lessthan 10 pet.

This suggests that the percent ofminers going beneath unsupported roof is relatively low.

In order to estimate the frequency with which miners go

beneath unsupported roof, miners were asked, "Considering a

typical crew of miners who work at the face, how often does

someone go beneath unsupported roof for reasons other than

to set temporary supports?" Miners' responses to this questionare listed in table 4. Forty-four percentindicated that they

believed that someone goes beneath unsupported roof at least

once per shift!

Twenty-five percent indicated that they believed that

someone goes beneath unsupported roof at least once per

week but not as often as once per shift.

TABLE 3.· Estimates of the percentage of miners who

go beneath unsupported roof during a typical month

Open-Ended Questions

EFFECT OF VARIOUS CHANGES ON

PREVENTING GROUNDFALL ACCIDENTS

Each participant was initially asked to respond to an

open-ended question on this topic. This question was followed by nine forced-choice questions.

25.4

16.4

14.6

Total. 110 100.0

Less than once per month 18

At least once per week

but less often than once

every shift 28

At least once per month

but less often than once

every week 16

These estimates suggest that going beneath unsupported

roofis not an uncommon event in a typical mining crew, and,

that more attention should be given to preventing miners from

engaging in this practice. In conjunction with the data from

table 3, these estimates suggest that (1) few miners are going

beneath unsupported roof, but, (2) those who are going beneath unsupported roof are doing it rather often.

Frequency of Frequency, pet

estimates

Participant

estimates, pet

0 34 27.2

1 9 7.2

2 8 6.4

5 9 7.2

9 1 .8

10 21 16.8

15 2 1.6

20 7 5.6

25 7 5.6

30 4 3.2

35 2 1.6

50 13 10.4

60 1 .8

75 2 1.6

80 2 1.6

90 2 1.6

100 .:..:.:...:-.=--1 .8 _

Total 125 100.0

Miners were asked for their opinions about what should

be done to reduce the number ofrock fall accidents in the coal

industry.

Theirreplies and (in parentheses) number ofrespondents

wereBetter training (19)

Inspect the roof more often (14)

Don't make entries too wide (7)

Drill test holes more frequently and deeper (7)

Always set temporary supports before walking beyond

bolts (7)

Put more emphasis on the dangerousness of groundfall

accidents (7)

Follow the roof control plan/bolting

pattern more closely (6)
36

Use more of the automated temporary roof support

(ATRS) type bolter (5)

Recheck existing supports more often (5)

Add more supports to bad areas (5)

Stricter supervision (4)

Use more bolts (4)

Use longer bolts (4)

Don't rush (4)

Put less emphasis on production (3)

Scale the roof better (2)

Check the torque on roof bolts more often (2)

Sound the roof more often (2)

More safety talks (2)

Other responses included putting canopies on roof

bolters, operating equipment by remote control, offering

bonuses for good roof support, installing roof supports more

quickly after the area is mined, installing bolts closerto the rib,

encouraging communication between miners about the existence of new roof problems, and explaining some of the

theoretical principles behind roof support.

MSHA inspectors were also asked what they thought

needs to be done to prevent more rooffall accidents in the coal

industry. The most common response was that the use of

ATRS systems on bolters should be mandatory. Such systems

are expected to significantly reduce the amount oftime miners

spend beneath unsupported roof. Other responses include

Use remote sensing devices to check for gas at the face.

Do not assign inexperienced crews to perform retreat

mining.

Encourage continuous miner operators to report roof

problems to bolters.

Avoid letting sections stand idle during pillar recovery.

Ensure closer compliance with the roof control plan and

other safety rules.

Improve training.

With regard to the improvement of training, inspectors

recommended the following:

Supplement classroom training with structured on-thejob training in roofcontrol and the identification ofgroundfall

hazards.

Explain the theoretical principles of roof support to

bolters in laymen's terms.

Limit the size of training classes to encourage more discussion.

Increase miner awareness of the consequences of roof

falls by showing slides of roof fall accidents and relating the

details of how people have been injured by them.

MSHA inspectors were asked two questions regarding

the identification of groundfall hazards. They were asked to

list the types of cues that can warn miners that a piece or an

area of the roof is about to fall, and then to choose which of

these warning signals would be most difficult for inexperienced miners to recognize as an indicator of danger. The

following visual cues were mentioned:

Cracked, bent or broken support posts.

Cracks, gaps, slips, cutters, and clay veins in the roof and

rib.

Heaving of the floor.

Loose rock lying on the floor.

The absence of rock dust on previously dusted surfaces.

Bent plates around bolts.

Cracked, bent, broken or squeezed cap blocks, crossbars

or cribs.

Sags in the middle of the roof or crossbars.

Reduction in the clearance between tops of equipment

and the roof over time.

Dust trickling down from the roof.

Water seeping out of roof bolt holes.

Kettle bottoms and other fossils.

The following auditory cues were mentioned:

Sounds associated with sounding the roof.

Noise caused by shiftsin the stress distribution on various

layers of rock, i.e., when the roof is working.

Cracking of wooden supports due to stress concentrations.

Pinging noises from roof bolts caused by increased roof

loading.

It was noted that roof bolter operators receive several

types of cues about the stability of the roof when drilling bolt

holes. It was also noted that these warning signals are not

universal, but may vary with the type of coal seam and

geological conditions.

Responses to the question, "Which types of warning

signals are more difficult for inexperienced miners to recognize than miners with several years of experience?" include

the following: clay veins, cutters, sloughing of the ribs,

cracking or heaving of the floor, the presence of sandstone

channels, and the pinging noises produced by bolts.

Forced-Choice Questions

Miners were asked to indicate the degree to which various

changes would help miners avoid rock fall injuries. The

changes were

1. Better lighting.

2. Less noise.

3. Supervisor putting greater emphasis on correcting

roof hazards.

4. Better training in the identification of roof hazards.

5. Better training in proper methods of supporting the

roof.
6. Reprimanding or penalizing those who repeatedly go

beneath unsupported roof.

7. Better scaling of the roof.

8. Adding more support to bad areas of the roof.

9. Better installation ofroof bolts.

A six-pointrating scale ranging from a very small degree

to a very large degree was used to respond to each statement.

The rating scale contained the following options:

A very small degree

A small degree

A somewhat small degree

A somewhat large degree

A large degree

A very large degree

Each of nine items were inserted into the blank as the

following statement was read: To what degree would

___help miners avoid rock fall injuries? The percent of

miners who chose each point on the rating scale is presented

in table 5. The first column of numbers indicates the percent

37

ofparticipants who chose a large degree or a very large degree

to answer the question.

Table 5 rank orders the nine statements in this section in

tenns of the highest to lowest percent of persons who responded to the questions with large or very large. In order of

descending rank, the top three items are adding more support

to bad areas of the roof, better training in proper methods of

supporting the roof, and better training in the identification of

roof hazards. Except for better lighting, the majority of the

miners indicated that all the proposed changes would help

miners avoid rock fall injuries to a large or very large degree.

(The corresponding percentage for betterlighting was 44 pet.)

These data suggest that, because of their perceived importance in reducing rock fall injuries, further consideration

should be given to the possibility of implementing all of the

nine changes proposed in this section.

ItemsB-l, B-2, B-7, B-8,andB-9 allreferto changing the

physical work environment, whereas items B-3, B-4, B-5, and

B-6 all refer to changes in miner training and supervision.

Note that there is a tendency for the percentages ofresponses

in the large or very large degree categories to be higher for the

proposed changes in training and supervision than for the

proposed changes in the physical work environment.

TABLE 5.• Rank ordering of questions about degree to which various changes would help miners to avoid rock fall

Injuries, according to percentage of persons who chose large or very large degree responses

Reason Large or Very Small Somewhat Somewhat Large Very large

very large small small large

B-8. Adding more support

to bad areas of the roof. ............... 78.9 3.0 5.3 3.8 9.0 39.8 39.1

B-5. Better training in proper

methods of supporting the roof. .... 69.2 2.3 11.3 3.0 14.3 43.6 25.6

B-4. Better training in the

identification of roof hazards........ 68.4 3.0 6.0 6.8 15.8 45.1 23.3

B-6. Reprimanding or penalizing

those who repeatedly go beneath

unsupported roof. .......................... 60.0 10.4 14.8 5.2 9.6 28.9 31.1

B-7. Better scaling of the roof ..... 56.7 2.2 17.2 8.2 15.7 37.3 19.4

B-3. Supervisor putting greater

emphasis on correcting roof

hazards .......................................... 56.3 6.7 15.6 4.4 17.0 37.8 18.5

B-2. Less noise ............................ 56.0 7.5 19.4 6.0 11.2 38.1 17.9

B-9. Better installation of

roof bolts ....................................... 53.1 6.1 25.8 5.3 9.8 25.8 27.3

B-1. Better lighting ......................44.0 14.2 26.9 9.7 5.2 30.6 13.4
38

MINER EXPERIENCES WITH ROCK FALLS

The miners interviewed for this study were asked to

provide infonnation about their recent experiences with rock

falls that is not typically collected by MSHA. Miners were

asked for detailed infonnation about eitherrecent injuries that

they had suffered as a result ofa rock fall, orincidentsin which

they were startled because of their close proximity to large

pieces of falling rock.

Miner responses indicate that unplanned rock falls in

underground coal mines are a somewhat common event. Of

the 143minersinterviewed forthisstudy, 88 reported that they

had either been injured or startled by a rock fall at least one

time during the past year. Eighty-one percent of those who

reported that they had been recently startled by large pieces of

falling rock said thatsuch an incident had happened more than

once within the past year. The median of the answers was

three times. Sixty-five percentofthe miners who reported that

they had recently suffered an injury caused by a groundfall

said that they had been near the location of the rock fall for

only a few minutes prior to the accident. This suggests that

most rock fall accidents could be avoided if miners would

always check the roof before beginning to work in a new area.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The data collected for this study suggest that most people

who work underground agree that the factors listed in figure

1 are significant barriers to coal miner prevention of groundfall accidents. The evidence supporting this assertion is

reviewed in the following sections.

INABILITY TO RECOGNIZE

GROUNDFALLHAZARDS

The reasons for an individual's inability to recognize

groundfall hazards may be an attribute of the person or of the

environment. Data supporting the importance of this set of

factors comes from miners' responses to questions B-1, B-2,

and B-4 (table 5). Forty-four percent said that better lighting

would help miners avoid rock fall injuries to a large or very

large degree. This implies that miners may often fail to

recognize hazardous roofconditions because the illumination

is not good enough to be able to detect them. Fifty-six percent

said that less noise would help miners to a large or very large

degree. This implies that there may often be too much noise

for miners to hear sounds that could warn them that a hazardous roof condition exists. Sixty-eight percent said that better

training in the identification of roof hazards would help

miners to a large or very large degree. This suggests that

miners sometimes fail to recognize certain types of hazardous

roof conditions because they are not aware that these roof

conditions should be considered hazardous.

INABILITY TO CORRECT GROUNDFALL

HAZARDS

Data supporting the importance of this set of factors

comes from miners responses to questions A-I and A-6 (table

2) and B-6 (table 5). Fifty-one percent agreed that one of the

main reasons that miners sometimes neglect correcting roof

hazards is because they do not have the tools or materials with

them that are needed to fix the roof problem. Thirty-seven

percent agreed that one of the main reasons that miners

sometimes neglect correcting roof hazards is because they do

not know how to correct roof problems. This suggests that

miners sometimes fail to correct certain types of hazardous

roof problems because they have neverlearned how to correct

them. Sixty-nine percent said that better training in proper

methods ofsupporting the roof would help miners avoid rock

fall injuries to a large or very large degree.

LACK OF MOTIVATION TO SEARCH FOR

GROUNDFALLHAZARDS

Data supporting the importance of this set of factors

comes from miner responses to questions A-8, A-7 (table 2)

and B-3 (table 5). Eighty-one percent agreed that one of the

main reasons that miners sometimes neglect correcting roof

hazards is because they do not take enough time to look for

roof problems. One reason that miners might not take enough

time to look for roof problems is that they do not realize how

dangerous roof problems really are. In response to question

A-7, 68.4 pet agreed that one of the main reasons that miners

sometimes neglect correcting roof hazards is because they do

not realize how dangerous roof problems really are. Another

reason that miners might not take enough time to look for roof

problems is that they do not think that their supervisor wants

them to devote much time to this activity. In response to

question B-3, 56 pet indicated thatsupervisors putting greater

emphasis on correcting roof hazards would help miners avoid

rock fall injuries to a large or very large degree.

LACK OF MOTIVATION TO CORRECT

GROUNDFALLHAZARDS

Data supporting the importance of five types of factors

within this category come from miners' responses to questions A-2, A-3, A-4, and A-7 (table 2) and B-3 (table 5). Fiftytwo percent agreed that one of the main reasons that miners
sometimes neglect correcting roof hazards is because they

think that it is someone else's responsibility to take care of

roofproblems. Forty-eightpercent agreed that one ofthe main

reasons that miners sometimes neglect correcting roof hazards is because they do not want to risk getting hurt while

fixing the roof. Fifty-eight percent agreed that one ofthe main

reasons that miners sometimes neglect correcting roof hazards is because they dislike doing the type of work necessary

to correct the roof problem. Sixty-eight percent agreed that

one of the main reasons that miners sometimes neglect correcting roof hazards is because they do not realize how

dangerous roof problems really are. Fifty-six percent indicated that supervisors putting greater emphasis on correcting

roof hazards would help miners avoid rock fall injuries to a

large or very large degree.

PREVENTING GROUNDFALL ACCIDENTS

When asked about what should be done to reduce the

number ofrock fall accidents in the coal industry, both miners

and inspectors frequently cited the need for better training in

this area. Several otherstrategies for improving training were

also suggested.

A significant number of miners agreed that each of the

changes proposed in statements B-1 through B-9 (table 5)

would significantly help miners to avoid rock fall injuries.

The three highest ranked changes were adding more support

to bad areas of the roof, better training in proper methods of

supporting the roof, and better training in the identification of

roof hazards.

RECOMMENDATION TO COLLECT

SURVEY INFORMATION

In order to formulate a good strategy for preventing roof

and rib falls at a particular mine site, one needs to get an

accurate diagnosis of the types of barriers that people are

facing at that mine. Barriers that are quite significant in some

mines are not at all a problem in other mines. Therefore, mine

STo obtain copies of any of these materials, write to: National

Mine Health and Safety Academy, Business Office, P.O. Box 1166,

Beckley, WV 25802-1166. Ifyou have any questions concerning the

survey guide's use, contact the training specialist at the MSHA office

in your district.

39

safety and training professionals should consider collecting

survey information from the people who work at their mine to

fmd out which barriers need to be overcome. The people who

work underground every day are in the best position to help

diagnose which barriers are the most troublesome, and they

may also have some very good ideas about how these barriers

can be overcome.

The Bureau of Mines has developed a detailed survey

guide for collecting information about miner beliefs concerning the causes and prevention of roof and rib fall accidents.

This guide contains a set ofsurvey forms, and a set of detailed

instructions about how to use these forms to conduct one's

own survey. The survey requires approximately 30 min for

participants to complete, and is designed for collecting information from groups of miners in a classroom setting (e.g., as

part of annual refresher training).

The information one obtains from this survey can be used

for a variety of purposes. The survey results can be used by

trainers to help them determine the adequacy of the training

they are giving miners on the prevention of roof and rib fall

accidents, and how they might make improvements to this

material. The survey results can be used in subsequent

training sessions as an excellent source of material for group

discussions. The survey results can also be used to help

formulate recommendations to mine managers about what

should be done (in addition to training) to prevent roof and rib

fall accidents.

MSHA has assembled a set of materials to assist those

interested in finding out how to collect survey information

concerning roofand rib fall accidents from the miners at one's

own mine site. These materials include:5

1. A survey guide that containssurvey forms and detailed

instructions about how to use these forms to conduct a survey

of one's own miners.

2. A Bureau of Mines Information Circular that presents

substantially more information about groundfall accidents

than could be covered in this paper.

3. A 20 min videotape presentation of the research

findings contained in this paper.
40

BLASTERS TRAINING MANUAL FOR METAL-NONMETAL MINERS

By Michael A. Peltier,· Larry R. Fletcher,2 and Richard A. DickJ

ABSTRACT

The Bureau of Mines has developed blasters training material for the metal-nonmetal mining

industry. The material is divided into 6 chapters and 47 modules, with each module covering a single

topic. For example, the second chapter, which covers initiation and priming, is subdivided into nine

modules. There is a module covering initiations systems in general, another module covering delay

series, and one discussing priming. The remaining six modules deal with each of the six initiation

systems.

The modules were structured to enable the mine training personnel to easily develop a site-specific

blasters training program. Each module contains text material that comprehensively covers the topic,

as well as a paraphrased section highlighting the major ideas of the text. Also included with each

module are line drawings and test questions with answers.

The objective of this material is to increase hazard awareness and foster the use of safe blasting

practices with the anticipated end result being accident-free and productive blasting.

INTRODUCTION

Based on accident data obtained from the Mine Safety

and HealthAdministration (MSHA), most blasting accidents

are caused by human error, lack of hazard awareness, or lack

of general blasting knowledge.A lack of understanding as to

how explosives function can contribute to highermining costs

because of inadequate fragmentation or lost production.

Federal regulationsrequire that every person who uses or

handles explosive materials shall be experienced and understand the hazards involved. Trainees shall do such work only

under the supervision of and in the immediate presence of

experienced miners. Federal regulations also require hazard

and task training for miners. Most training given on mining

IMining engineer.

2Mining engineering technician.

3Staff engineer.

Twin Cities Research Center, Bureau of Mines, Minneapolis, MN.

property is based on experience at that mine and is done

without the aid of adequate training materials. An improved

and more meaningful blasters training program is essential in

assisting operators to properly train blasters and meet MSHA

training regulations.

The blasterstraining material was developed to aid industry in the preparation of a site-specific training course, and is

based on a previous Bureau report. 4 It is the intent of the

blasters training material to help the individual using explosives and blasting agents to develop a better understanding of

the various aspects of blasting that contribute to a safe and

efficient blast.

4Dick, R. A., L. R. Fletcher, and D. V. D'Andrea. Explosives and

Blasting Procedures Manual. BuMines IC 8925, 1983, 105 pp.
41

PREPARING A TRAINING COURSE

The blasters training materials have been developed to be

easily constructed into a site-specific and comprehensive

blasters course. The material consists ofdiscrete modules that

contain text material, a paraphrased section, line drawings,

and test questions with answers.

Individual pages have been divided vertically with the

comprehensive text material on the left-hand side ofthe page.

Each paragraph of the text material is numbered for quick

reference. The right-hand side of the page consists of paraphrased text material with a main heading and a paragraph

number. Theperson preparing the training course can read the

paraphrased material quickly in order to grasp the main ideas

ofthe text material. If an explanation is needed, the individual, by noting the paragraph number, can go directly to the

paragraph that discusses a particular point.

Line drawings are included with the material to help illustrate specific concepts. The line drawings can be easily

converted to overhead transparencies for use in the training

course.

The first step in preparing a blasters training course is to

detennine what material mustbe covered. This can beaccomplished by talking with the blasting supervisor and blasters,

and by observing the blasting operation. To help determine

what topics need to be covered in the course, a checklist is

included with the material. The checklist is arranged to

parallel the chapters. By completing the checklist the trainer

will be able to locate the modules to be included in the course.

For example, under the "Chapter One--Explosives Products" section ofthe checklist, ifANFO and emulsion are noted

next to the subsection "Blasting Agents," by reading the list of

modulesin the table ofcontents under the "ChapterOne-Explosives Products" section, the trainer will notice that module

4 discusses ANFO and module 5 discusses emulsions.

The second step is to gather the training material needed.

The infonnation gathered from the blasting personnel through

the use ofthe checklist will indicate which modules should be

included in the course. In addition to the modular material,

slides and other visual aids from the actual operation should

be used. Additional technical information concerning specific blasting products can be obtained from either the explosives supplier or manufacturer.

The third step is to write lesson plans for the course and

arrange the training material into a cohesive unit. The writing

ofthe lesson plans can be simplified by making extensive use

ofthe paraphrased section in the modules.

Since the experience, knowledge, and ability of individual

blasters vary widely, both the length and amount of material

to be included in the course will have to be determined by mine

management.

CHAPTER CONTENTS

CHAPTER ONE-EXPLOSIVES

PRODUCTS

Purpose and Descrjption

The purpose ofthis chapter is to help the blaster develop an

understanding of various types of explosives. Chemical and

physical properties of seven types of explosive products are

discussed. Additional information explaining nine properties

of explosives, used to determine how an explosive product

will function under field conditions, is also covered. Material

explaining how to select an explosive product is included in

this chapter.

Objectives

Upon completion of this chapter, the blaster should be able

to--

1. Give a concise explanation of the nature of various

explosive products;

2. List the basic reactive ingredients of an explosive product;

3. Explain how the detonation pressure and explosive

pressure cause the rock to be broken;

4. Explain the importance ofoxygen balance as itrelates to

both the energy released and to the formation of toxic gases;

5. Describe the individual characteristics of the explosive

products the blaster may be using;

6. Briefly explain why a particular product is being used at

his or her operation;

7. State and explain nine basic properties of explosive

products; and

8. Relate the basic properties of explosives with the types

of explosive products being used on the job.

Chapter Modules

1. Chemistry and Physics of Explosives

2. Types of Explosives and Blasting Agents

3. Nitroglycerin-Based High Explosives

4. Ammonium Nitrate-Fuel Oil (ANFO)

5. Slurries, Water-Gels, Emulsions

6. Heavy ANFO

7. Primers and Boosters

8. Liquid Oxygen Explosives

9. Black Powder

10. Properties of Explosives

11: Explosives Selection Criteria
42

CHAPTER TWO-INITIATION

AND PRIMING

Purpose and Description

The purpose ofthis chapter is to help the blaster develop an

understanding ofsix initiation systems. The blaster willieam

the various components of each initiation system, how the

individual system functions, and the advantages and disadvantages of the six systems. Information about the two basic

delay series and material concerning priming is also included

in this chapter.

Objectives

Upon completion ofthis chapter, the blaster should be able

to---

1. Name the three ba~ic parts of an initiation system;

2. Explain the difference between high explosives and

blasting agents as to their sensitivity to initiation;

3. State the difference between an instantaneous and a

delay detonator;

4. List the various components ofthe initiation system he

or she will be using;

5. Explain how the initiation system functions;

6. Explain how to check the final hookup of the system;

7. Discuss the potential hazards to the initiation system;

8. Give the definition of a primer;

9. Name some types of explosives used as primers;

10. Explain the proper procedure for making primers;

11. Explain why the proper location of the primer in the

borehole is important.

Chapter Modules

12. Initiation Systems

13. Delay Series

14. Electric Initiation

15. Detonating Cord Initiation

16. Detaline Initiation System

17. Cap-and-Fuse Initiation

18. Hercudet Initiation

19. Nonel Initiation

20. Priming

CHAPTER THREE-BLASTHOLE

LOADING

Purpose and Description

The purpose of this chapter is to examine proper biasthole

loading techniques. The chapter discussesloading procedures

for both small- and large-diameter blastholes. Also included

in the chapter is material that not only discusses how to check

blastholesfor proper depth, water, voids, and obstructions, but

how to mitigate these problems.

Objectives

Upon completion of this chapter, the blaster should be able

lo1. Explain why blastholes should never be loaded and why

workersshould retreat from the blast area during the approach

or progress of an electrical storm;

2. Describe how to check the borehole for proper depth.

obstructions, water, and voids;

3. Explain how to remedy problems, such as, improper

borehole depth, obstructions, water, and voids;

4. State why stemming is important and how to estimate

the amount of stemming needed;

5. Explain when plastic borehole liners or water-resistant

cartridges should be used;

6. Explain proper technique for loading the explosive or

blasting agent he or she will be using;

7. Describe the characteristics of the type of pneumatic

loading he or she will use;

8. Explain the potential problem ofstatic electricity ifhe or

she is going to use a pneumatic loader; and

9. List the advantages and disadvantages of using bulkloaded products in large-diameter biastholes.

Chapter Modules

21. Introduction

22. Checking the Blasthole

23. General Loading Procedures

24. Small-Diameter Blastholes

25. Large-Diameter Blastholes

CHAPTER FOUR-BLAST

DESIGN

Purpose and Description

The purpose of this chapter is to examine the factors that

influence safe and effective blast design. In addition to the

discussion of design factors for surface and underground

blasting, four controlled blasting techniques are also covered.

Objectives

Upon completion of this chapter, the blaster should be able

to---

1. Discuss how geology affects fragmentation;

2. Name the most significant geologic features to consider when designing a blast;

3. Discuss the importance of a well-detailed drilling log;

4. Explain how to determine the burden;

5. Explain why geologic structure is the major factor in

determining blasthole diameter;

6. Explain how collar distance affects fragmentation size;
7. Explain the relationship of collar distance to airblast

and flyrock;

8. Explain the relationship between burden flexing and

rock fragmentation;

9. Discuss the problem with either excessive or insufficient subdrilling;

10. Explain how spacing is detennined;

11. Explain the advantages of millisecond delays;

12. Discuss two classifications of opening cuts;

13. Explain how to design an angled cut;

14. Explain how to design a parallel hole cut;

15. Discuss the two types of delays for underground blasting;

16. Name the two main advantages of using controlled

blasting;

17. List the four primary methods of controlled blasting;

and

18. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the various methods of controlled blasting.

Chapter Modules

26. Introduction to Blast Design

27. Properties and Geology of the Rock Mass

28. Surface Blasting

29. Underground Blasting

30. Controlled Blasting Techniques

CHAPTER FIVE-ENVIRONMENTAL

EFFECTS OF BLASTING

Purpose and Description

The purpose of this chapter is to examine the environmental effects of blasting. The material will discuss flyrock,

ground vibrations, airblast, and dust and gases. Methods to

reduce the potential healthand safety hazards they may present will be discussed.

Objectives

Upon completion ofthis chapter, the blaster should be able

to1. Explain the importance of conducting a preblast survey, maintaining comprehensive records, and good public

relations;

2. Discuss the causes of flyrock;

3. Discuss methods to alleviate flyrock;

4. Discuss the causes of ground vibration;

5. Discuss design techniques to minimize vibrations;

6. State some methods to monitor ground vibrations;

7. Discuss the causes of airblast;

8. Discuss methods to monitor airblast;

9. List techniques to reduce airblast;

43

10. Explain why an adequate amount oftime must be given

for dust and gases to be diluted before returning to the blast

site; and

11. List the two common toxic gases produced by blasting

and list techniques to reduce them.

Chapter Modules

31. Introduction to Environmental Effects of Blasting

32. Ayrock

33. Ground Vibrations

34. Airblast

35. Dust and Gases

CHAPTER SIXBLASTING SAFETY

Pumose and Description

The purpose of this chapter is to help the blaster develop

a better understanding ofblasting safety. This will be accomplished by examining a number of auxiliary blasting functions. A number of precautions related to previous modules

are mentioned. Four accident types that occur frequently are

also discussed.

Objectives

Upon completion of this chapter, the blaster should be able

lo1. Explain why a knowledge of all current blasting safety

regulations is important;

2. Name the agencies that regulate and enforce the use

and storage of explosives and blasting agents;

3. Describe the requirements for vehicles used to transport explosives and blasting agents from the magazine to L'1e

job site;

4. Explain the importance of marking the blast area, and

keeping nonessential personnel away;

5. Explain when to check for extraneous electricity;

6. Discuss why electrical storms are a hazard regardless

of the type of initiation system;

7. Explain the importance of proper primer makeup;

8. List a number of checks to be made before borehole

loading begins;

9. Describe various methods to check column rise during

borehole loading;

10. Describe some precautions to consider before and during the hookups;

11. Explain some good methods for blast area security;

12. Describe the potential hazards to check for when reentering the blast site after the shot has been fired;

13. Discuss methods for disposing of misfires; and

14. Discuss the principal causes of blasting accidents.
44

Chapter Modules

36. Introduction to Blasting Safety

37. Explosives Storage

38. Transportation From Magazine to Job Site

39. Precautions Before Loading

40. Primer Safety

41. Borehole Loading

42. Hooking Up the Shot

43. Shot Firing

44. Postshot Safety

45. Disposing of Misfires

46. Disposal of Explosive Materials

47. Principal Causes of Blasting Accidents

SUMMARY

Training material for metal and nonmetal mining has been

developed by the Bureau. This program consists of 47 modules or topics under 6 major headings (chapters). The modules consist ofa text and outline on a single blasting topic plus

questions and answers. Supplementing the modules are a 73-

item bibliography, a list of regulatory authorities and their

responsibilities, additional information on MSHA and Office

of Surface Mining, Reclamation and Enforcement, glossary,

and 65 illustrations suitable for duplication and use as overhead transparancies.

Developed material will soon be available through

MSHA's National Mine Health and Safety Academy, Beckley, WV.
45

OPERATIONS-BASED TRAINING STRATEGY FOR LONGWALL MINING

By R. Larry Grayson,l Michael J. Klishis,t

Ronald C. Althouse,l and George M. Lies2

ABSTRACT

A system that can be used to pinpoint the specific training needs of operations and assist in the

design and upgrading offocused training approaches can benefit longwall mining. It can be directed

at systematically correcting performance discrepancies at an individual, crew, or mine level, and also

to challenge workers and management toward attaining improved performances. Such an approach

involves a combination of features, such as diligence in monitoring and evaluating performances,

thorough coordination in implementing changes, and effective use of operational data.

The Bureau of Mines, through contract with the Mining Extension Service of West Virginia

University, has developed such a system, the training in operations program (TOP), that combines

these features and ties longwall training directly to operational performance requirements.

The TOP provides a practical five·step system for managers to implement a focused training

program that coincides with longwall productivity and efficiency goals. The system permits management to plan, organize, and schedule task training, cross training, and specialized longwall skills

training of regular crews and backup personnel.

INTRODUCTION

Managers in the coal industry often wish they had a foolproof system for managing operational performance and

managers in safety, training, and operations would like a

system for upgrading training to match operational needs. A

practical approach for managing operations and upgrading

worker skills involves a combination of features, such as

diligence in monitoring and evaluating performances, thorough coordination in implementing changes, and effective

use of operational data.

The training in operations program (TOP) is a management system that combines these features so that managers

can plan, organize, and direct longwall training efforts. It is

an operations-based strategy that ties longwall training directly to operational performance requirements and guides

management step-by-step in using operational data for improving safety and efficiency through training.

In a manner similar to the way management seeks to

allocate and use human, technical, and support resources for

more efficient longwall operations, this approach:

I Assistant professor.

2Curriculum designer.

Mining Extension Service, West Virginia University,

Morgantown, WV.

1. Provides an operator with an organized way to plan

and execute training for developing proficient workers and for

improving work practices on the longwall face,

2. Introduces guidelines and schedules for training of

longwall workers and workersfrom different areas ofthe mine

who are often reassigned to nonroutine tasks, and

3. Establishes operational performance criteria that

guide the training of workers assigned to longwall panels and

allow for timely evaluation of their individual performances.

This approach can benefit longwall operators threefold.

First, it incorporates a problem-solving method for assisting

management in pinpointing trainable operational concerns.

Second, it helps managers make better use of training resources for upgrading and maintaining worker skills in a

systematic way. Last, it emphasizes collection and analysis of

data for assessing the impact of training on operational performances.
46

TRAINING IN OPERATIONS PROGRAM: A METHODOLOGY

The Mining Extension Service ofWest Virginia University, under contract with the Bureau of Mines, developed the

concept for the TOP on the basis of an I8-month assessment

of training needs in longwall mining.

This operations-based training concept fits the traditional mine management system for controlling operational

performances, but it directs managers in using operational

data for improving worker proficiency and, hence, reducing

downtime and accidents.

The model (fig. 1) consists of a five-step methodology

that guides managers in developing a specific training strategy for resolving operational areas of concern.

The five steps, which will be described in more detail,

are1 Developing a training strategy.

2. Planning the training program.

3. Scheduling and executing training.

4. Evaluating impact of training on operations.

5. Obtaining feedback and adjusting training strategies.

Through this process, TOP provides a practical way for

managers to maintain compatibility between training and

operations and to implement training according to established

company policy, particular on-the-job training (OJT) practices, and operational timetables. Also, this system permits

management to plan, organize, and schedule task training,

crosstraining, and specialized skills training of longwall

crews and otherworkers who are assigned intermittently to

longwall tasks.

The model can direct management in making the best use

of current longwall training options (Harold ill,3Jackson (2),

Sprouls Q), and Riddell and Savage G). Also, it can help

longwall operators bridge the gap between initial training by

the manufacturer of the longwall equipment, which extends

from installation of equipment and the first few weeks of

operations, and task training or annual refresher training,

which may meet the coal operator's cross-training requirements.

Develop I+- training strategy

"

r----. Plan the training I+- in operations program (TOP)

" Schedule training

and execute TOP I+-

l'

Evaluate impact of training

on operations and achieving I+-

objectives

.,

Obtain feedback.

Make adjustments in TOP

and/or operations

FIGURE 1.-Training in operations program (TOP) model.

TOP AND OPERATIONS-BASED DATA MANAGEMENT

As a systematic approach to longwall training, the TOP

involves the use of operational data and related information

for training purposes. Analysis ofsuch data can help managers pinpoint real training needs and project operational benefits. With this strategy, mine management can also capitalize

on existing knowledge and experience-often lost with informal training-and adjust training plans to meet operational

demands.

The program organizes pertinentoperational information

according to three facets of longwall mining:

3Underlined numbers in parentheses refer to items in the list of

references preceeding the appendix at the end of this paper.

1. Work practices that often change according to the

requirements of a system's technology and equipment modifications; panel design and dimensions, and mining or physical conditions.

2. Work (shift) organization that depends on the amount

of time used for performance of production-related tasks,

nonroutine tasks associated with downtime, and tasks required for servicing and maintenance of equipment.

3. Workforce requirements that derive from staffing and

crew configuration, demographic trends of longwall crews,

and the general or specialized training needs of machine

operators and selected workers.
The three facets of longwall mining provide a useful

framework for organizing data and infonnation that affect

longwall training. Each facet consists of several factors that

influence both the content oftraining and the level ofperfonnance.

LONGWALL WORK PRACTICES

Work practices may vary widely according to technology. panel dimensions. and face conditions. although longwall operators have sought to standardize operational procedures over the years. Mine operators generally prefer a

double-ended ranging drum shearer and shields for their

longwall systems (table 1). This type of installation now

accounts for nearly 85 pet of alllongwall panels operating in

1986 according to analysis ofrecent studies (Sprouls (5)).

47

Preferred work practices often change as management

makes modifications in the longwall system for safety and

efficiency. Longwall operators also tend to implement new

technology as it becomes available. phase out labor to reduce

mining costs. and usually standardize work practices as

changes are made in the system.

Longwall systems. which generally handle adverse

physical conditions betterthan other mining methods. are still

characterized by a number of common problems affecting

work practices. These areas of concern are congested walkways. which restrict movement. especially at the headgate.

flying and falling rocks. especially at shearer operator and

shield worker locations; and tight clearance for workers assigned to cleaning rock-coal spillage. transporting supplies

along the face. and perfonning nonroutine maintenance work

(especially during downtime periods).

TABLE 1 . Longwall eqUipment utilization, 1974·84

1974

Number pet

New installations

1975-77

Number pet

1978-82

Number pet

All installations operating

in 1984-85 period

Number pet

Chainless haulage:

Shield support .

Chock support .

Chain haulage:

Shield support .

Chock support .

Chainless haulage:

Shield support .

Chain haulage:

Shield support .

Frame support .

DOUBLE-ENDED RANGING SHEARER

4 8 3 20 43 88

1 2 0 NAp 0 NAp

6 12 8 53 3 6

9 18 2 13 1 2

SINGLE-DRUM RANGING SHEARER

0 0 0 NAp 0 NAp

7 14 0 NAp 1 2

1 2 0 NAp 0 NAp

SINGLE FIXED DRUM SHEARER

74

o

6

2

2

1

o

74

NAp

6

2

2

1

NAp

1 2 8 8

0 NAp 1 1

0 NAp 1 1

0 NAp 0 NAp

0 NAp 0 NAp

Chainless haulage:

Shield support .

Chain haulage:

Shield support .

Chock support .

Rope haulage:

Chock support .

Chain haulage:

Shield support .

Chock support .

Frame support .

Rope haulage

Chock support .

Frame support .

o

o

3

2

2

1

7

2

3

o

o

10

4

4

2

14

4

6

0 NAp

0 NAp

0 NAp

0 NAp

COAL PLOW

1 7

1 7

0 NAp

0 NAp

0 NAp

o

o

o

o

NAp

NAp

NAp

NAp 2 2

ALL CUTTING MACHINE SYSTEMS

Total

NAp: Not applicable

48 100 15 100 49 100 100 100
48

TABLE 2. - Overview of longwall crew responsibilities

Scope of Service- Startup2 On-shift duties End of shift

activity maintenancel Cutting time I Downtime

HEADGATE OPERATOR

Communications, Service duties, vis- Coordinates startup Coordinating role with Special duties and All shutdown tasks

coordination, trans- ual housekeeping. with shearer supervisor and shearer tasks as instructed. (except hydraulic

portation. Performs operator who gives operator. Performs all pumps), does deenerall tasks. OK and startup or- tasks. Monitors cutting gize.

Alignment done by ders. speed, communicates

a supervisor- with headgate operator

shieldman. on pass, both wavs.

SHEARER OPERATOR

Sequence ot actIVI- ServIce dunes, VIS- Coordmates with Discuss cuts with super- None. All shutdown tasks

ties coordinates ual monitoring. headgate operator visor, coordinates with (except deenergize

with many (e.g., key steps (e.g., all supervisor. Performs all shearer and powerwastartup,alignment, clear, panline, ener- tasks. Monitors cutting ter, done by headgate

deenergize shearer, gize) WIder instruc- speed, communicates operator).

hydraulic hoses, fit- tions from supervi- with headgate operator

tings). Shields pres- sor. on pass, both ways.

surized by shield

mover.

PLOW HEAD-TAIL OPERATOR

Coordinates, Usually mechanic- Coordinates startup Monitors sequence None. Coordinates shutdown

checks activities electrician or main- with supervisor and movement of panline, with supervisor, mewith many workers tenance shift. electrician-me- but not alignment, face chanic-electrician,

at the face. Runs chanic, functioning crew aligns. Methane and utility workers

face equipment. as headgate supervisor checks, re- (deenergize locally).

operator. Informa- ports to supervisor, face

tion on height- crew.

depth from supervisor, tailgate

operator, jacksetter.

SHIELDMAN-JACKSETTER

Coordmates WIth Usually, hydraulIc PreoperatIOnal du- Coordinate-coffiffiWIi- Special concerns. Communicates with

supervisor and oth- supervisor, electri- ties apply here too. cate between headgate headgate operator and

ers on face. Per- cian-mechanic, util- operator, shearer-plow shearer operator (exforms all tasks. Of- ity worker. operator, moving shields cept hydraulic pumps,

ten OK's with hy- and moving panlines electrician-mechanicdraulic supervisor (following operators). utility worker or suor mechanic, pervisor turns off

headgate operator, pumps).

electrician.

MECHANIC-ELECTRICIANJ

Special skills, Mechanic or 3d Does ongoing per- Does ongoing permissi- Performs tasks as None.

qualifications. shift maintenance missibility checks, bility checks, repairs needed or inoften does work. repairs equipment equipment (as needed). structed.

(as needed).

UTILITY WORKERS

Directed, in- As directed, may de Involved with other Assist as ordered these As directed, may Directed, instructed,

structed, assigned spot tasks (e.g., get workers. workers headgate do servicing, assigned to help head

by supervisor. Per- materials). May as- operator - shieldman housekeeping,spe- gate operator, shieldforms all tasks. As- sist servicing (e.g., tailgate operator - stage cial instructions. man, (tailgate operasists operators, sh- grease, rockdust loader operator (con- tor) (e.g., shovels,

ieldman. Performs bits). struction crew stallman). rockdusts, servicing).

housekeeping setup May relieve shieldman.

tasks. Performs tasks at all

places on face or outbv.

Ipermissibility check.

2Includes preoperational checks.

30r 3d shift maintenance
LONGWALL WORK (SHIFT)

ORGANIZATION

Productivity and costs of a longwall system are tied in

part to the efficient organization ofwork acrossshifts. The assignment oflabor on a typical shift depends on the amount of

time longwall crew members perform work related to production, downtime, and maintenance activities. Table 2 shows

the responsibility of a longwall crew across a shift.

Longwall mining requires a great deal of coordination

among workers and continuity in the performance of tasks.

Workers have to perform assigned tasks in a prescribed way

to achieve and maintain optimal operational efficiency.

During downtime periods, work activities are influenced by

the fact that the supervisor has to reassign workers and

redistribute workloads.

Mechanical breakdowns, nonmechanical delays, and

accidents can affect productivity drastically. The amount of

available cutting time, according to an analysis of recent

productivity studies (peake, (Q:1)), as shown in figure 2,

company data, as shown in figure 3, and on-site observations

ranges on the average from only 100 to 170 min per shift.

Based on productivity figures, mine operators generally

mustreassign workers a lotofthe time to nonroutine tasks and!

or maintenance work. Production periods still incur more

injuries than startup or end-of-shift periods. However,

nonroutine tasks during downtime can account for as much as

41 pet of reported longwall accidents.

49

LONGWALL PRODUCTIVITY

FIGURE 3.-Monthly summary of production and downtime

for sample longwall mine.

Equipment-related work and environmental hazards affect the longwall crew generally across a typical shift. Falls

of coal, pans-conveyors, roofsupport, and mining machinery

are common agents causing bodily injury to the longwall

miner. About 40 pet of the injuries were due to lifting, trips,

falls, or handling materials.

LONGWALL PRODUCTION

av ton per shift

94-in seam

height

1,307 tons

54-in seam

height

934 tons

45-in seam

height

.A:'/ ••71:

«{/- ......

....."... ::- ........... z ..........jl '/ .":.....:::;,~~ :.- .....

~.:•• "/, 'l. Z ~~ /.,1

Z 01 'Z 'Z '/) .....

'<I W.4 "" t'/ t'/ '/ ,,//

"<;,: t'.// '/. r/ '/

-

739 tons

KEY: Estimated

downtime

Estimated ~.".".j face time "·b"

FIGURE 2.-Average longwall production per shift by seam height, and estimated production and downtime.
50

FIGURE 4.-Longwall experience versus overall experience

in relation to nonfatal days lost (NFDL) injuries for miners in

longwall occupations, 1983-84.

company personnel from various departments can define

training strategies and choose the most appropriate optionsfor

improving operational performances.

Next, this paper uses a scenario to show how managers

can incorporate TOP into their normal decisionmaking structure and improve safety and efficiency of a longwall system

through an operations-based training strategy.

50

KEY

(J) -- Years in present occupaW tion (present experience)

0::: ,

:::> 40 - - Total years in mining ...., (total experience) Z

0

w 30 t- " o:::

',

r

0

'\ ,

"

',

,

W , \ , , ,

0::: 20 \ , \ "

\

,

LL \ , \ , 0 \

'

\ I \

'

0::: ..... ..... /

W \'

CD

•

10

:::> I

Z /

-- 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

EXPERIENCE, yr

Longwall mining is characterized by a veteran and experienced laborforce. The average age among longwall workers

studied is 35 yr and their average total mining experience is

10 yr.

A longwall crew (table 3) constitutes a relatively stable

work group that remains intact over a long period oftime (i.e.,

14 to 16 yr), spanning a series oflongwall panels and moves.

Crew sizesrange from 4 to 13 workers, down from 30 workers

on pre-1970 panels, depending on the degree of control

technology. Recent technological advancements (e.g., sensors, microprocessors) suggest that future longwall panels

may require significantly fewer face workers.

Generally, workers tend to remain on the longwall panels

in various occupations, often cross training among these jobs

and bidding on other longwall jobs but not bidding off the

longwall panel. These workers, however, experience a substantial number ofinjuries as they move from job to job on the

longwall.

A range of accidents occurs to those workers who, on the

average, have less than 5 yr experience (fig. 4) in their current

job. This suggests that a worker may have extensive longwall

experience with skillsin onejob, butmay not possessthe skills

required of a new job assignment. This pattern holds true for

all longwall workers, except mechanics, electricians, and

supervisors.

Based on an analysis of accidents reported by 34 West

Virginia mines operating 4210ngwalls in the 1983-84 period,

the cumulative lost time for reported injuries can result in a

substantial loss. Nonfatal days lost (NFDL) at mines studied

totaled 89 person-months in 1 yr and 93 person-months the

other year or about 7 to 8 employee-years or more of work

annually.

These facets oflongwall mining provide a useful way to

arrange and analyze operational data for determining specific

training responses. In using these operational indicators,

LONGWALL WORKFORCE

REQUIREMENTS

Table 3. - Demographic characteristics of longwall workers experiencing Injuries, 1983·84

Average, yr Injuries, Average lost

Age Mining Present job pet days per injury

Shear, plow operator ....................... 36 11.3 4.9 16.3 18.7

Shield, jacksetter ............................. 32 9.6 4.2 21.3 13.2

Headgate operator ........................... 38 11.0 5.1 5.8 36.0

Utility worker .................................. 36 9.2 4.2 15.9 23.4

Other labor ...................................... 33 8.5 3.0 11.6 18.7

Electrician-mechanic ...................... 36 10.6 6.1 16.3 14.0

Management-salaried ..................... 37 11.8 6.9 12.8 20.4

Average or total ................ 35 10.4 5.2 100.0 18.7
51

LONGWALL MANAGEMENT AND TRAINING

Longwall mining. as in most other mining methods. requires management to plan, organize. and control operations

through the exchange of information in both formal and

informal meetings. To allocate and use resources efficiently,

managers must deal with data and information affecting labor,

equipment, utilities, supplies, materials, and mine-specific

conditions. Much of this information, as will be shown, may

also be used and applied to develop a focused training effort

(as needed) for company personnel.

For comparison purposes, a scenario will be used here to

show the differences in using data between a traditional

management system and a management system employing

the TOP. The scenario will illustrate a problem discovered by

a manager of mines on a routine, biweekly visit to a mine's

longwall panel, which is equipped with a double-ended ranging drum shearer and two-legged shields.

First, a description ofthe problem: The manager ofmines

is observing production work along the panel, and notes that

a shield mover is having trouble with baseplates digging into

soft bottom. and that this problem. on occasion, leads to

downtime. Also, the manager discovers that the worker is not

placing crib blocks under the shields to help them stay on

bottom, and tends to keep hydraulic valves open too long

when resetting shields against the roof.

The managerlearnsfrom the longwallsupervisorthat this

particular employee is a fill-in for the regular shield worker.

that the worker had some previous experience as a fill-in for

other members of the longwall crew, and that the worker was

trained on moving shields for 2 h at the beginning ofthe shift.

The supervisor. however, acknowledges that this fill-in

worker has not mastered many of the fine points of the job.

At end of day, the manager notes that a total of 40 min of

downtime occurred because of this problem. and that the fillin shield worker was injured when a shield mashed the

worker's foot into the bottom after it slid off the baseplate of

an adjacentshield. First aid treatment and transportation from

the panel interrupted production for another 30 min.

Now. compare the approaches as managers attempt to

resolve the longwall problem.

MANAGEMENT AND INFORMAL

TRAINING

Management decisions, including both immediate and

deferred responses to a problem. may require training of

hourly orsupervisory personnel. Managers usually approach

training within the traditional decisionmaking structure. and

such training. which can be critical to cost-efficient longwall

operations, often defaults to informal or impromptu methods

(usually involving a supervisor), which often lack new information, effective communications. and guidelines for evaluation of performances.

Consider the case of the manager of mines from the

scenario above. The manager recognizes several problems.

such as costs of downtime, direct and indirect costs of accidents, and the company's practice of using partially trained

workers as fill-ins for regular longwall crew members. What

does the traditional management system offer, in the way of

information, in order to solve the dilemma? What tools are

available to help managers develop a planned, focused training effort to make operations more cost efficient?

Taking the problem back to the company's monthly

review meeting, the manager of mines has to deal with the

following:

The coal mine management system typically consists of

three levels at which managers consider data and/or information regarding mining operations:

1. Monthly Divisional or Corporate Meetin2"s.-Here

managers review operational performances, discuss costs and

productivity. determine capital and staff support of major

work requirements. and analyze operational problems that

potentially impact productivity.

Types of data and information generated for and by this

level includes comparisons between established goals and

present performance levels. labor assignment and supply

delivery schedules, equipment maintenance and utilization

plans, and other operational data (e.g., machine-panel designs, work practices).

2. Weekly Mine Plannin2" Meetin2"s.-These are designed to coordinate various work requirements among departments, to plan new jobs and weekend oridle work, follow

up on progress of projects. and to examine operational problems and determine solutions.

At this level, information reflects operational performances, which may be directed at supporting a particular

manager's position regarding a problem, costs ofmining, and

accomplishment of work according to new or revised schedules. Performance measures usually include productivity

figures, downtime hours worked on support and maintenance,

consumption of supplies, accidents and violations. and a line

item summary of mining costs.

3. Informal Mine Meetings.-At this level, meetings

may involve preshift coordination sessions at the supervisor

staging area. where personnel relate and transfer information.

generally in an unsummarized format. which bears directly on

the previous shift·s impact on the present status of sections

and jobs.

Specific information exchanged includes physical conditions. equipment locations on sections or panels, status of

supplies. materials, mechanical availability ofequipment, and

status of ongoing work (e.g., track-belt installation or removal, cable power center moves, construction ofstoppings).

At this level, such information determines jobs that must be

accomplished simultaneously with production to ensure
52

uninterrupted operations, and assists managers in updating

and revising work schedules for efficiency.

At each stage in this decisionmaking process, personnel

handle and review different kinds of data and information.

Each level involves assignment ofjobs, scheduling of work,

or adjusting schedules based on updated information and

input from various personnel to comply with operational

objectives.

The manager ofmines, given this system, has many ways

to turn to resolve the recognized problem. However, how does

the manager begin to state the case for either training of fillins or reduction of accidents to avoid unplanned downtime?

Whatinformation isrequired to make the decision? Who does

top management charge with the responsibility for training?

Without guidelines for incorporating operational data

into decisions for training, managers may discuss a problem

and then defer action or take immediate, ineffective steps to

remedy the situation. Ifthey make an immediate decision to

train workers as fill-ins, how do they implement their plan? If

they defer action because they need additional information,

what helps them determine the types of data needed to be

collected?

Here is what might have transpired in the scenario:

After considering the problem, top management decides to train additional workers to serve

as substitutes for regular longwall crew members. In so doing, the management team charges

the supervisor with the training responsibility.

With time ata premium, especially on the part of

the supervisor, operational limitations often result in transfer of only the most basic aspect of

job requirements to the worker (i.e., the functional aspects of performing a task or operating

machinery).

Training ofthis nature quite often falls short on followup

evaluation. Also, misinterpretation of intent, inability to

implement actions, or inattention to detail may prevent proper

implementation of desired instructions.

The training experience, hence, becomes one of selflearning. As the worker encounters problems, he or she

focuses only on those essentials needed to maintain

operational performance. Often, the trainee may have to ask

the supervisor or a fellow worker for the proper way to handle

a problem. Or, unfortunately, this person may use faulty

reasoning in order to accomplish a sequence oftasks. Such an

informal approach often leads to shortcuts as the worker tries

to get the job done without understanding the potential for

mishaps, which may result in downtime and/or injury.

FORMALIZING TRAINING WITH TOP

Features ofthe TOP provide a way for managers, beginning at the monthly review meeting, to focus on a specific

concern such as the problem observed by the mine manager in

the shield mover scenario. Working within the traditional

management system, here is how TOP can systematically

address the problems raised by the mine manager.

1. DeveIQuin2aTrainin2Strate2y.-Step 1ofTOP (fig.

5) is initiated when the mine manager and other key personnel

discuss the observed problem at the monthly review meeting.

Only this time, managers have access to the TOP system and

program guidelines. Here is what may transpire:

At the monthly review meeting, the manager of mines

states the case for developing the skills of fill-in workers

through training. The manager relates the issue to key personnel at the meeting: the superintendent ofthe mine, director of

safety and training, controller, and the chief engineer.

The manager presents the facts: The injured worker was

off 18 days and the accrued costs of the accident (e.g., direct

and indirect expenses) is $4,600 so far, and the 70 min of

downtime translates into nearly a $9,000 cost considering idle

equipment and personnel. Then, the manager charges the

mine superintendent with the responsibility to train a number

of employees to be proficient as fill-ins for all longwall jobs,

and asks for a report on progress in 1 month.

2. Plaunin2 Trainin2 and EvaluatiQn.-Given an area of

focus, commitment by upper level management, and keeping

projected benefits in mind, key mine-level personnel initiate

step 2 (fig. 6) and begin to formulate specific objectives.

These objectives should be quantifiable as far as possible to

permit evaluation of progress.

At the weekly planning meeting, the superintendent explains the situation and costs incurred to key personnel:

longwall coordinator, general mine supervisor, chief electrician, outside sueprvisor, trainer and others. "Does a problem

exist and, ifso, how many workersshould we train asfill-ins?"

the superintendent asks ofthe group. The longwall coordinator suggests that four workers be trained as fill-ins for various

longwall jobs, and that the mine could gain much operational

flexibility as well as guard against a recurrence ofthe previous

experience.

After obtaining a consensus, the superintendent charges

the trainer and safety director to draw up a plan for training

four workers and estimate total costs. The superintendent will

choose the trainees after consulting with the mine supervisor,

longwall coordinator, shift supervisor, and the mine committee.

In a related move, the superintendent requests the chief

engineer to project potential benefits ofthis training approach

(i.e., training employees as fill-ins for regular workers who

were off or sick). "How much could we have saved over the

past 3 months, in terms of production time lost and costs of

accidents, if we already had well-trained workers to fill in as

needed?"

Next, the trainer assesses training resources and their

compatibility with specific objectives, tailors materials, and

develops a tentative training plan and timetable. Also, management determines specific information and data to be col-
lected during and after training, so that the company will

obtain an accurate evaluation of the impact of training on

operations and achievement of objectives.

This step requires thought on how and when to obtain

data, analyze and summarize it, and present it to personnel

throughout the organization. At this point, data and infonnation must reflect perfonnance levels resulting from changes

and allow for comparisons between new perfonnance levels

and acceptable standards. (Types ofdata are referred to under

weekly planning meetings.)

Consider:

1. Overall goals

2. Existing training

3. Changes in operations

4. Operational problems

5. Worker or supervisor needs

6. Feedback

I

Areas of focus

Improve an operational area

Reduce risks

New skills

Upgrade skills

Cross training

Transfer job knowledge

I

Determine commitment

Training resources

Planning and scheduling

Evaluation tools

Money

Personnel

Communications and feedback

I

Project benefits

I

To planning phase

FIGURE 5.-Developing a training strategy.

53

3. Scheduling Training and Data Collection.-This

planning process then leads to step 3 (fig. 7) ofTOP. Management schedules and executes training plans, bearing in mind

the need for types of training, specific times and trainees,

operational contingencies, and potential revisions of the plan.

Also, a schedule is set for specific data collection activities,

which may require coordination between training and

operations personnel.

4. Evaluating Data and Infonnation.-This step (fig. 8)

involves evaluation of the training impact on operations and

in achieving specific objectives. Decisions focus on application of specific data analysis methods, and use of summary

statistics or infonnation for assessing the training impact.

Input: training strategy

components

Focus areas: commitments; projected benefits

I

Develop specific objectives

examples:

Control roof behavior on headgate area

Train mechanics on circuitry

Retrain in work area preparation

Cross train fill-in workers as shield

movers

I

Focus on training

1. Analyze resources

2. Address speci'fic objectives

3. Match specific reqUirements

4. Select appropriate trainer

5. Make tentative plan

• Focus on evaluation

Data and information required

Data collection and evaluation methods

Feedback process

I

To scheduling phase

FIGURE 6.-Planning TOP.
54

Input: TOP plan

Scheduling training sessions

Specific times

General timetable

Period for selected workers

Schedule data collection

Performance monitoring

Information gathering

Analysis period

Followup visits

Reporting dates

Feedback meetings

Perform training

As scheduled

collect data

Revise as needed

Update resources

~;~~, ,. -"-·C·, ..:Or' -...., _.... • _'. ,.... '.' • _" •••• \~:-..: ~I:~ T,."... . :.~

To evaluation phase

FIGURE 7.-Scheduling TOP.

Afterwards, the results of evaluation will be presented in

various visual and graphic forms to distinct audiences within

the company. Care must be taken to ensure that methods of

presentation are compatible with the audience in order to elicit

appropriate feedback.

5. Feedback and Adjustment.-Feedback from personnel at various levels is a critical function of the TOP system.

This effort (fig. 9) provides information to operating and staff

personnel regarding results from training and attainment of

objectives, and obtains constructive comments from them

Input: actual training data and information

collected; pending schedules

!

Assess and adjust evaluation methods

!

Perform evaluations and summarize

!

Effectively display results of evaluations

!

Determine methods of presentation

!

; , '. ., ,'''',\.: .. - ~".' ... . '..•........ ....,...•

To feedback and adjustment phase

..... , #'. ,., r.'- ".: '.-", ,,,.' .. :..,. I" ..... _'.' ..,., ....-"'.,. ,...:..,.....,i -'

FIGURE a.-Evaluation in TOP.

Input: Evaluations of training impact on

operations and in achievement of

objectives

t

Give and receive feedback

Analyze results of evaluations

and feedback sessions

t

Disseminate results

t /O,,· •.•.r-.. \...f···· .... '-,' ,. ,. loo" ••••• •• ~. • •• .,-. '. •• . .., .:_0··· .. .,.,". ,.., ..

,

Develop new strategies \

, ....:' ·w..... · : 'I~:_lt•• " .~~... ,,;,,," ............... : .• ''':01' '... :" ".:.r.-,: . ! ..........;.' "~.' ,- .:<IL" ." "~l. -,........ ,"" ...... ;;....... J

FIGURE g.-Feedback in TOP.
regarding shortcomings of training, the TOP methodology,

formulation of plans or schedules, or practicality in tackling

other areas of concern.

Following this interaction, managers can make adjustments to improve the program, amend objectives, continue as

planned, or concentrate more heavily on other operational

problems. Finally, dissemination ofresults to all appropriate

levels in the organization ensures commitment from various

personnel and keeps them abreast of results. Hence, this

process will lead to new strategies (involving other areas of

focus), new plans, and updated schedules in a systematic and

continuous manner.

Asthe scenario depicts, TOP guides managerstoward the

achievement ofsafer and more efficient operations through a

process aimed at mastering longwall changes or innovations

and monitoring performance requirements. This leads to

55

better control of operational performances and an effective

way for measuring the training impact on operations.

In mastering changes, managers can adjust training to

match anticipated modifications in work practices. This

permits development of specific objectives which translate

operational needs into training plans and schedules. By

monitoring performance levels, management can evaluate

results and make adjustments in training to meet operational

needs. This results in the continuous use of operational data

for upgrading the skills of the longwall workforce.

Thus, TOP provides managers with a way to better

control operational conditions for high performance of a

longwall system. It gives mine operators a perspective for

developing a specific operations-based training strategy and

for assessing the impact of training on safety and efficiency.

CONCLUSION

The characteristics of U.S. longwall mining, coupled

with global coal market conditions, emphasize a necessity for

management to plan and organize training to reduce and make

effective use of unplanned downtime, develop worker proficiency and eliminate performance errors, and improve both

the efficiency and safety of longwall technology. These are

imperatives managers cannot afford to forfeit.

Longwall productivity and accident experience, as discussed in this paper, indicated that management can reduce

downtime and lost workdays by paying close attention to

detail and developing an operations-based training strategy to

address operational problems in a systematic fashion.

The TOP offers a formalized methodology for guiding

and assisting managementin the application of data and information to improve operational performances as part of a

company's normal decisionmaking process. It can provide

benefits by allowing management to create a schedule of

training requirements directed atIndividual or crew work practices,

Familiarization of crew members with new or modified

machinery or changing physical conditions, and

Development of auxiliary personnel to perform longwall

operational or support activities.

This operations-based strategy provides managers with a

tool for improving operational safety and efficiency and for

accomplishing various types of training as described in this

paper. This approach to longwall operations can ensure accomplishment of intended objectives for developing proficient longwall workers and, in the end, higher productivity.

REFERENCES

1. Harrold, R. Jim Walters' Training Program. Ch. in

Coal Age Second Operating Handbook of Underground

Mining, ed. by N. P. Chironis. McGraw-Hill, 1980, pp. 390-

395.

2. Jackson, D. Emery Mining Toms to Longwalls. Ch.

in Coal Age Second Operating Handbook of Underground

Mining,ed. byN.P.Chironis. McGraw-Hill, 1980,pp. 72-75.

3. Longwall Training Smooths Start-up. Coal Min. and

Process., v. 19, No.2, 1982, pp. 46-48.

4. Riddell, M., and J. Savage. The Introduction of

Mechanised Longwall Systems-An Integrated Approach to

Training. Paperin Proceedings, Second International Symposium on Training in the Prevention of Occupational Risks in

the Mining Industry, ed. by F. L. Misaqi. MSHA (U.S. Dep.

Labor), 1981, pp. 51-65.

5. Sprouls, M. W. Longwall Census '87. Coal Min.

Process., v. 24, No.2, 1987, pp. 26-41.

6. Peake, C. V. Longwall Output Continues to Rise.

Coal Age, v. 91, No.8, 1986, pp. 58-60.

7. __Longwall Productivity in U.S. Mining Continues to Climb. Coal Age, v. 90, No.8, 1985, pp. 68-69.
56

MINER AND TRAINER RESPONSES TO SIMULATED MINE EMERGENCY

PROBLEMS

By Henry P. Cole1 and Staff, University of Kentucky2

ABSTRACT

This paper reports the results of a Bureau of Mines sponsored field test of 18 exercises intended

to teach and assess miner proficiency in dealing with simulated mine emergencies. The problems are

written from the perspective of the person working the exercise, and use latent image ink to provide

feedback on any course ofaction listed as an alternative for each question. In this manner, the exercise

takes the miner through decision points much like the ones he or she would be faced with in an actual

emergency. Data collected from 1,500 underground miners in six States indicate that trainees overwhelmingly judged the exercises as being realistic and authentic, helpful in reminding miners of

important things and in learning something new, of a suitable length, and highly enjoyable to work.

INTRODUCTION

When an emergency situation develops in the isolated

environment of an underground coal mine, the well-being of

the miners and the mine depends upon the early recognition of

the problem and promptresponses to prevent, limit, or escape

from the emergency. Civil and military aircraft flight crews

face similar problems during inflight emergencies. Research

suggests that paper and pencil and/or computer presented

simulations of inflight emergencies can better prepare aircrews to recognize and cope with actual nonroutine critical

events (Brecke Q),3 Flathers (2), Giffin (3), and Jensen (1)).

Similar extensive research suggests that training physicians

and other medical personnel in medical diagnostic judgment

and decisionmaking can be facilitated by simulation exercises

(Babbott (i),Berner (Q), Dugdale (]), Elstein (8), Gilbert (2),

Jones (lQ),McGuire Cll.:.U), and Rimoldi (H)). These types

1Educational psychologist.

2R. D. Wasielewski, G. T. Lineberry, A. Wala, L. Mallett. 1. V.

Haley, W. E. Lacefield, and P. K. Berger, University of Kentucky,

Lexington, KY.

ofsimulations have come to be used extensively in the training

of many kinds of military personnel in a wide range of

problem solving tasks (Halff ill)). Simulation exercises are

sometimes constructed using latent image (invisible) ink and

paper and pencil tests. When the person makes a choice in a

simulated diagnostic procedure, a special pen is used to mark

in a space on the paper. A message appears and tells the test

taker the consequences of his or her decision or action.

Computers, role playing, physical models (manikins), and

case reviews are also used to teach and assess proficiency in

medical diagnostic and decision making skills. The extensive

research literature about these simulations provides much

information about how to teach and assess proficiency in

fields where critical judgment and decision making are required for health and safety.

3Underlined numbers in parentheses refer to items in the list of

references preceding the appendix at the end of this paper.
57

LATENT IMAGE SIMULATION EXERCISES FOR COAL MINERS

Under a Bureau of Mines contract, researchers at the

University of Kentucky Institute for Mining and Minerals

Research, Behavioral Research Aspects of Safety and Health

working group have developed similar simulation materials

for underground coal miners. The materials are problems that

require miners to recognize and cope with developing emergency events in underground mines.

Problem scenarios are developed based upon actual mine

emergencies involving fIres, explosions, water and gas inundations, roof falls, equipment failures, serious injuries, and

sudden illnesses. The scenarios are authentic with respect to

both the language and context of underground mining. As a

problem unfolds miners must first gather information. They

must then make judgments and decisions about what additional information they need, how to obtain the information,

and ultimately what actions to take in what order. ProfIcient

and efficient responses result in miners working the problem

to prevent or minimize the accident or emergency. Errors in

information gathering, interpretation, judgment, and decisionmaking lead to actions that worsen the situation. Thus, in

the safety of a training room, miners experience vicariously

the consequences of good and bad judgment and decisionmaking. It is not uncommon for a miner working the problem

to end up "dead" or in deep trouble. When this happens, the

miner is attentive to the information and procedures that are

included in the remediation portion of the exercise. The

remediation is intended to correct errors miners make in responding to the simulation problem. The intention is to

improve the ability of miners for coping with the judgment

and decisionmaking aspects of actual mine emergencies that

may be encountered in the workplace.

TRADITIONAL ANNUAL REFRESHER TRAINING

For the past several years, members of the research

project have attended many annual refresher training classes

at many sites in several States both as observers and as participants. Observations of these sessions are sufficiently

varied and lengthy to support the following generalizations:

1. Instruction forrote learning ofinformation isthe most

common technique used by trainers.

2. There is a heavy reliance on the same sets of training

films from year to year.

3. Trainees frequently fail to attend to the problem at

hand, often dividing their attention between what is going on

at the front of the room and interpersonal interactions with

those around them.

4. When games are used, they usually focus on low-level

factual recall of information-in addition, the mechanics of

the games tend to compete for the miner and instructor attention and often detract from the content.

5. Many classes are characterized by relatively great

amounts oftime wasted, in the sense that it is spent on pursuits

that are not goal oriented.

6. Parts of the typical daily program sometimes degenerate into complaint sessions with little of a concrete nature

being accomplished.

7. The times when miners are most task oriented, attentive, and involved is when there is opportunity to discuss and

resolve a problem in work procedures, or in discussing a

hypothetical or actual first aid, fIre, or other emergency.

8. Class members also tend to be alert and involved

when opportunity exists for hands-on practice of specific

skills or tasks such as simulated first aid treatment ofvictims,

orthe use ofmine rescue equipment, orfirefighting apparatus.

Instructional materials that have good potential use often

fail to achieve that potential. For example, the Mine Safety

and Health Administration (MSHA) Fatal Illustrations program has the potential to involve miners and instructors in

productive indepth discussion, analysis, and planning. However, this potential is possible only when one or two fatal

illustrations are selected for indepth attention. Yet, it is not

uncommon for an instructor to show 20 to 30 of these fatal

illustrations one after the other with an accompanying audiotape that presentsthe narrative for each accident. This method

presents too much material, too rapidly, with little or no

opportunity for miner involvement. Heavy use of training

films one after the other, without time to think and talk about

the film content, presents similar problems. Many studies

have shown it is far more effective to focus on one or two

issues that have direct relevance for the learners, and to encourage their dialogue and active involvement about these

issues (Bransford (16), Cole (11), and Halpern (18)).

In summary, the content of annual refresher training is

usually important and relevant. The opportunity for miners to

become interested in the content presented and actively involved in discussing, debating, and generalizing itto their own

experience is often limited. There tends to be little focus on

problem solving and decisionmaking. There are, of course,

exceptions and very capable instructors who teach effectively

using a variety of methods that interest and involve miners.

Even when annual refresher classes are dull and uninteresting, in almost all cases the instructors are technically competent and respected by the miners in their classes. But both

instructors and miner often appear bored by the typical pace,

method, and topics of instruction.
58

DEVELOPING LATENT IMAGE SIMULATION EXERCISES ABOUT MINE EMERGENCIES

Using accident reports and the help of experienced mine

safety personnel, a number ofsimulation exercises have been

developed for teaching and assessing minerskills forresponding to underground coal mine emergencies. The exercises are

similar in structure to those used successfully to train for

judgment and decisionmaking skills in emergency situations

in medicine, aviation, and the military.

Problem scenarios accompanied by maps and illustrations are developed from reviews of actual mine emergencies

reported in accident investigations. Sometimes scenarios are

developed from the experience of miners, mine rescue team

members, and mine inspectors. Usually, as a scenario unfolds

there are predicaments. At some stages in the problem it is

often unclear what series of correct actions is necessary to

avoid or lessen the impact of an ongoing or impending accident. Each exercise presents a problem that unfolds overtime.

Just as in real life, the miner knows something of what has

happened in the past, but cannot know what the future holds.

However,just as in life, wise and canny miners can anticipate

what actions, choices, and failures to act will likely alter

future events, for better or worse. Constructing such inferences about a best course of action based on available data is

what real life problem solving requires in mine emergencies.

The simulation exercises are designed to approximate this

situation.

Once they are developed, the realistic exercise scenarios

are then discussed in small groups of experienced miners,

emergency medical technicians, and mine rescue personnel.

As the discussion progresses, good and bad optionsfor coping

with the problem at each of several stages emerge. This

information is recorded and later used to construct individual

questions and correct and incorrect answersto these questions

for each scenario. Once developed, these prototype latent

image format exercises are authenticated with small groups of

other experts. The exercises are then revised, produced, and

field tested with working miners in annual refresher training

classes. All the exercises concern either first aid orself-rescue

and escape situations.

The exercises are written as ifthe problem were developing and unfolding for the person who completes the exercise.

The appendix to this papershows the beginning ofone first aid

exercise. The basic background and problem information is

presented succinctly in simple language. Simple line drawing

illustrations appear in the printed exercise booklet and help to

further describe the problem.

After studying the problem situation and illustrations,

miners work the problems by reading a series of multiple

choice type questions that appear in a problem book, with one

question per page. A separate answer sheet contains sets of

brackets that enclose each latent(invisible) image message for

each course ofaction listed as an alternative for each question.

When the miner makes a decision and selects a particular

alternative, he or she colors between the brackets with a

special marking pen. Immediately, the invisible ink becomes

visible, and the miner is informed ofthe correctness or incorrectness of the response. Often, additional information that

would normally result from that action is also presented.

Thus, miners soon learn the consequences oftheir choice, the

inadequacy or the value ofa particular response, again similar

to the manner in which such feedback is received for decision

points and choices in actual mine emergency situations. In

this manner, the exercise takes the miner through from 6 to12

steps in the problem where information must be gathered,

decisions made, or action taken. The exercises are designed

to teach as they simultaneously assess miner proficiency in

dealing with the problems presented.

The appendix to this paper also illustrates part of another

exercise, this one dealing with escape from smoke and gases

originating in an unknown area of a mine. It too presents a

complex problem in simple language and makes use of mine

section mapsto provide information needed to make decisions

as the problem unfolds.

Thirty exercises like these have been developed to date.

Once an exercise is developed in a latent image format it can

be converted to a computer-administered format. Some exercises, especially in the first aid area, also lend themselves to

role playing simulations with miners acting out the role of

victim and first-aiders.

RESULTS OF FIELD TESTING

In 1986, 18 exercises were field tested in 84 annual refresher training classes at 20 sites" in six States with approximately 1,500 underground coal miners. Large and small

mines, union and nonunion companies, high and low coal

seam mining conditions, and various mining methods and

techniques are represented in the sample. The basic demographic characteristics ofthis group ofminers are presented in

4The 20 sites were distributed across the Kentucky, West Virginia

Pennsylvania, Virginia, Tennessee, and Illinois coalfields.

table 1. The distribution ofage, gender, and job classification

in this sample closely matches the observed distribution of

these characteristics in other national samples of miners

(Rockefeller (12)). The job classification miner includes all

persons in regular and direct coal production jobs underground. The maintenance-technical classification includes

mechanics, electricians, masons, carpenters, beltsetup crews,

surveyors, inspectors, engineers, geologists, and others who

work underground but not directly in production. The supervisory-management classification includes all managers from
59

Number Mode Mean Std dev

Statistic

TABLE 2.• Typical number of miners per class

Mode 17.0

Mean 15.5

Standard deviation 8.7

Yes No

(Completed data sets, 1,213)

Miner judgment category

Exercise content is authentic 97.4 2.0

Working exercise will help me

to remember important things 95.4 3.9

Learned something new from

working the exercise 86.3 12.8

The exercise was too long 15.9 83.2

Liked working the exercise 89.0 10.1

Instructor directions clear 94.3 4.8

Written directions in the exercise are clear 86.1 13.0

Graphics in exercise are easy to understand 92.1 7.0

The procedures for scoring my performance

are easy to understand 79.3 18.5

The exercise is easy to read 92.8 6.4

TABLE 3.· Rating of the validity, relevance, quality,

and utility of 18 exercises In 6 States, 20 sites, and

84 annual refresher training classes In 1986

unifonnly high on all categories, except for clarity ofscoring

procedures.

For each class administration, the instructor also completed a questionnaire thatsolicited information about(1) how

the exercise was introduced and administered, (2) if the

instructor modified the exercise in any way, (3) the observed

frequency ofreading problems among miners in the class as

they worked the exercise, and (4) the instructor's judgment

about key aspects of the exercise. The judgment categories

included the degree to which miners were able to understand

the instructor's directions, the clarity ofwritten directions and

graphics in the exercise, and the scoring procedures. The

instructor also was asked to judge the appropriateness of the

perfonnance objectives, the relevance of the exercise for the

annual refresher training class, and whether more exercises

like these should be used in the future in other classes. Instructors also were asked to make comments to improve the exercise, and many did so, usually indicating they also would like

to have more exercises developed for use in the future.

The summary data for the instructor's questionnaire are

presented in table 4. Most instructors administered the exercise individually, in large part because they were requested to

do so, to enable the correlation of miner performance scores

with their questionnaire data. Given a free choice, the majority ofinstructors report they prefer to administer the exercises

in small groups of from three to five miners per group. There

are three reasonsfor this. First, the latent image answersheets,

which are consumable, last longer this way and more classes

ofminers can be taught with fewerofthese materials. Second,

most individual class members prefer to work the exercises

cooperatively in small groups rather than individually. Once

35 37.0 9.0

10 12.2 7.0

Frequency, pet

97.3

2.7

65.9

12.6

9.3

12.2

100.0

TABLE 1.• Basic demographic characteristics of

underground coal miners from 6 states, 20 sites, and

84 annual refresher training classes In 1986

the section foreman up through general mine foreman, superintendent, and top company management. The other classification includes clerical and office personnel, preparation

plant and surface mine workers, accountants, laboratory

workers, and others who work on the surface, but who sometimes participate in annual refresher training. Generally the

classes were small, averaging about 16 miners (see table 2).

In addition to completing the exercise answer sheet,

miners also completed a rating fonn and made written comments about the exercise. Miners at all sites judged the

exercises very favorably, as can be seen by inspection of

table 3. In particular, exercises were judged as being realistic

and authentic, helpful in reminding miners ofimportant things

and in learning something new, to be about the right length,

and enjoyable. In addition to the instructor's directions, the

exercise written directions and graphics were judged as easy

to comprehend, and the entire exercise as easy to read.

About 19 pet of the sample reported difficulty in understanding how to score their perfonnance. Subsequent revisions of exercises have simplified scoring procedures and

eliminated this problem. Inspection of individual exercise

data revealed little variation in ratings of miners across the

judgment categories. Generally, all exercises were rated

Job classification:

Miner 1,031

Maintenance!

technical 197

Supervisory/

management 146

Other :.:..: .-=-.:.1::...::.9--=1--l--- -----""-'------ _

Total 1,565

Gender distribution:

Male 1,256

Female 35

Number

Age 1,298

Experience 1,219
60

TABLE 4. - Percentages of Instructors In 84 classes

responding to questions about exercise administration options

Administration format:

Administered individually, 1 exercise

booklet per miner 77.2

Presented exercise on transparencies

while each miner responded individually 15.8

Presented exercise on transparencies

while class members responded as a group 5.3

Used 1 exercise per small group

in several groups per class 1.8

Used computer-aided instruction

format 0.0

Explanation or direction provided:

Explained how to work the exercise

and use the latent image pen 90.5

Made general comments about the

exercise problem prior to miners working the

exercise 69.0

Answered some questions as

they worked the exercise...... 57.1

Led miners through the exercise

questions, page by page 14.3

Provided other types of explanations

and direction for working the exercise 3.6

Instructor action:

Instructor did not modify

the exercise 93.7

Instructor did use the discussion notes

after the miners finished working the exercise .. 83.2

and decisionmaking skills than having them work independently. Just as in real life the opportunity exists for the group

decision at critical points to be informed or misinformed by

members of the group with special status, authority, and

expertise.

As shown by table 4, before administering the exercise

about 91 pet of instructors explained the mechanics of working the exercise, and 69 pet commented on the problem. In

about 57 pet of the classes, instructors reported answering

some questions by miners asthey worked the problem. Observation offield sitessuggest most ofthese questions by miners

concerned matters ofprocedure and clarification ofthe meaning of specific words and phrases to be consistent with local

conventions, e.g. "Is a belt control line the same as our Air

Alertsystem?" or "Is the expression dinner hole what we call

the kitchen?" Only about 14 pet ofthe classes hadan instructor

who led the miners through the exercise in a lockstep fashion,

a method that is generally distracting and annoying to trainees.

About 94 pet of class instructors reported making no modifications to the exercise, and 83 pet reported using the instructor discussion notes provided with the exercise (see table 4).

These data and many field observations suggest instructors

administered the exercises as intended.

Instructors' observations also verified that miners have

few problems in reading the exercises (see table 5). Instructors from 51 classes reported on this topic. These instructors

reported that 55 pet ofclasses had no miners who experienced

difficulty in reading the exercises. In about 28 pet of these

classes, one miner experienced reading difficulty. Classes in

which two miners experienced reading difficulty constituted

11.8 pet of these 51 classes. Only 5.9 pet of the classes

reported three miners who experienced reading problems. No

more than three miners with reading problems were ever

reported. Table 5 summarizes these results of instructor

observations of the frequency of miners' reading problems.

TABLE5. - Frequency of miners who had difficulty In

reading the exercise as reported by Instructors, 51

classes

miners have worked an exercise as part ofa small group, they

usually resist attempts to have them work a second exercise

individually. Third, in actual mine emergencies and in routine

mine work, miners are generally required to work together.

Working the simulation exercises in small groups may actually be more valid for teaching and assessing miner judgment

0 28

1 14

2 6

3 3

Miners with

reading problems

Classes

Number pet

54.9

27.5

11.8

5.9

TABLE 6. - Amount of time needed by the slowest

class memberto complete the exercise, as reported

by instructor, 84 classes, minutes

Mode 30.0

Mean 43.1

Standard deviation 22.9

Inspection of table 7 reveals that instructorjudgments of

the relevance, quality, and clarity ofexercise content parallel

those of the miners. With the exception of clarity ofscoring

procedures, all aspects of the exercises were rated highly, as

can be seen in the small standard deviations for each variable

in table 7. The appropriateness ofthe performance objectives,

the use of the exercises in annual refresher training classes,

and the judgment that more exercises like these should be

developed and used in the future received exceptionally high

ratings from instructors.
TABLE 7.• Instructor ratings of exercise clarity, quality, objectives, and relevance, 84 classes

Rating category Strongly agree Strongly disagree Mean Std

4 3 2 1 dev

Miners understood--

Instructor directions ................................... 52.6 43.6 2.6 1.3 3.47 .62

Written directions in exercise ....................46.8 44.3 8.9 0.0 3.38 .65

Graphics in exercise .................................. 65.4 33.3 1.3 0.0 3.64 .51

Scoring procedures .................................... 26.9 29.5 24.4 17.9 2.63 1.11

Perfonnance objectives are

appropriate ................................................. 72.2 25.3 2.5 0.0 3.67 .52

Exercise fitted well with annual

refresher training ....................................... 87.2 10.3 2.6 0.0 3.84 .43

More exercises like these should

be used in the future .................................. 91.0 7.7 1.3 0.0 3.90 .35

TABLE 8.• Exercise list and word count

Exercise} ................................... HT OBJ 2PB MAS DN 2AS lLIA

Apparent Diving Accident ................... 306 217 938 496 1,068 203 300

Arnel V Beam ..................................... 1,218 267 728 471 1,098 185 294

Bob Hall2 ............................................... 300 147 1,134 570 918 244 333

Bennie J Floyd ....................................... 308 169 665 407 798 181 230

Bubba .................................................... 295 234 1,786 1,372 1,850 226 1,172

Cleo C Pike .......................................... Rev

Cleo C Pike Simulation3 ..................... 3,011 0 0 NAp 0 0 0

Cecil ...................................................... 278 228 1,766 1,114 2,393 248 872

Cutthrough Ventilation Arrangement .... 312 408 2,140 1,225 2,951 473 807

Douglas 0 Tacket .................................. 278 142 950 506 915 219 294

Delta Mine Cutthrough4 ......................... NA 262 1,974 NAp 3,121 500 NAp

Drainway Entry ..................................... 294 264 1,208 840 932 176 671

Fix-It ...................................................... 309 287 668 612 1,108 114 507

Harry Hastings....................................... 295 PB 1.264 566 1,232 223 353

Harry Harlan .......................................... 299 163 985 447 1,150 199 254

Harry Harlan Simulation3 ................... 3,222 0 0 NAp 0 0 0

Hot Shuttle Car ...................................... 308 141 1,151 929 1,206 228 708

J. J. Johnson........................................... 309 200 1,159 663 1,219 140 530

J. J. Smith.............................................. 300 201 1,227 790 1,365 243 555

Jupiter Mine Fire ....................................Inc

Low Coal Fire ....................................... 315 271 1,699 1,312 1,843 306 1,097

Marvin R. Letcher ................................. 309 316 1,829 971 2,002 167 810

Marvin R. Letcher Simulation3........... 3,587 0 0 NAp 0 0 0

Persephone Mine Explosion.................. 300 148 966 497 685 199 305

Roof Fall Entrapment ............................ 308 160 1,706 793 1,122 267 533

Thunnan "HAP" Anderson ................... 309 320 2,553 1,474 2,247 193 1,288

Traumatic Head Injury.......................... 316 194 1,383 827 1,085 234 1,288

Vulcan Mine Ignition............................ 308 258 2,308 1,279 1.755 158 1,128

Vulcan Mine Recovery ....................... 1,295 323 2,395 1,449 3,638 199 1,257

Water Line Repair ................................. 309 408 1,538 894 962 138 763

AS Answer sheet. PB Problem booklet. IExcept as noted, all exercises have a latent image format.

ON Discussion notes. Rev Exercise under revision. 2Qnly parts read by trainees.

HT How to use this exercise. MAS Master answer sheet. 3Role play simulation format.

Inc Exercise is incomplete. NAp Not applicable. 4Essay format.

LIA Latent image answers. OBI Performance objectives.

61
62

When developing the exercises, a major concern was to

keep them short. Most similar simulation exercises used in

other fields tend to be much longer and often require as much

as 2 or 3 h to complete. In annual refresher training classes

the available yearly time for instruction is only 8 h. Any

materials that are likely to be used must be well-organized,

brief, and time efficient. The exercises meet these criteria.

Instructors reported the time required for the slowest member

of their classes to complete the exercise. The mean time of

about 43 min reported in table 6 is actually longer than the

typical time needed by the typical miner. The standard

deviation for this variable is large for two reasons. First,

exercise length varies quite a bit. Some exercises are long and

others are short, as can be seen from inspection of table 8.

Second, there is wide variation in the reading speed and comprehension of any group of adults, including underground

coal miners.

WHY THE EXERCISES ARE EASY TO READ

Another major concern early in the project was that many

miners would not be able to or would not want to read long

written paper and pencil exercises. From the beginning, the

exercises were designed to minimize demands upon reading

speedand comprehension. Theirdesign was also informed by

the large amount of recent research in the area of story

grammar and reading comprehension. This research has

established that the structure and organization of written

passages is more critical to a person's motivation to read the

material and the ability to comprehend it, than the particular

words used in the passage. Basically, well-organized prose

materials that have a story line or plot, that deal with emotive

laden content, that present dilemmas and predicaments, and

that are cast with contexts that are common to the reader's

own life experience are compelling reading and result in good

comprehension (Anderson aID, Bower CW, and Mayer

(12). All exercises developed were designed to meet these

criteria for the design of good prose material.

Other information also explains why the exercises are

easy to read. First, although the problem content is often

complex, the exercises are written in simple and direct language. Experienced specialists in the design ofinstructional

materials typically rewrite and simplify exercise wording

after these are initially developed by technical personnelsuch

as engineers, emergency medical personnel, and experienced

mine rescue specialists. The rewriting ofinitially developed

exercises to conform with standards of good narrative structure, clarity and simplicity of language and directions must

not alter, change, or detract from the technical content and

purpose of the exercise. A team effort and a willingness to

cooperate in exercise construction is essential.

An analysis of the readability level of three early but

representative exercises was carried out using the University

ofKentucky Composite Readability Analysis program. This

program carries out seven independent estimates of the completed school grade level equivalent required to comprehend

TABLE 9.• Es'Umated reading difficulties In grade level equivalence of

representative exercises compared to MSHA Fatal illustration program

narratives

Estimation Harry Water line Vulcan mine MSHA fatal illustration

formula Harlan! repair problem2 ignition3 program

Spache 4 4 4 (5)

Dale-Chall 10 7 7 11th grade.

Raygor 7 4 4 Estimate not valid.

Fry 4 5 7 Professional.

Flesch e) e) (4) College senior.

Gunning-Fog e) (4) (4) College.

SMOG 7 7 8 College.

!Pirst aid exercise.

2Self-rescue and other rescue and escape exercise.

3Methane ignition, rescue, escape, and fIrst aid exercise.

4Below formula range and cannot be calculated.

sAbove formula range, and cannot be calculated.
the samples of text material analyzed. A fourth analysis was

carried out on the narrative portion of samples from the

(MSHA) Fatal Illustrations program. The results of these

analyses are shown in table 9. The three representative exercises were found to have reading difficulties at the upper

elementary and junior high school level, while the MSHA

Fatal Illustrations narratives were found to require eleventh

grade or higher educational levels ofreading skill. It should

be noted that all samples were corrected for the specialized

mining jargon words that appear in both the simulation exercises and in the MSHA Fatal Illustration narratives. The

difference in reading levels between the simulation exercises

and the MSHA narratives are not related to the absence or

presence of special technical words, but to the simplicity,

directness, and clarity with which complex ideas are expressed.

63

Table 8 provides yet additional evidence that helps explain why the exercises are easy to read. The number ofwords

per exercise is small. Little reading is required to work completely through an exercise. This is accomplished by precise

use ofsimple and direct language, and by the use of appropriately placed graphics throughout the exercise as the problem

unfolds. Furthennore, the bulk of the entire exercise component is not read by the miner in the annual refresher training

class. Rather, the trainee reads only the problem booklet

questions, the answers from which to select, and those latent

image messages from the answers selected. The alternative

choices to a question, as well as the invisible latent image

feedback on the answer sheet, also are terse and to the point.

Much effort is required during the design phase ofan exercise

to achieve this cogency.

INDEPENDENT OBSERVATIONS OF EXERCISE ACCEPTABILITY

Throughout the field testing, a primary problem faced by

the project staff was to supply company management and instructors with the number ofexercises and answersheets they

desired. For research and development purposes, only about

100 to 200 data sets were needed for each exercise. Yet

company trainers often wanted from 500 to 2,500 copies of

specific exercises, so that all miners in their organization

could be trained. It is clear that the exercises are perceived as

appropriate, worthwhile, and effective instructional tools by

those who plan and teach annual refresher training classes.

Frequent observation of refresher training classes by

project staff members also independently confinn the summary data presented in tables 2 through 5. Miners almost

always are very attentive and interested in the problem being

worked. During the discussion period that follows working

the exercise, miners actively participate, often challenging

points and choices made in the exercise itself, or those made

by their colleagues and the instructor. Members of the class

almost always explicitly relate and generalize the content and

predicaments presented in the exercise problem to their own

mines and experiences. The class frequently runs overtime

extending into the lunch break, the end ofthe day, or the next

class as miners continue to engage in lively debate and

discussion about the problem. During breaks and lunch hour,

miners have frequently been observed to continue their discussion of the exercise problem.

Another observation relates to the emotive involvement

of miners in the exercise problem. The level of thinking and

dialogue stimulated by the exercises is almost always sophisticated and technical. Yet, it is also passionate and emotional

as miners and trainers debate what should or should not be

done, under various circumstances, and why or why not. In

short, the exercises engage the full attention of miners and

stimulate high levels of thinking about, and discussing, ways

to cope with and prevent mine emergencies.s Many studies

have shown it is precisely these types of emotional and

cognitive involvementwith classroom presented material that

learners see as authentic and relevant. Furthennore, while

most classroom learning tends to be inert and not applied by

the student to real life situations, classroom instruction that

engagesthe active interest and involvement oflearners makes

what is learned accessible to the learner. When the content is

accessible the learner tends to apply skills and knowledge

learned in class to relevant aspects of his or her personal work

and life (Bransford (lQ) and Halpern (ll)).

In summary, both miners and trainers are fascinated with

the exercises, would like to have more of these included in

annual refresher training, become emotionally and intellectually involved in the problems, easily generalize and relate the

problem content to their own experiences, and believe working the simulation exercises will help them cope more effectively with similar real-life emergencies. Company management and instructors would like more exercises, feeling that

they stimulate high levels ofinterest, motivation, and involvement of the miners in annual refresher training classes.

Two broad generalizations can be drawn from the observations and data from the initial field test sites. First, the

exercises are time efficient. An entire problem from introduction to feedback can be completed in approximately 1 h, with

little or no time wasted on non-goal-directed activity. Second,

exercises are motivating to the miners who work them. At

each site, regardless of physical conditions or competing

concerns, the part ofthe program devoted to exercise administration was characterized by concentrated effort and a high

level ofinterest on the partofboth trainers and trainees. There

are three possible reasons for these observations.

SA more detailed account of the effects of the exercises on miner

and instructor interactions and behavior is presented by reference 23.
64

First, the technique used in presenting the problems is

intriguing. Although latent image technology has been in

existence for several decades, few individuals are exposed to

it on a regular basis. Therefore, it is novel and perhaps

physically appealing to those who are interested in how

objects work. However, there is no doubt that the novelty

would soon wear offifthat were all the exercises offered. The

latent image technique can be considered an attention getter,

but it is not the reason miners are willing to spend 1 or 2 h

working and debating a problem. The major appeal of the

exercises derives from the conformity to good instructional

design criteria for both the construction of narrative materials,

and for the effective presentation ofclassroom learning activities and materials.

A second factor in the apparent success of the exercises

is that they provide concrete things for the trainees to do.

Unlike training films and rote instruction, the problems do not

allow passivity on the part of the miners. In order to get the

task completed, class members must become involved. In addition, each person soon fmds out that his or her opinion

matters. The trainee owns the problem, in a sense, and the

outcome depends very much on that person's judgment and

choices. As in the workplace, the exercises allow the participants to exchange ideas and debate courses of action; either

before or after the fact. The entire mode, therefore, evokes

some ofthe same intensity of behavior that occurs in real-life

situations where miners seek to anticipate, cope with, or

reflect upon an emergency situation.

The preceding point underscores a third aspect of the

exercises being field tested. They reflect authentic situationsthe same kinds of predicaments miners talk about in the

workplace and in othersettings where they get together. Field

observations indicate miners continue discussing facets ofthe

exercises during breaks and at slack moments in other phases

ofthe training program. Thisindicates thatjust as the workers

do not tire ofspeculating on the things that went wrong when

actual accidents or disasters occur, they do not grow tired of

working exercisessuch as those now being developed. An advantage of the exercises over real situations is that each

problem contains solutions and recommendations based on

factual knowledge and expert authority, whereas informal

efforts to reconstruct actual accidents after they have happened are often based on incomplete or erroneous information.

CONCLUSION

Simulation exercises for teaching and assessing proficiency in coping with underground coal mine emergency

situations are a novel approach for annual refresher training

classes. Yet, similar though longer and more open ended

simulations have been used for years for training mine rescue

teams and mine management personnel in mine emergency

response procedures. The present project draws upon previous research in simulation problems in medicine, aviation,

and the military. It includes as well the expertise in coping

with underground mine emergencies that is found among

experienced miners and mine rescue personnel. It also draws

heavily from the recentresearch concerned with the construction of motivating and easy to comprehend narrative materials, as well as other research about the design of instructional

strategies that make learning interesting and what is learned

accessible to the learner in practical contexts. The simulation

exercises that result are intended for working miners. They

focus on the perceptions, information, judgments, decisions,

and actions working miners must exhibit to prevent, recognize, and control nonroutine emergency situations. The

setting is at the working section. The options are those

available to working miners. Initial field test results of these

18 exercises have been encouraging. These latent image and

other formats for simulation exercises have potential for

increasing the relevance and quality of annual refresher training.
65

REFERENCES

1. Brecke, F. H. Instructional Design for Aircrew

Judgment Training. Aviation, Space, and Envir. Med., v. 53,

No. 10, 1982, pp. 951-957.

2. Flathers, G. W.,Jf., W. C. Giffin, and T. J. Rockwell.

A Study of Decision Making Behavior of Pilots Deviating

From a Planned Flight. Aviation, Space, and Envir. Med., v.

53, No. 10, 1982, pp. 958-963.

3. Giffin, W. C., and T. H. Rockwell. Computer-Aided

Testing of PilotResponse to Critical Inflight Events. Human

Factors, v. 26, No.5, 1984, pp. 573-581.

4. Jensen, R. S. Pilot Judgment: Training and Evaluation. Human Factors, v. 24, No.1, 1982, pp. 61-73.

5. Babbott, D., and W. D. Halter. Clinical ProblemSolving Skills of Internists Trained in the Problem-Oriented

System. J. Med. Educ., v. 58, No. 12, 1983, pp. 974-953.

6. Berner, E. S. Paradigms and Problem-Solving: A

Literature Review. J. Med. Educ., v. 59, No.8, 1984, pp. 625-

633.

7. Dugdale, A. E., D. Chandler, and G. Best. Teaching

the Management of Medical Emergencies Using an InteractiveComputerTerminal. Med. Educ., v.16,No. 1, 1982,pp.

27-30.

8. Elstein, A. S., L. S. Shulman, and S. A. Sprafka.

Medical Problem-Solving [Letter to the editor]. J. Med.

Educ., v. 56, No.1, 1981, pp. 75- 76.

9. Gilbert, G. G. TheEvaluation ofSimulation for Skill

Testing in the American National Red Cross First Aid and

Personal Safety Course. Ph.D. Thesis, OH State Univ., 1975,

264 pp.; University Microfilms No. 76- 997.

10. Jones, G. L., and K. D. Keith. Computer Clinical

Simulations in Health Sciences. J. Computer-Based Instr., v.

9, No.3, 1983, pp. 108-114.

11. McGuire, C. H. Medical Problem-Solving: A Critique of the Literature. Paper in Research in Medical Education 1984 Proceedings of the Twenty-Third Annual Conference. Assoc. Amer. Med. Colleges, 1984, pp. 3-13.

12. McGuire, C. H., and D. Babbott. Simulation Technique in the MeasurementofProblem-Solving Skills. J. Educ.

Measurement, v. 4, No.1, 1967, pp. 1-10.

13. McGuire, C. H.,L. M. Solomon, andP. G. Bashook.

Construction and Use ofWritten Simulations. Psychological

Corp. (New York), 1976,307 pp.

14 Rimoldi, H. H. A. The Test of Diagnostic Skills. J.

Med. Educ., v. 36,1961, pp. 73-79.

15. Halff, H. M., J. D. Holan, and E. L. Hutchins.

CognitiveScience and MilitaryTraining. Amer. Psych., v. 41,

No. 10, 1986, pp. 1131-1139.

16. Bransford, J., R. Sherwood, N. Vye, and J. Rieser.

Teaching Thinking and Problem Solving: Research Foundations. Am. Psychol., v. 41, No. 10, 1986, pp. 1078-1089.

17. Cole, H. P. Process Education. Educational Tech.

Publ., 1971,261 pp.

18. Halpern, D. F. Thought and Knowledge: An Introduction to Critical Thinking. Erlbaum (Hillsdale, NJ), 1984,

402 pp.

19. Rockefeller, J. D. IV. The American Coal Miner: A

Report on Community and Living Conditions in the Coal

Fields. The President's Commission on Coal, 1980,233 pp.

20. Anderson,J. R. Cognitive Psychology and ItsImplications. Freeman, 1985,472 pp.

21. Bower, G. H. Experiments in Story Comprehension

and Recall. Discourse Processes, v. 1, 1978, pp. 211-231.

22. Mayer, R. E. Thinking, Problem Solving, Cognition. Freeman, 1983,426 pp.

23. University ofKentucky. Exercises for Teaching and

Assessing Nonroutine Mine Health and Safety Skills: Ongoing BuMines contract H0348040; for inf. contact W. J.

Wiehagen, TPO, BuMines, Pittsburgh, PA.
66

APPENDIX. - PORTIONS OF A FIRST AID

AND A MINE EMERGENCY EXERCISE
Marvin R. Letcher Exercise

Background

8 entries are being driven in 42 inch coal.

Eleven miners are working on Section 001.

The portal is 4,000 feet outby the face.

It is just after lunch. (Marvin ate a big meal.)

The EMT normally on this section is absent today.

You are trained in basic first aid but not as an EMT.

The top in this section is generally drummy and poor.

The roof bolter has an ATRS.

Problem

You are the pinner operator. You are bolting the roof in the

#2 entry at the face. Your helper, Marvin R. Letcher, has

gone out ahead of the bolter to mark the roof. You yell at

him to get back. He almost gets back to supported roof

when a piece of draw slate falls trapping both his legs. (See

Figures 1 & 2 on page 9.) Marvin is lying face down

screaming. The roof is dribbling across the whole entry just

past the last row of bolts. Now, turn to page 4 and answer

the first question.

2

67
68

FIGURE 1.-Draw slate falls from roof.

~~~~~~~

-~-----

------"

Z

FIGURE 2.-Draw slate hits Marvin's Ie9s.
Top

Draw slate working

Automatic

temporary

roof support

, J'+

Roof bolts

+ + I \-

Roof bolter

+ + + +

Crosscut (bolted roof)

+ + + ~- + + -t- +

Stretcher and first-aid kit at the dinner hole

dinner hole 240 ft away.

Mine pager at tailpiece 200 ft away.

FIGURE 3.-Details of Marvin's position.

69
70

Marvin R. Letcher

Question A

You yell for help. Three other miners come quickly. Marvin's legs are under the slate.

His head is near the left rib. The roof bolter is outby his position about six feet. The

ATRS is in place. (See Figure 3 on page 5.) The top continues to work. What would

you do now? (Choose only ONE unless directed to "Try again!")

1. Grab a couple of slate bars. Have the other three miners help you pry the rock off

Marvin's legs.

2. Get the head of the roof bolter under the corner of the rock and lift it gently off

Marvin's legs.

3. Move close to Marvin to check his injuries and begin first aid imnlediately.

4. Leave the bolter and the ATRS where they are. Set roof jacks and timbers from the

ATRS toward and around Marvin.

5. Lower the ATRS on the bolter. Tram the bolter ahead and then raise the ATRS

over Marvi n.

6. Tram the roof bolter out of the entry. Then tram a scoop in so you can lift the rock

off Marvin with the scoop bucket.

4
Marvin R. Letcher

Question B

You have now supported the roof with two jacks and three posts. Using slate bars and

a jack, the three of you have lifted the slate just enough to 'free Marvin's legs. The top

continues to dribble across the whole entry. What should you do now? (Choose only

ON E unless directed to "Try again !")

7. Have your buddies grab Marvin by his belt and shirt while you grab his pants leg

above and below his left knee. Pull together and slide him out from under the rock

sideways on his stomach.

8. Get a board or some other object to serve as a spli nt. Put the board between his

legs. Then gently tie his legs together before movi ng hin1.

9. Reach under the slate. Grab him by his boots and jerk him out sideways by his

feet.

10. Leave Marvin under the rock. Give t-lim first aid in this position until he has been

fully immobilized and can be moved without further injury.

6

71
72

Marvin R. Letcher

Master Answer Sheet for Marvin R. Letcher Exercise

Use this answer sheet to mark your selections. Rub the special pen gently and

smoothly between the brackets. Don't scrub the pen or the message may blur. Be sure

to color in the entire message once you have made a selection. Otherwise you may not

get the information you need.

Question A (Choose only ONE unless directed to "Try again !")

1. [Risky! This may hurt you, the others, and Marvin. Try again!

2. [Good idea, but the head is too big to fit under the rock. If you try to lift the rock

[ this way it may slide, slip, or fall and hurt Marvin more. Try again!

3. [This action places you and Marvin in danger. Try again!

4. [Correct! With the roof supported, you can now help Marvin. Do next question. ]

5. [When you start to lower the ATRS, more slate falls. This action places you and]

[ Marvin in danger. Try again! ]

6. [When you lower the ATRS and begin to tram the bolter outby, more slate falls. ]

[ Now Marvin is in more trouble and you can't get to him. Try again!

Question B (Choose only ONE unless directed to "Try again !")

7. [Correct! This procedure would be the fastest and least harmful way to move

[him. Do next question.

8. [This would endanger him and you. Try again!

9. [This nlethod of moving Marvin could cause further injury. Try again!

10. [ Risky and impossible. You can't work on him under the rock. This action also

[ places you and him in danger. Try again!

Question C (Choose only ONE unless directed to "Try again !")

11. [ His airway has to be O. K. He is screaming. There is a more important first

[step. Try again!

12. [ Marvin probably needs help before being transported. Try again!

13. [Correct! This protects everyone. Color the box under answer 14.

[

21
Cecil

Cecil Exercise

Background

The mine, w~lich is above the water table, is wet and has a 52 inch seam.

This is an 8 entry supersection, with 2 continuous miners, and 2 shuttle

cars.

You (Cecil) are a continuous miner operator on the West Mains Section.

You are slim, strong, and in good shape (5' 10" and 145Ibs).

Big Tim, your helper, is overweight and in poor physical condition (6' 2"

and 275 Ibs).

The shuttle car roadway is littered with a large accumulation of loose

coal and coal dust.

Problem

You and Big Tim have just trammed the continuous miner to the face of the

#1 entry. Your boss comes by and tells you that one shuttle car with a

damaged cable is stalled between #3 and #4 in the last open crosscut, and

the other is stuck near the feeder. You and Big Tim decide to replace a few

worn bits while waiting. While pulling the bits, you smell something burning.

Tim tells you the smell is probably just from heat shrinking the boot over

the splice on the shuttle car cable. After installing the bits, you go to the

mouth of the #1 entry to establish face ventilation. Your eyes begin to burn

and water. You look down #1 and across to #2 and see a cloud of thick,

black smoke. The smoke is going by the mouth of #1 and out the return.

You immediately yell to Tim and tell him about the smoke.

After studying the map on page 8, turn the page and answer the first

question.

7

73
5

You suspect smoke is

from cable splice here

3 2

Heavy

smoke

Rock

dust

I I I II I I I 1

? . ~.- I: .. LEGEND

Return

Intake I,LJ ,U rU rT""9~~ ?Q£J lD

Neutral ?D? FeedercJ5SRsl D DngUishers

? Unknown mine ? ?

atmosphere

= Stopping

g Dhn~~r l0 i -C- Curtain I I

tOt ?D? ?O? 0

FIGURE 1.-Your position and Tim's position on the section, with the smoke cloud. You can see the possible locations of smoke

marked with question marks.
Cecil

Question A

After telling Tin1 about the sn10ke, what should you do 1l§1? (Choose only ONE

unless directed to "Try again!")

1. Take your filter self-rescuer off your belt and have it ready in case you need it.

2. Sit down and wait for instructions from your face boss.

3. Put on your filter self-rescuer and tell Tin1 to do the san1e.

4. Take a deep breath and head for intake air quickly.

9

75
76

Cecil

Question B

As you are putting on your filter self-rescuer (FSR), Big Tim tells you that he has left

his FSR on the other miner, which is broken down in the #6 entry. What would you do

now? (Choose only ONE unless directed to "Try again!")

5. Finish putting on your FSR, but stop and think before taking further action.

6. Share your FSR with Tim by taking turns breathing through it, and dash

through the smoke.

7. Tell Tim to stay put. Finish putting on your FSR and go across the section to get

Tim's FSR.

8. Leave your FSR off and wait for help with Tim.

9. Offer your FSR to Big Tim and have him go for help.

10
Cecil

Master Answer Sheet for Cecil Exercise

Use this answer sheet to mark your selections. Rub the special pen gently and

smoothly between the brackets. Don't scrub the pen or the message may blur. Be

sure to color in the entire message once you make a selection. Otherwise you may

not get the information you need.

Question A (Choose only ONE unless directed to "Try again!")

1. [You shouldn't do this unless you plan to put it on now. Try again!

2. [He's probably down at the feeder. You need to act now. Try again!

3. [Correct! Carbon monoxide may be present. Do next question.

4. [This is very dangerous! You and Big Tim may die. Try again!

Question B (Choose only ONE unless directed to "Try again!")

5. [Correct! A "snap" decision could prove fatal to both of you. You are not yet in

[smoke. Do next question.

6. [This would be difficult to do, and you would likely become separated in the

[smoke. Try again!

7. [There is a nlore critical first step. Try again!

8. [Although "misery loves company," it is important that at least one of you is

[ protected from carbon monoxide. Try again!

9. [Should it be necessary for someone to get through the smoke quickly, it should

]

[ be you rather than Tim. Try again!

Question C (Choose only ONE unless directed to "Try again!")

10. [The effects of carbon monoxide do not depend on physical condition. Try

[ again!

11. [This will not protect him from carbon monoxide. You still don't know the

[ source or extent of the smoke. Try again!

12. [ Smoke is slowly drifting in toward the face. Tim would soon be overcome. Try]

[ again! ]

22

77
78

FIRST AID ROLE PLAY SIMULATIONS FOR MINERS

By H. P. Cole,! R. D. Wasielewski,2 J. V. Haley,3 and P. K. Berger4

ABSTRACT

Simulation exercises designed to strengthen miners fust aid patient evaluation, problem identification, and fust aid treatmentskills were developed and evaluated over a 2-yr period. The exercises

are based on the work ofOhio State University and University of Kentucky researchers under Bureau

of Mines contract. The design characteristics of these simulations are described in this paper. An

example exercise is provided as an appendix to this paper. Using these materials, instructors can adapt

the procedure and methods to develop a wide variety ofother effective first aid simulation exercises.

Field tests ofthe new exercises suggest that the simulations (1) are seen as authentic and realistic

problems by miners and instructors, (2) actively engage the interest and participation of miners, and

(3) teach important fust aid diagnostic and problem identification skills, as well as standard frrst aid

treattnent procedures. Perfonnance data from the exercises confinn minerslack of proficiency in frrst

aid diagnostic and evaluation skills. Training with realistic simulations, like those researched and

described in this report, may increase miner proficiency for coping with actual rust aid emergency

situations.

INTRODUCTION

This paper provides practical infonnation for instructors

who teach fust aid to miners in annual refresher training

classes. After reading the paper and examining the materials

in the appendix, instructors who choose to do so can develop

similar simulation exercises for other fust aid problems. The

paper also provides background infonnation about the design

ofthese types ofsimulation exercises and presents data about

their effectiveness.

The fust section reviews the role ofsimulation exercises

in teaching critical skills. Miner experience with simulation

exercises, like mine rescue contests, is then discussed. Then,

the inexpensive Ohio State University simulation method

developed by Gilbert (I _2)5 is described. Its potential application to the training of miners is noted. Results of the University of Kentucky studies of miner first aid strengths and

'Professor, Department of Educational and Counseling Psychology.

2Associate professor, Lexington Community College.

3Professor, Department of Behavioral Science.

weaknesses are then presented. Implications ofthese findings

for the improvement of fust aid training of miners are discussed.

The nextpartofthe paperdescribesthe design ofnew first

aid simulation exercises for miners. The exercises emphasize

initial diagnostic evaluation of the victim's injuries through

hands-on primary and secondary surveys, as well as the performance of standard first aid treattnent procedures once the

injuries have been identified and treatment priorities determined. Then, the field testing procedures used to evaluate one

exercise are described. The miner evaluations ofthe exercise

are presented along with information about the miner performance.

The last part ofthe paper interpretsthe data from the field

tests of the new simulation exercise. Suggestions for the use

of such exercises are provided.

4Professor, Martin School of Public Administration. University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY

SUnderlined numbers in parentheses refer to items in the list of

references at the end of this paper.
79

SIMULATION EXERCISES FOR TEACHING AND TESTING CRITICAL SKILLS

Simulation tests ofreal life problem solving are often an

effective way to train and assess proficiency for dealing with

emergency situations. Simulated emergencies can be realistic

and motivating. They can also demand a broad range of

responses from the individual including (a) recognizing cues

that indicate an emergency is developing or underway, (b)

gathering additional information to diagnose the nature and

extent ofthe emergency, (c) making decisions about various

courses of action that should be taken, and (d) implementing

and carrying out appropriate proceduresto alleviate or control

the emergency (Distlehorst Q)). For these reasons, welldesigned simulation exercises can mimic many aspects of

emergency situations. Consequently, a simulation exercise

can provide opportunity for persons to learn and practice

critical skills needed to cope with actual emergencies.

Because ofthese characteristics,simulation exercises are

widely used in training professional and technical persons for

responding to emergency situations. Elaborate interactive

computer-controlled human patientsimulators, patient actors,

computer-generated patient evaluation problems, and paper

and pencil latent image patient care and management problems (PMP's) are frequently used for training physicians,

nurses, and dentists to diagnose and treatmedical illnesses and

emergencies (Baboou @, Dugdale W, Farrand (Q), Fleisher

(]J, Jones ([), McGuire <2:.lID, Norman (ll), Pryor (12),

Saunders (U), and Umbers (H)). Similar simulation techniques are used in assessing proficiency of emergency skills

of aircrews (Flathers (12), Giffm (lQ), Jensen (11)), power

plant operators (Hunt (lID), and other technical personnel

(Olsen (12)).

Figure 1 outlines a simulation exercise developed for the

proficiency testing and refresher training of industrial and

laboratory workers (Olsen (12)). The simulations are carried

out as staged accidents in actual work locations. Human

actors and simple props are used to stage a more or less

realistic accident scene. (In one training program described

by Olsen (12), animal blood and entrails obtained from

slaughterhouses are used as props to simulate major injury

accidents to workers.)

The simulation begins when workers discover the simulated accident and begin first aid care for the victim. The

discovery may be with or without prior knowledge of the

trainees as part of a planned training activity. Although they

may provide a realistic context for teaching and assessing

proficiency in critical first aid skills, such full-scale work

location simulation exercises are difficult and costly to arrange. Yet these and other types of simulation exercises

provide experience with situations workers and first-aiders

rarely encounter otherwise. A main purpose ofsuch simulations is to maintain proficiency in nonroutine, infrequently

used, but critical skills.

Other types of simulation exercises can often be even

more expensive, especially when they involve complex interactive computersin combination with mechanical mockups of

human patients, aircraft cockpits, or other equipment. However, simpler paper and pencil simulations are often used for

teaching and assessing proficiency in criticalskills, especially

those involving problem recognition, information gathering,

and decisionmaking (Giffin (lQ)).

Paper and pencil simulations of this type have recently

been developed for teaching coal miners how to cope with

underground mine emergency situations (Cole C2Q:l!) and

Lacefield @). Knowledge gained from constructing and

field testing these types ofsimulations can contribute directly

to the design of effective role play simulation exercises. As

McGuire (l3) notes in a review of medical simulation research, it is not the format of problem presentation but the

content and logic ofthe simulated problem that is basic to an

effective exercise for testing proficiency in such skills. Simulations may take many formats including computer administration, paper and pencil exercises, gaming situations, fullscale drills and contests in the workplace, or structured classroom role playing activities. This paper deals with the latter

type of simulations. However, the principles noted often

apply to other types of simulation problems, including the

latent image paper and pencil fonnat exercises developed in

this project and described in other reports (Cole (21)).

MINER EXPERIENCE WITH ROLE PLAY SIMULATIONS

If designed appropriately, role play simulations are motivating and effective means for teaching and assessing problem solving skills needed to cope with emergency situations.

Ifthey are not carefully designed, classroom role play simulation exercises fail to achieve their potential. Both well

designed and poorly designed role play simulations have been

experienced by most miners and trainers. The simulations

experienced by most miners fall into three general categories:

Mine rescue contest exercises, first aid contest exercises, and

impromptu and less complete classroom role playing situations that are usually carried out in the context of teaching

interpersonal dynamics. This generalization is based upon

visiting and observing many of these types of training activities in the mining industry in 6 States over a 4-yr period.

Mine rescue training exercises are widely used in the

mining industry. These are elaborate and detailed problem

solving exercises that involve the use of actual mine rescue

equipment and many props to simulate an underground mine

environment. Sometimes the exercise is carried out underground in an actual mine. During the exercise some persons
80

SCENARIO

EMERGENCY RESPONSE TRAINING

DATE TIME -----

NATUREOFEMERGENCY:~A=d~d~b~~~e~~~e~xp~lo~s~io~n~~~~~~~~~~~~~

TRAINING TO BE UTILlZEDfTESTED: First aid in add environn1ent

LOCATION OF EXERCISE: Emergency generator building

NOTIFICATIONS OR SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Fire Department. Request that the

fire department take information from the plant emergency response team and advise

that no ambulance is available for transport of injured.

DESCRIPTION OF INCIDENT: A maintenance man is checking the bearings on the

emergency generator. Batteries are being charged. Upon completion of his job. he

lights a cigarette. The flame ignites hydrogen which is trapped in the area because of

a ventilation problem.

The battery explodes.

The man is hit by flying debris.

His head is cut.

His hand is burned by the exploding hydrogen gas.

He is covered with acid.

PROCEED AS IF THIS SITUATION WERE AN ACTUAL EMERGENCY.

FIGURE 1.-Example of realistic simulation exercise (Olsen (19) ).
play the role of injured or trapped miners while others adopt

the multipIe roles ofthe mine rescue team and itssupportstaff.

The exercise is structured around a complex and realistic

problem, such as a mine fIre or explosion. The simulated

victims and the mine rescue team do not know all of the

problem structure as the exercise begins. Rather, they know

only the infonnation that would typically be available to them

in a similar actual mine emergency. Thus, as in real life,

details ofthe problem become known to the role players only

as they develop a plan, enter the simulated mine and attempt

to locate and rescue the missing miners.

The problem unfolds and changes as the rescue team

explores the mine, gathers infonnation, encounters barriers

and hazards, and modifIes strategy to achieve the goals of

locating and evacuating trapped and/or injured miners and

restoring the mine to a safe condition. Although there are

well-established procedures and protocols for mine rescue

work, every mine exercise is a different problem. A good

solution (rescue) requires a flexible and unique combination

of prior knowledge and skills. The development and execution of constantly changing plans and strategies is required.

Standard protocols must be recalled and applied when appropriate. Asthe rescue proceeds, inferences mustbe constructed

about mine conditions based on available infonnation. A

good solution creatively integrates the large amount ofinformation and the many procedures basic to any problem. Miners

and trainers enjoy these elaborate simulations and learn much

from them.

First aid exercises and contests are also widely used in the

mining industry, often in conjunction with mine rescue contests. These exercises also involve miners who role play

injured accident victims and others who adopt the roles of a

first aid team. The simulated injuries are usually severe. First

aid kits and supplies nonnally available in mines are available

to the fIrst aid team. However, unlike mine rescue exercises

that require problem solving activity, most mine frrst aid

exercises and contests place less emphasis upon initial problem identifIcation and fonnulation. The nature and extent of

the victim'sinjuries are usually given to the first-aiders, often

printed on a piece ofpaper. The exercise usually focuses upon

the skill of the first aid team in applying standard procedures

to stop bleeding, dress and bandage wounds, splint and bandage fractures, and immobilize the victim on a stretcher.

These types of exercises present the first-aiders with an

already well-defined problem. The emphasis (and scoring) is

upon the rapid and skillful application of frrst aid procedures

according to standard protocols. The early and crucial information gathering, problem fonnulation, and strategy development aspects of the problem are ignored. These include (1)

the fIrst-aider's initial evaluation of the accident scene to

detennine if it is safe to treat the victim, or if some other

action(s) must be taken fIrst; (2) the approach to and removal

ofthe victim, once the mine area in which the victim is located

isjudged safe for the first-aiders to enter; (3) the evaluation of

the victim's injuries through a detailed primary and secondary

81

survey; (4) the use of infonnation from the primary and

secondary surveys to construct inferences about what injuries

are present, which should be treated, in what order, and by

what methods; (5) the planning and implementation of complex details of communicating with surface personnel and

transporting the victim to the portal.

The third type ofrole play simulations with which many

trainers and miners are familiar are designed for inclusion in

annual refresher training and similar classroom settings.

Constraints oftime and location generally require these simulation exercisesto be brief, perhaps no longerthan 20 min, and

to not require elaborate props or equipment. Often the content

ofthese role play simulations concerns interpersonal dynamics among miners and their supervisors. Sometimes the

content is technical, such as the role playing of a mine

inspector and a mine supervisor conversation about a list of

violations found by the inspector in a current visit to the mine.

If carefully planned, developed, and introduced at the appropriate time and in an appropriate manner, these types of

shorter simulations can also be engaging and elicit the full

participation of miners. However, even short classroom

simulation exercises are more diffIcult to design and structure

than they may at first appear.

It has been observed that many mine trainers have tried to

use role play simulations like these in their classes, but with

poor results. Often there is too little planning and preparation

on the part ofthe instructor. Skillful and experienced instructors who can use impromptu role play situations effectively

tend to be few and far between. Frequently the method fails

to achieve its potential because the trainer fails to select and

structure an authentic problem that challenges participants

present levels ofknowledge and skill. Oftentimes the problem

structure is not clearto the trainerorto the miners. The content

and logic of the problem is often not well articulated. The

roles of the players are often not specified clearly, and class

members feel uncertain and uneasy about what they are to do.

Sometimes, little thought is given to what the members ofthe

class who are not involved in the role play situation are to do

during the activity. Usually there are no objective criteria for

evaluation of the role play perfonnance. Following the

activity, it is easy for the persons who observed to be critical

of the actors. Thus, the role players may feel uneasy and defensive. One or two experiences with role play simulations

like these serve to disenchant both miners and trainers. In the

future, both will tend to avoid similar classroom simulation

exercises or activities that they perceive as similar to these

simulations.

Much preparation prior to the simulation is necessary if

the instructor is to present the simulated problem in a realistic

and time efficient manner, and if trainees are to become fully

and quickly engaged in the activity. Effective role play

simulation exercises incorporate a number of components.

These include (1) simple propsthatsimulate key aspects ofthe

problem setting, (2) carefully chosen graphics and illustrations that help describe the problem, (3) a brief written
82

description that clearly presents the initial problem, (4) brief

and clear instructions to the individual class members who

play various roles in the simulation (and to those who observe

the role play simulation), and (5) a means to evaluate specific

aspects of the problem solving performance of the participants. Role play simulations that are usually designed and

used by classroom instructors tend to be more impromptu and

less complete with respect to these design criteria.

First aid classroom role play simulations that meet good

design criteria and that are known to be motivating and

effective instructional tools have been developed and researched with college student populations at the Ohio State

University (Gilbert (1)). This earlier research was used to

design the fIrst aid simulation exercises discussed in this

paper.

GILBERT FIRST AID SIMULATION TECHNIQUE

In his dissertation, Gilbert (1) set out to develop an inexpensive, easy to use, and effective simulation method for

teaching basic fIrst aid skills. His review of the earlier

research categorized simulation exercises into eight different

approaches. Many ofthese approaches, such as computerized

mechanical models ofinjured human victims, full-scale field

simulations of accidents with injury makeup kits and human

actors (as often used in the military), and complex flight or

other equipment simulators are not available to instructors in

typical first aid courses. Other methods, such as those described by Olsen (l2) using human actors with animal blood

and entrails to simulate industrial accidents at actual work

stations, are difficult to stage, very time consuming, and

fraught with potential ethical and legal problems.

Using ideas and techniques from simulation methods and

research across the eight approaches, Gilbert developed an

inexpensive, simple, but effective simulation approach. The

procedure provides short verbal descriptions of the problem

situation, brief written instructions for human actors (victims

and bystanders) in brief role playing situations, injury tags

placed on the victim, and a performance scoring sheet. The

simulation is presented to the trainee as if he or she had

suddenly encountered an accident victim.

The trainee must fIrst gather information from the victim

and bystanders, by observation and questioning. Information

about the nature and extent of injury to the victim is partially

revealed by the trainee's primary and secondary surveysofthe

victim. Bleeding, puncture wounds, dislocations, fractures,

and other injuries are not fully simulated with makeup kits.

However, they are simulated by the victim actor and by injury

tags placed on the victim's body at appropriate places; e.g., a

small label stuck to the patient's ear that says "small amount

ofclear,slightly yellow fluid running outofear," a small label

on the upper left chest that says "puncture wound (about the

size of a pencil) making a sucking noise," or a large red card

on a limb or the floor that says, "large pool of dark red blood

and blood-soaked clothing."6

The size, location, and prominence of the injury tag is

related to the size, location, and prominence of actual injury

cues on real victims with the types ofinjuries being simulated.

To perform effectively, the trainee must fInd and make

use of all the cues (position of victim, bystanders observations, injury card cues located on the victim, etc.). He or she

must then decide upon a course of action and administer first

aid. For each simulation exercise there is a performance check

list that is used by the instructor to score the proficiency ofthe

trainee. An example of a Gilbert simulation exercise and a

performance scoring sheet is given in fIgures 2 and 3, respectively.

Gilbert tested his simulation method in a large experimental study with college students. He found the method to

be highly motivating to students, inexpensive. and effective in

teaching basic fIrst aid skills as outlined in the "First Aid and

Personal Safety Course ofthe American Red Cross" (25). He

also found his method was effective in measuring student

knowledge of fIrst aid skills as validated by the "Ohio State

University First Aid and Personal Safety Achievement Test"

(Gilbert (1)). The Ohio State test is a standardized 100 item

multiple choice test. More recently Gilbert (2) has further

refIned and validated his simulation method with other

samples of persons and with the "Burkes Emergency Care

Knowledge Test" (Burkes (2.6)).

From hisresearch. Gilbert concluded that persons trained

in the method were able to learn to perform procedures

correctly and that they achieved mastery of verbal knowledge

about fIrst aid procedures. However, his study did not determine how long trainees retained this profIciency and knowledge. or how well this procedural proficiency in first aid

generalized to actual first aid practice.

6 These injury labels are similar to the labels used in surface

simulations ofmine rescue contests where printed material on cards

placed on the ground or simulated rib disclose information to the

team as it advances (water, methane level, roof fall, etc.).
Situation #78: Industrial Accident

Situation:

You are working on a construction project when there is a cave-in and material

strikes a co-worker.

Where:

Ground level of a new building project

Miscellaneous Information:

You fear the building will continue to cave in.

Position of Victim:

On back

Special Instructions for Victim:

You are Unconscious and remain so.

Supplied Materials:

1. Assorted bandaging materials

2. Coat

Tags:

1. Moderate bleeding (1 )-front of scalp

2. Mild bleeding (1 )-nose

3. Mild bleeding (1)-back of neck

4. Moderate bleeding (1 )-front of left lower leg

FIGURE 2.-Example of Gilbert simulation exercise.

83
84

Name of First Aider Grader

Situation #78: Industrial Accident

Yes

Well Done

Yes

Adequate No

1. Was the victim removed from the dangerous

area in proper fashion? 3,2 0

2. Was the victim properly examined for all

injuries? 2 0

3. Was moderate bleeding of leg controlled and

bandaged properly? 4,3 2,1 0

A. Direct pressure and elevation (1)

B. Pressure point (1)

C. Proper bandage and dressing (2)

4. Was moderate bleeding of scalp controlled by a

loose bandage and dressed so as not to stop flow

completely? 4,3 2,1 0

5. Was concussion suspected and victim thus

handled very carefully? 2 0

6. Was mild bleeding of neck controlled and

bandaged properly? 3,2 0

A. Direct pressure (1)

B. Proper bandage and dressing-non-circular (2)

7. Was mild bleeding of nose controlled in an

appropriate fashion? 2 0

8. Was victim treated for shock? (In this case

elevation of feet is inappropriate and elevation of

upper body is acceptable.) 2 0

Comments: Pdj

Drldbrs

Tdal

22

FIGURE 3.-Example of Gilbert simulation exercise performance scoring sheet.
85

POTENTIAL OF GILBERT SIMULATION METHOD FOR MINER TRAINING

Prior to the work of this project, it appeared that the

Gilbert method for teaching and assessing proficiency in fIrst

aid skills had notbeen applied to minertraining. However, for

a number ofreasons, the method wasjudged to have promise

for teaching fIrst aid skills to miners in annual refresher

classes.

First, it is relatively easy to develop and use simulation

exercises patterned after the Gilbert method. Neither the

developmentofthe exercises northeir use requires any special

equipment beyond that typically available to annual refresher

class instructors.

Second, the method is adaptable. Where miners might be

inhibited about doing a full body survey in a suspected spinal

injury victim (including checking for penile erection and toe

flexure), a manikin rather than a human actor might be

substituted.

Third, the method is brief and time efficient. A single

simulation can be completed, evaluated, and critiqued in a 20-

or 30-min period. Multiple role play simulations of the same

or different problems may be undertaken with small groups of

trainees in the same classroom, thus involving all participants

in hands-on skill building activities.

Fourth, the Gilbert method has proven to engage the full

attention and participation of college students and others in

learning fIrst aid skills, and it has also been shown to increase

their fIrst aid knowledge and skills.

Fifth, many of the simulation exercises developed by

Gilbert and his colleagues may be easily adapted to fIrst aid

problems that are common in underground mines.

Sixth, the method can be used to present realistic problemsthat mimic well the full rangeofproblem solving activity

required in actual mine first aid emergencies, much more so

than first aid team contest exercises, orrefresher classfirst aid

instruction that presents a well-defined first aid injury case

and focuses mainly on performance of first aid procedures.

Seventh, field interviews revealed that miner first aid

skills and knowledge were weakest in critical information

gathering, judgment, and decisionmaking. These specific

skill areas are emphasized by the Gilbert simulation method.

For these reasons the Gilbert simulation method was

studied and adapted to the production ofclassroom simulation

exercises for use in annual refresher training.

MINER FIRST AID STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES

A study of miner performance of first aid skills as

practiced on injured fellow miners was undertaken (Cole,

(ll)). Medical personnel and miners trained as emergency

medical technicians (EMT's) were sampled from four coalproducing regions in Kentucky, West Virginia, and Virginia.

The sample included those fust aid experts who first see and

treat injured miners who have earlier received first aid from

their fellow miners. The observations of these experts were

gathered from interviews. Interviewers used critical incident

and structured interview forms designed to elicit from these

experts their direct observations of what first aid tasks miners

usually perform well and what tasks they often perform

poorly. One hundred twenty first aid experts were interviewed, some in group settings. Reports from 77 experts who

made individual responses were collected and tallied. Table 1

describes the geographic distribution and the types of experts

involved in this sample. In the interviews it was made clear

that the expert'sframe ofreference should be the strengths and

weaknesses ofminer actual first aid performance. The quality

ofperformance was to bejudged by the expert's examinations

of the victims, following initial first aid treatment by nonEMT trained miners.

The working EMT's shown in table 1 included five

underground coal miners who routinely are called to the scene

of underground first aid emergencies, and seven EMT ambulance personnel who routinely meet injured miners at the

portal. The 33 EMT miner trainees are all experienced

miners, many ofthem supervisors, who had nearly completed

TABLE 1.• Types of first aid experts Interviewed and their geographic distribution

Expert type Eastern KY WesternKY Central WV Southwest VA Total

Emergency MD 1 0 2 4 7

Emergency room RN 2 3 3 5 13

EMT instructors 6 1 0 1 8

Working EMT's 0 13 1 0 14

EMT miner trainees 16 17 0 0 33

Other 2 0 0 0 2

Totals 27 34 6 10 77
86

16 weeks of EMT training but who had not yet passed the

certification examination.

The experts interviewed reported miners were strongest

in following standard procedures for treating obvious injuries, especially splinting and bandaging simple fractures,

caring for cuts, abrasions, and sprains, and controlling bleeding. Miners were reported as mostoften making serious errors

when (1) immobilizing and transporting victims with back

and neck (spinal) injuries, (2) dressing and immobilizing

compound fractures, (3) rushing to move an injured miner

without fIrst immobilizing and stabilizing the victim, and (4)

failing to do a victim evaluation through a primary and

secondary survey.

Poor performance on these tasks was reported to be

caused primarily by failure to discover hidden or nonobvious

injuries. Missing hidden injuries wassaid to resultfrom miner

failure to conduct an adequate initial hands-on patient evaluation. Thus, the victim's injuries, unless obvious, tend to

remain unidentified. Properly evaluating the victim for injuries tends to improve fIrst aid care because hidden injuries

may be found and treatment priorities established.

Analysis ofthe data suggested there is a consensus among

the experts on both frrst aid treatments performed well and

those performed poorly. Obvious injuries are generally

treated well, hidden injuries and illnesses are not, with a major

exception that obvious compound fractures are often not

treated well because the treatment procedures are diffIcult.

Sometimes obvious and hidden injuries are combined in

the same victim. Table 2 reports the experts' estimated

percent of injuries miners treat well or poorly when the

injuries are obvious, hidden, or combined. Table 3 shows

there is a strong positive correlation between those first aid

treatments miners do well-poorly and the obvious-hidden

nature of the injury. The observed correlation between these

two dimensionsis 0.53. When the obvious but diffIcult to treat

injuries (compound fractures and amputations) are omitted

from the obvious-done poorlycell, the relationship isstronger

and the correlation increases to 0.64.

What differentiates miner treatment of obvious and hidden injuries? It appears that treatment of obvious injuries

requires knowledge of technique and appropriate use of frrst

aid equipment, the skills that are emphasized in annual refresher frrst aid training and fIrst aid contests. Appropriate

treatment of hidden injuries or illnesses appears to require

more emphasis upon gathering information, evaluating the

accidentscene and victim, constructing inferences about what

the probable injuries are, and prioritizing first aid treatment

and procedures.

TABLE 2. - Obvious, hidden, combined, and

other Injuries treated well-poorly

First aid Obvious Hidden Combined Other

Cases reported ............. 117 41 43 9

Treated welL...jX:t ....... 68 7 26 (I)

Treated poorly.. jX:t ....... 32 93 74 (l)

1 These frequencies were too small to compute meaningful

percentages.

Interviews with the 120 experts also yielded other information, including a consensus that miners often failed to

communicate clearly and effectively with each other and with

surface personnel when they are involved in a first aid emergency. Lack of clarity in communication, or failure to communicate the details of an injury accident can have severe

consequences for a victim. Examples cited include (1) a

mantrip bringing out an injured miner being forced to wait for

the track to be cleared of other equipment, when an appropriate call earlier could have cleared the track all the way out,

(2) an injured miner who had been brought 4 miles to an

elevator and had to be transported back in the same direction

from which he had started, plus an additional 4 miles, to

another elevator because the fIrst elevator was temporarily inoperative while being repaired, and (3) getting an injured

TABLE 3. - Relationship between first aid done well-poorly and obvious-hidden Injuries

(Reported frequencies of well-poorly done first aid)

Done poorly Total

38 117

38 41

76 158

23 102

38 41

61 143

Excluding compound fractures and arnputations:2

Obvious 79

Hidden 3

Total -:8--=-2----------,-------------..,......,..-:,--------

Done well

Including compound fractures and arnputations: 1

Obvious 79

Hidden .:.: .-=-3 ----==--=--- ----=--='--- _

Total 82

1 Chi square =44.09, 1 degree of freedom; P =<0.001; phi coefficient =0.53.

2 Chi square =58.81, 1 degree of freedom; P =<0.001; phi coefficient =0.64.
miner to the surface promptly and into the company ambulance but not being able to leave the mine property for the

hospital because the very long surface unit train was blocking

the single roadway to the mine.

Mter the field interviews ofthe 120 fust aid experts from

the underground coal mine industry were completed, a meeting at the National Mine Health and Safety Academy was

convened with 13 additional experts familiar with medical

emergencies in underground coal mines in six States. These

experts, who routinely teach first aid as well as provide first

aid and emergency medical treatment to miners, were also

asked to identify the most common and most serious errors

made by miners in first aid treatment of fellow accident

victims. The group members identified most serious and

frequent errors as failure to do a careful injury assessment,

failure to prepare and stabilize the victim prior to transport to

the surface, and failure to monitor the victim during the

transport period.

Miners were said to often act too quickly, moving the

victim out without frrst searching for and identifying the

extent and nature of injuries. More extensive injuries and

complications frequently result for the victim because firstaiders fail to conductcritical injury evaluation, fail to find and

care for seriousinjuries, and hurry transport. These 13 experts

87

reviewed the findings from the field interviews and independently judged them to be valid. The results of the field interviews offirst aid experts, and the independent observations of

the 13 experts, are also consistent with an earlier set of

fmdings and recommendations from a study concerned with

the first aid needs and skills of miners (pickar (21)).

In summary, good fust aid in underground mine emergencies requires a broad problem solving focus, not only

knowledge of specific first aid procedures. Good first aid

simulations should be structured much like good mine rescue

contest problems. They should present a simulation that

mimics the complexity ofproblem identification, infonnation

gathering, decisionmaking, communication, strategy development, rapidly changing conditions and unknowns, and the

application ofspecific first aid techniques required to administer effective first aid in actual mine emergencies. These

research results from studies of miner needs for first aid

training, and the practical knowledge gained from studies by

Gilbert and his colleagues, contributed to the development of

short and time efficient first aid simulations for use in annual

refresher training classes. A sample exercise that resulted

from this integration ofresearch and practice isincluded as an

appendix to this paper. It can serve as a model for others who

are interested in developing additional first aid simulation

exercises for miners.

NEW FIRST AID SIMULATIONS FOR MINER TRAINING

Many ofthe approximately 50 simulation exercisesin the

Gilbert (2) manual are relevant to underground coal mine first

aid situations and can be used with little modification. (All of

Gilbert's simulations are available for duplication without

copyrightrestrictions.) OtherGilbert type simulations ofcoal

mine medical emergencies can easily be developed from real

past accidentsituations. The example simulation exercise and

scoring sheet in figures 4 and 5 illustrate this. The graphic

depiction of the accident situation (fig. 6) is taken from the

MSHA "Coal- Underground Fatalities" @. The problem

situation, injury tags, and scoring sheet are designed for this

case. Although the miner in the accident case was fatally

injured, for purposes of the exercise, the miner's injuries are

severe, but not necessarily fatal if he is given prompt and

proper first aid care. Many other problem situations can be

taken from the MSHA "Fatal Injury Abstracts and Illustrations" program, as well as from MSHA and State accident

investigation reports. Consequently it is a relatively easy task

to make up an array of Gilbert type simulations based on real

case materials.

The first aid simulation exercise (fig. 4), and two others

involving other mine injury first aid situations were distributed to a group of instructors who routinely teach annual

refresher training classes. While these persons found the

content of the exercises to be of interest, they were unsure

about how effective the exercises might be in their classes and

also unsure how to go about presenting the material. Some

thought miners in their classes might be unwilling to participate in such an activity. Others thought the simulation would

require too much preparation, or would be too difficult tocarry

out. Subsequent to these meetings, the Gilbert method was

modified to make the exercise purpose more explicit, to make

it easier for trainers and miners to use the simulations, and to

produce a realistic simulation similar in many ways to the

traditional mine rescue exercise simulations popular with

miners and trainers.

Examination of the sample exercise in the appendix to

this paper illustrates all the basic features of the Gilbert

method have been retained, while additional design features

have been added that make the simulation easier for miners

and instructors to use.

The following is a list of the design guidelines for these

newer role play simulations.

1. The problem should challenge participants present

levels of frrst aid knowledge and skill. There should be an

opportunity for the trainees to identify and solve problems, not

only the opportunity to demonstrate first aid procedures such

as giving artificial respiration or bandaging a wound.

2. The problem contextshould be authentic with respect

to the trainees workplace experiences. The problem, the

language used to describe it, the roles and relationships ofthe

victim and role players, the graphic illustrations and the props
88

Situation #1: Roof Fall Injury

Situation:

A miner is hit by 12 inch thick, 4 x 5 foot kettle bottom while shoveling coal

Where:

48 inch coal near a continuous miner

Miscellaneous Information:

There are two other members in the crew and you are the most experienced.

Nearest phone 5 minutes away. It is twenty minutes to portal by mantrip.

Position of Victim:

Lying on side under part of broken kettle bottom

Special Instructions for Victim:

You can talk but are dazed and cannot move your arms and legs.

Special Instructions for Crew Members:

Act excited but do what you are told.

Supplied Materials:

Mine first aid kit and stretcher (5 minutes away).

Tags:

1. Part of kettle bottom on top of miner (Simulate with cardboard box or other

similar object)

2. Left upper chest pulls in when miner breathes in. (Apply label to left chest under

shirt)

3. Bones of upper spine are out of line. (Apply label to upper spine under shirt)

FIGURE 4.-Sample Gilbert-type exercise simulation modeled after a coal mine accident.
Name Grader

Situation #1: Roof Fall Injury

89

Yes

Well Done

Yes

Adequate No

1. Was the kettle bottom promptly, gently,

and properly removed from the victim? 3 0 0

2. Was the victim properly examined and

questioned for all injuries? 2 0

3. Was the victim ll.Q1 moved unnecessarily? 3 2 0

4. Was the victim given verbal encouragement? 2 0

5. Was crushed chest properly diagnosed and

splinted? 2 0

6. Was possible spinal injury properly diagnosed

and victim handled correctly? 3 2 0

7. Was victim treated for shock? 2 0

8. Was help sent for? 0

9. Was victim properly immobilized and moved

properly? 3 2 0

fdj----------------

D:rldbns _

TctaI _

PQsgje ----=2::..:,1 _

FIGURE 5.-Sample Gilbert type exercise simulation performance scoring sheet for roof fall accident situation.
,.'..:..... ~- .. -~.--.: --- '. ....... , \ .. - .... - ... -, ....

,- .. - .

90

,----~-

I\..

- ------------_.....

..........

FIGURE 6.-Depiction of roof fall accident situation (28).
used to help present the problem, the types of injuries simulated, as well as their cause, must all be seen as authentic and

realistic by the trainees with respect to their workplace experiences.

3. The initial problem situation, descriptions of additional background infonnation, and instructions to the role

players,should all be brief and articulate statements written in

simple language. Drawings, diagrams, graphics, and simple

props should be used along with verbal descriptions to present

the main aspects of the problem and its context.

4. The initial problem situation needs to be described

adequately. Relevant background infonnation that would be

known to the persons in an actual problem situation should be

briefly presented. However, only that infonnation that would

be immediately available to the first-aiders from the emergency scene itself, from the victim or wimesses, should be

available in the initial problem narrative statement. Otherwise, the simulation does not provide the opportunity for the

trainee to identify the problem(s), establish treatment priorities, and select and apply relevant first aid procedures.

5. The simulation exercise should be designed to reveal

additional infonnation to the problem solversrole playing the

frrst-aiders as the simulation unfolds. The instructions to the

victim, the placement ofinjury and accidentscene cues, and

all other aspects of the problem should be designed to release

additional relevant infonnation to the problem solvers as

appropriate inquiries are made as the problem is worked.

6. Simple props that simulate the key elements of the

accident scene, the injuries to the victim, the materials and

resources at hand, and any special conditions in the specific

accident situation need to be developed and presented

throughout the exercise as the problem unfolds. These props

can include simple drawings and diagrams of the accident

scene including the location and appearance ofequipment and

the victim, depictions of obvious and hidden injuries through

the appropriate placement of injury tags and simulated injuries, special instructions to the victim about how he or she

should act or speak, as well as collections of equipment and

materials that would usually be available at or near to the

accident scene, e.g., other persons, telephones, first aid kits,

jackets, tools, etc.

7. The brief printed instructions to those class members

who are to role play the victim(s), wimesses, and/or the firstaiders need to be prepared on separate cards and presented to

the role players when the simulation is introduced. Similar

sets of brief instructions need to be prepared and given to

trainees who are not involved as actors but will observe the

simulation. Prior to the simulation, each group of trainees,

victim, frrst-aiders, and observers need their own set of

instructions to define their role in the activity.

8. A perfonnance evaluation sheet by which to rate the

effectiveness of the first aid treatment administered to the

victim by the first-aiders should be prepared. All the key steps

in proper first aid treatment for the case in the simulation

91

should be listed and followed by a short and easy to use rating

scale. Following the simulation, all the members of the class

including the instructor, the victim, the frrst-aiders, and the

observers should rate the frrst aid perfonnance on the rating

scale. Discussion ofthe ratings awarded by the instructor and

the class membersshould be used as aidsfor correcting errors,

reinforcing correct perfonnance, and illustrating first aid

concepts, procedures, and techniques.

In addition to the materials to be used with the miners in

the classroom, a carefully designed instructor's guide should

be prepared for the trainer. The following is a list of design

guidelines for the instructor's guide:

1. The instructor's guide should present the problem

situation in a brief narrative and graphic fonn that will also be

used to help present the problem situation to the miners. This

helps the instructor to grasp quickly the content and contextof

the problem. (See pages 3-5 of appendix.)

2. The instructor's guide should describe in a clear and

logical manner what the instructor must do before the simulation to prepare for class, what he or she must do during the

simulation to ensure an effective session, and what must be

done afterthe simulation to help class members profitfrom the

exercise. This type of detail in the instructor's guide makes it

easy for the instructor to prepare for class. Uncertainty about

how to proceed is avoided. Detailed prior preparation and

planning is assisted by such directions. (See pages 6-10 of

appendix.)

3. The instructor's guide should be designed so that

everything the instructor needs to prepare for and carry outthe

simulation is provided. This includes the narrative description and graphics used to present the problem situation to the

miners (prepared in large type suitable for copying to readily

visible overhead transparencies); injury tags, instructions to

the victim, first-aiders, and observers all printed neatly on

cutoutcardsthatmay be quickly clipped out and used as is; the

perfonnance rating fonn; additional diagrams, charts, and

pictures to be used following the simulation; suggestions

about how to adapt, modify, and enhance the exercise; etc.

Those props and materials that cannot be included in the

instructor's guide should be commonly and easily available in

typical annualrefreshertraining classes. These things include

first aid kits, blankets, jackets, tools, and objects like desks

and tables used to simulate equipment like roof bolters,

continuous mining machines, and such things as rolled up

newspapers taped with masking tape to simulate an amputated

ann.

4. The instructor's guide and the simulation activity

itself should both be designed such that once the instructor

prepares for one class, he or she can save the props and

materials and use them again to teach other classes for the

same simulation, with minimum new preparation time.

5. The instructor's guide and the simulation activity

itself should be designed to help instructors generalize these

instructional design principles to the planning, development,
92

and use of other effective simulation exercises generated by

instructors themselves.

There are two primary instructional design differences

between the Gilbert simulations and these newer first aid

simulations. First, with the new method the presentation of

the problem scenario is more detailed and complete, but still

short and time efficient. In the Gilbert method, the problem

presentation is accomplished through brief verbal statements

and descriptions along with the physical role playing presentation of the accident scene complete with the role playing

victim and injury tags. (See figure 1.) In the new method the

problem situation is presented in more detail. A one-page,

large-type description of the problem and its background

features is presented on an overhead transparency. (See page

3 of appendix.) In addition, detailed drawings and graphics

are presented on overhead projector transparencies. (See

pages 4-5 ofappendix.) These diagrams and drawings quickly

convey details of the accident scene that would normally be

available in an actual emergency, but that are difficult to

describe in verbal statements. It is also easy for the instructor

to set up the simulated accident scene with reference to the

written and graphic depiction of the problem. This simultaneous multiple presentation of the problem through verbal,

graphic, and physical simulation of the accident scene and

injuries helps make the exercise more realistic and meaningful to the miners who enter the classroom in the role of firstaiders or observers.

A second instructional design difference between the

Gilbertsimulations and the newer method concernsthe degree

to which the instructor is provided details and assistance in

preparing for and carrying out the classroom simulation

activity. In typical Gilbert simulation exercises the instructor

is provided with little specific information about how to

prepare for the simulation, conduct the activity, or engage in

fruitful fo11owup discussion. (See figure 1.) The new method

makes these matters explicit. Consequently, instructors who

are not skilled in using classroom role play simulations as an

instructional method may be expected to do a better job of

preparing for and conducting their class. Examination ofthe

instructor's guide for the sample simulation exercise included

in the appendix illustrates the explicit nature ofthe assistance

to the instructor in planning and conducting the exercise.

First, the guide presents the problem situation to the

instructor in verbal and graphic form. (See pages 3-5 of

appendix.) Thus, the instructor immediately knows what the

problem is and has information about how the accident scene

must be simulated.

Second, the instructor is told how to prepare for the

simulation using the materials in the instructor's guide and

locally available resources. Specific suggestionsinclude a list

of materials and props that must be gathered prior to the

simulation, details of how to stage the simulated accident

scene, how to recruit the role players, and how to present the

role players and the observers their individual tasks and

instructions. (See pages 6-8 of appendix.) Additional directions are provided that explain what the instructor should do

during the simulation, and how to conduct an effectivecorrective feedback and discussion session after the simulation

including using the performance evaluation ratings by all

class members, victim, first-aiders, and observers. (See pages

9-10 of appendix.) Tips are also provided concerning how

long the exercise will take, how to save the injury tags and

props to make teaching subsequent classes with the same

simulation exercise an easy task, and how to adapt and modify

the exercise to local situations and needs. (See pages 10-11 of

appendix.)

Third, the guide provides the instructor with many of the

materials he or she needs to conduct the simulation. A set of

performance objectives that define what the class members

are to learn and do is helpful to instructors in clarifying their

own thinking about the activity and may be used to report to

superiorsthe purpose and contentofthe activity. (See page 13

of appendix.) Ready to use materials needed for the simulation are provided. These include the performance rating form

(see pages 14-15 of appendix), a trainee questionnaire that

allows the miners to evaluate the exercise (see page 16 of

appendix), and a similar instructor's evaluative questionnaire.

The instructor need only duplicate these materials.

In addition, the instructions to the victim and the first aid

role players, the injury tags, and prop tags are all prepared in

final form and sufficient number (see pages 17-20 of appendix.) Again, the instructor need only make one copy of these,

cut out the tags, and mount them on a card. Once this is done

the same tags can be used repeatedly in new classes with the

same simulation activity. Additional diagrams and drawings

are included that may be useful to the instructor when discussing the problem and providing corrective feedback after the

simulation. These need only be copied to overhead transparencies to be used by the instructor (see pages 21-23 of

appendix.) Finally, the reference sources are provided for the

first aid techniques and procedures used in the simulation

problem (see page 24 of appendix).

Earlier observations and studies suggested that mine

health and safety trainers are quite competent in the technical

aspects of what they teach, but less informed about how to

design and use effective classroom simulations. An additional important design characteristic ofthese newer simulation exercises is their capability to teach instructors how to

plan and conduct classroom simulations. Once an instructor

has used one or two simulation exercises like the one in the

appendix to this paper, he or she should learn specific techniques that may be applied to the development and use of

similar simulations for annual refresher training classes. The

instructor's guide is deliberately designed to serve as a model

to which instructors can refer as they develop, plan, and carry

out their own simulation exercises for annual refresher training classes.
93

FIELD TESTING AND NEW SIMULATION EXERCISES

Training Certification Performance

miner performance ratings of the frrst aid skills of the three

groups of persons who role played the first-aiders in each

classroom.

TABLE 4.-Characterlstlcs of the three-site, three-class

field test sample for a first aid simulation exercise

(56 male mlners-mean age, 36.4 yr;

mean experience, 8.3 yr)

Number Frequency, pet

51.8

22.2

24.1

1.9

1.8

1.8

1.8

12.5

8.9

1.8

0.0

5.4

28

12

13

1

16.1

8.9

3.6

26.8

10.7

12.5

3.6

7.1

'Information not provided by 2 class members.

2Frequency of self-reported level of expertise.

Category, pct:2

Supervisor 17.9

Mine safety committee 3.6

Mine rescue 5.4

CPR 17.9

Advanced first aid 25.0

EMT 7.1

Advanced life support 7.1

Other 3.6

Job classification:'

Miner.

Maintenance-technical.

Supervisory-management.

Other.

The sample simulation exercise in the appendix to this

paper has been field tested in 3 States at 6 training sites. To

date, data from 3 classes at 3 sites in 2 States have been

collected and analyzed. Additional field tests ofthis exercise

and other first aid simulation exercises are in progress.

The basic characteristics of the miners involved in the

field test for which these results are reported are described in

table 4. Although there were 59 minersinvolved in these three

classes, the variable number ofpersonsreported in table 4 and

later tables reflects missing data in specific categories. Table

5 describes the three classes for which these data are reported.

The number of frrst-aiders is the number of persons who role

played the fust aid care givers. The first class had four firstaiders, two of whom are State mine inspectors with mine

foreman certification, a mine equipment sales representative

with advanced first aid training, and an engineering technician. The five first-aiders in the second class included three

mine health and safety instructors (two with advanced training

in first aid and who routinely teach first aid), one mine

supervisor, and one miner. The three fust-aiders in the third

class included two miners with only the usual training in first

aid, and a mine supervisor with advanced first aid training.

None of the first-aid role players were trained or certified as

EMT's. Observers from the University of Kentucky were

present in the first and second classrooms.

The data gathered from these three classes were analyzed

and used to report two basic types of findings. These are (1)

miner evaluation of simulation exercise based upon the

pooled ratings by all class members on specific criteria (see

the trainee's questionnaire, page 16 of appendix), and (2)

TABLE 5. - Class size and number and qualifications of first-alders at three sites

Number of first-aiders and qualifications Observer present

Class I, 18 persons 4-2 State mine inspectors, 1 sales representative

with AFAT, 1 engineering technician.

Yes

Class 2, 7 persons 5-3 instructors, 2 with AFAT, 1 mine

supervisor, 1 miner.

Yes

Class 3, 31 persons 3-2 miners, 1 mine supervisor with AFAT. No

(AFAT - self-reported advanced first aid training.)
94

MINER EVALUATION OF THE SIMULATION EXERCISE

The results of miner evaluations of the exercise are

presented in table 6. All the miners reported the exercise

content to be authentic and realistic. Over 98 pet reported the

exercise would help them remember important first aid

knowledge in the future. Over 87 pet reported they learned

something new from the simulation. About 35 pet thought the

exercise was too long, but over 92 pet reported they liked

working the exercise. Approximately 94 pet ofthe minersfelt

the instructor's directions were clear and 96 pet felt that the

exercise directions were clear. Approximately 93 pet judged

the graphics as easy to understand and 89 pet found the

exercise performance scoring procedures to be easily understood.

The results in table 6 and observations by project membersin two ofthe classes indicate that both miners and instructors were able to use the simulation effectively. Miners were

willing and able to carry out their role play assignments. Both

the miners and instructors were able to execute all aspects of

the activity as planned in the printed instructor's guide. Both

the miners and instructors were able and willing to use the

performance evaluation form properly as a positive teaching

tool.

TABLE 6. - Miner ratings of exercise validity, relevance, quality, and utility (n =59)

Content Defmitely yes Definitely no Mean S.D.

4 3 2 I

Problem could happen ............................. 94.4 5.6 0.0 0.0 3.94 0.23

Help remember important things............. 78.2 20.0 1.8 .0 3.76 .47

Learned something new........................... 60.0 27.3 10.9 1.8 3.46 .77

Exercise too long..................................... 14.8 20.4 13.0 51.9 1.98 1.16

Liked working the exercise ...................... 67.3 25.0 7.7 .0 3.60 .63

Instructor directions clear ........................ 72.7 21.8 5.5 .0 3.67 .58

Written exercise directions clear ............. 59.3 37.0 3.7 .0 3.56 .57

Graphics easy to understand.................... 58.2 34.5 5.5 1.8 3.49 .69

Scoring easy to understand ...................... 67.3 21.8 3.6 7.3 3.49 .88

MINER FIRST AID PERFORMANCE ON THE SIMULATION EXERCISE

TABLE 7. - Internal consistency reliability estimates

of the performance rating form

IOnly those rating forms that contained a complete set of ratings

on all 15 questions were included.

2An estimate ofthe internal consistency or reliability ofthe scale.

The maximum possible value is I and the minimum value is O.

cantly and positively correlated with the total score on the

form. Items 9 and 10 (sending for help and communicating

clearly to the surface) were not significantly correlated with

the total performance rating score.

The analyses that follow are based on the performance of

the first-aiders in each class. Fifteen aspects of first-aider

performance were rated on a common rating form. Each ofthe

15 scales on the form was designed to evaluate key aspects of

rescue and first aid procedures needed to cope with the

simulation problem. The problem involved a miner whose

legs were crushed by a roof fall after he went under unsupported top to mark up the bolt pattern for the roof bolter. A

proper performance requires the frrst-aiders to assess the

accident scene, support the top, remove the rock from the

injured miner, and rapidly move the miner out of this dangerous area. Only then is it appropriate to evaluate the victim for

injuries, communicate with the surface, provide first aid care,

and prepare to transport the victim to the surface. The problem

and the performance rating form are described in the appendix

to this paper. All members of the class, including the victim,

the first-aiders, the observers, and the instructor rated frrstaider performance on the form.

The performance rating form was found to be a reliable

measure. Table 7 presents the internal consistency reliability

estimates of the form for the miners from all three classes and

with the miners from all three classes pooled. Thirteen ofthe

fifteen scales on the performance rating form were signifiComplete

ratings1

Class 1 16

Class 2 7

Class 3 26

Classes pooled .49

Firstaiders

4

5

3

12

Generalizability

coefficient

(alpha)2

0.69

.64

.77

.80
Comparison of the within classes and between classes

sums of squares revealed that 52 pet of the variance in performance scores among the three classes can be attributed to

differences in fIrst-aider performance in the three classes. The

remaining 48 pet of the observed variance in performance

scores is attributed to variations in miner individual ratings of

the same observed performance.

The performance rating total score for the frrst-aiders in

each class wassummed across the 15 scalesfor each rater. The

average rating was then computed for each group (class) of

first-aiders. Large signifIcant differences were observed in

the total performance scores earned by the fIrst-aiders in each

class(F=24.80; df=2.46; P=less than 0.00(1). These results

are reported in table 8.

The difficulty of each part of the fIrst aid performance

required by the simulation may be estimated from the raw

scores of the 15 individual scales found on the performance

rating form. Table 9 presents a description ofthe performance

content of each scale on the rating form along with the

95

TABLE 8.• Mean scores and standard deviations

of total performance score by class

Complete First- Mean S.D.

ratings aiders score

Class 1 ............... 16 4 55.34 11.15

Class 2 ................. 7 5 73.52 13.09

Class 3 ............... 26 3 35.37 15.45

lTotal raw scores were converted to a scaled 0 to 100 score.

maximum score for that scale, the mean score observed, and

the standard deviation. These data are pooled across all three

classes from a total of 49 ratings for the 12 role players.

Table 10 presents the same data, but broken down for

each of the three classes. The large significant differences in

observed total scores for the three classes are reflected in the

differences in raw scores on the individual scale items.

TABLE 9. - DiffiCUlty for each of 15 rescue and first aid performance tasks1

Scale and performance dimension

Max

Raw score statistics

Min Mean S.D.

I.Support mine roof before entering face area 3

2.Safely remove draw slate from victim 2

3.Properly remove victim from under slate 3

4.Verbally encourage victim 2

5.Promptly rescue-drag victim under good top 3

6.Handle victim properly when rescue dragging 3

7.Conduct primary and secondary survey 3

8.Find and treat both leg injuries 3

9.Send for help promptly and properly 2

10.Communicate clearly and accurately to the surface 2

I1.Properly position and lift victim to stretcher 3

12.Properly immobilize victim on back on stretcher. 3

13.Examine and treat victim for shock 3

14.Maintain unconscious victim's airway 3

15.0rganize overall first aid and rescue efforts well and effIciently 3

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

1.39

1.12

2.16

1.08

2.45

1.57

.55

.47

1.67

1.08

1.35

1.02

1.33

1.27

.90

1.40

.99

1.14

.73

1.00

1.15

.79

.87

.55

.76

1.13

1.11

1.20

1.29

.85

IPerfonnance data are raw scores for 3 first aid teams rated by 49 miners on all 15 perfonnance items.

INTERPRETATION OF MINER PERFORMANCE SCORES

Four features of the performance results stand out:

(1) The total performance scores are low for all groups, (2) all

groups did an adequate job on only two scales, (3) the worst

performance of the first-aiders was in conducting the victim

evaluation and treating hidden injuries, and (4) large differences exist in the performance scores ofthe fIrst-aiders in the

three classes.

The overall scores are low for each group offIrst-aiders.

(See table 8.) When the same exercise is given as a latent

image test, miner scores are typically higher. The role play

simulation version ofthe exercise requires miners to problem

solve with less guidance than is offered in the latent image

version of the exercise, which provides corrective feedback

revealed through the latent image answers as the exercise is

worked. Thus, miners learn and correct first aid procedural

errors as they work the latent image exercise. In the role play

simulation exercise, just as in real life, there is no corrective

feedback, beyond that available from others present. If the
96

TABLE 10.• Differences In difficulty of 15 performance tasks by first aid group (class)1

Item2 no. Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Significance,

Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D. p less than

1........................ 3.00 0.00 1.57 0.98 0.34 0.85 0.0001

2........................ 1.94 .25 1.71 .76 .46 .86 .0001

3........................ 2.88 .50 2.43 .98 1.65 1.23 .0012

4...........................69 .70 1.86 .38 1.12 .65 .0028

5........................ 2.44 1.03 2.71 .76 2.38 1.06 .6496

6........................ 1.88 1.20 2.14 1.07 1.23 1.07 .1448

7...........................31 .48 1.43 1.13 .46 .71 .0538

8...........................31 .48 1.00 1.41 .42 .86 .0319

9........................ 1.50 .63 1.86 .38 1.73 .53 .1259

10..........................69 .60 1.00 1.00 1.35 .69 .0155

11 ....................... 1.25 .93 2.71 .76 1.04 1.08 .0138

12....................... 1.06 .85 2.14 1.46 .69 .97 .0060

13....................... 2.06 1.12 2.43 .98 .58 .70 .0001

14....................... 1.88 1.20 2.71 .76 .50 .86 .0001

15..........................81 .40 2.43 .98 .54 .51 .0001

'Performance data are raw scores for the fust aid teams at each site on each performance item.

2See table 9 for description.

first- aiders make errors they may not know it at the time. In

addition, unlike the paper and pencil latent image version, the

role play situation exercise requires not only knowledge of

what to do and when to do it, but also skill in performing actual

first aid procedures without life situations, which is more

difficult than the latent image version. Like a well-designed

mine rescue contest, the first aid simulation is a good test of

knowledge, skill, and actual performance capability.

The first-aiders in all three classes did a good job on only

two tasks, properly removing the victim from under the slate

(item 3), and promptly rescue-dragging the victim outby the

face to get under supported mine roof (item 5) (see table 9).

Both of these tasks are rescue activities and both are obvious

actions.

The worst performance for all three groups offirst-aiders

involved conducting a victim evaluation through a primary

and secondary survey (item 7), and finding and treating both

leg injuries (item 8) (see tables 9 and 10). The first-aiders in

class 1 and class 3 did not carry out an adequate hands-on

primary and secondary survey. Consequently, they never

found the compound fracture ofthe femur, even though it was

simulated with a broken broom handle taped to the victim's

right front thigh along with a large injury tag thatsaid "MUCH

BLOOD AND BONE STICKING OUT." This simulated

injury was concealed underneath a pair of coveralls, and the

injured miner was lying face down. Another large injury tag

that said "BLOOD SOAKED CLOTHING" was attached to

the outer coveralls directly over the simulated fracture. Even

a cursory hands-on and/or careful visual primary survey

would have quickly revealed the presence ofthese injury tags

and the simulated compound fracture. The injured miner was

loaded and tied onto the stretcher face down. Consequently

the injury remained undiagnosed and untreated.

The first-aiders in class 2 carried out a victim injury

assessment. Because of their survey they found, and treated,

both simulated leg fractures. However, they had difficulty in

properly bandaging and splinting the compound thigh fracture. The types oferrors made by these miners in this realistic

simulation are precisely those tasks that the 120 experts

identified as weaknesses in miner actual first aid performance

they had witnessed in the field (see tables 2 and 3).

Large, statistically significant differences were observed

in the total performance and the individual scale scores ofthe

three groups of first-aiders (see tables 8 and 9). The groups

with the greater number of first-aiders with self-reported

advanced first aid training, and with first aid instructors,

performed betterthan the less well trained groups withoutfirst

aid instructors.
97

LIMITATIONS AND GENERALIZABILITY OF FINDINGS

These results are based on the perfonnance of only 12

miners who role played fIrst-aiders coping with one complex

and realistic underground coal mine fust aid problem. The

perfonnance results observed may not generalize to other

groups of miners or to other fIrst aid simulation problems or

actual emergencies. Additional data from the fIrst aid simulation described in this pa~r, as well as from other similar

simulations, are currently being collected and analyzed.

These additional data will help detennine the generalizability

of the fIndings reported here.

Some additional observational data are available at the

present. Two additional first aid simulation exercises have

been observed during administration to two classes. In these

classes the miners role playing the frrst-aiders also perfonned

poorly and made the same ty~s of errors as those reported

previously. Thus, even though the sample is small, the

fIndings from this initial study may be generalizable to the

broader domain of first aid ~rfonnance ofminers in general.

The simulations are carefully designed to be authentic

and realistic, and over 94 pet of the miners viewed them as

such (see table 6). Perfonning the frrst aid procedures in front

of a classroom, without any prior warning or preparation, is

stressful for the first aid role players. Yet, the classroom role

play situation can never be as difficult, stressful, and demanding as is coping with a similar serious injury accident in an

underground mine. If miners perform poorly in realistic

classroom simulations of frrst aid emergencies, they may

perform even less well in actual mine frrst aid emergencies.

The poor performance is probably related to lack of training

in these types of first aid skills, particularly in the skills

required for patient evaluation needed to define first aid

treatment needs. Miners who are frequently exposed to

realistic first aid simulation problems, like those described in

this pa~r, may become more skilled in theirresponsesto bOlh

simulated and actual first aid emergencies.

SIMULATION EXERCISES AS TEACHING AND TESTING DEVICES

Although the miners role playing the fust-aiders in these

three classes may not have ~rfonned well on the simulation

exercise, they probably learned a great deal, as they themselves reported (see table 6). The purpose of these exercises

is primarily to teach miners to be better fIrst-aiders. The

realistic nature of the exercises engages the emotional and

cognitive participation of the role players and the observers.

At the end ofthe simulation, the role players, the victim, and

the observers are anxious to critique the ~rfonnance, to

discuss and correct errors, and to repeat and practice difficult

parts of the perfonnance until these have been mastered.

The exercises are most effective as tests in a personal

sense. When the first-aider role players perform poorly, placing themselves in great danger to rescue the victim, or failing

to do an evaluation of the victim's injuries, these and other

errors and their potential consequences become starkly apparent in the corrective and discussion session that follows the

simulation. A properly designed simulation presents a realistic problem. The problem demands the full range of performance skills required in a similar actual emergency. For this

reason, working the simulation exercise tends to be a memorable experience. Many studies have shown that knowledge

and skills acquired in realistic problem solving situationstend

to be remembered well and are likely to be applied in actual

problem situations encountered later. Knowledge and skills

presented piecemeal, without being embedded in realistic

problem contexts, tend to become inert. Inert knowledge fails

to generalize to real world problem solving and also tends to

be rapidly forgotten (Bransford (22), Gagne and Briggs 00,

Halpern Q.!)).

It is important for miners to learn how to place and tie

dressings and bandages, and to remember first aid facts and

information. The teaching of first aid procedures like these,

and drilling miners on recall of first aid facts, are popular

instructional methods in annual refresher training classes.

When these facts and procedures are presented in fragmented

ways, without being placed in the context offirst aid cases or

problems, instruction cannot be expected to adequately prepare miners to cope with actual first aid emergencies. First aid

facts and knowledge, as well as fIrst aid skills in bandaging,

controlling bleeding, and other procedures, need to be taught

in the framework of realistic problems. Skills of accident

scene evaluation, patient evaluation, and the identifIcation of

victim treatment needs and priorities need to be practiced.

Well-designed simulation problem exercises provide one

means for the realistic teaching and assessment of a wide

range of first aid problem solving behaviors.
98

CONCLUSIONS

Well-designed simulation exercises have the capability

to teach miners what they do not yet know how to do well. The

research reported in this paper, as well as earlier research by

Pickar (W, suggests miners need more training in information gathering, victim evaluation, and first aid problem identification and prioritization skills. Simulation exercises like

those discussed in this paper can be used to teach and assess

proficiency in these and other skills. Data from the field

studies at Ohio State University and the University of Kentucky also suggeststhat college students and miners enjoy and

value realistic first aid simulation problems. Length of time

to conductsuch realistic simulations need not be a barrier. The

simulation described in this paper can be completed in a 20-

to 30-min period. Knowing how to design and conduct an

effective first aid simulation also need not be a barrier. The

guidelines set forth in this paper, and the sample exercise with

its easily adaptable format, can serve as a model for first aid

instructors who wish toextend the procedures to otherfirst aid

skill areas and problems.

REFERENCES

1. Gilbert, G. G. The Evaluation of Simulation for Skill

Testing in the American National Red Cross First Aid and

Personal Safety Course. Ph.D. Thesis, Ohio State University,

1975,264 pp.; University Microfilms No. 76-9974.

2. Gilbert, G. G. Teaching First Aid and Emergency

Care. Kendall- Hunt (Dubuque, IA), 1981,231 pp.

3. Distlehorst, L. H., and H. S. Barrows. ANew Tool for

Problem-Based, Self-DirectedLearning. J. Med. Educ., v. 57,

No.6, 1982, pp. 486-488.

4. BabOOtt, D., and W. D. Halter. Clinical ProblemSolving Skills of Internists Trained in the Problem-Oriented

System. J. Med. Educ., v. 58 No. 12, 1983, pp. 947-953.

5. Dugdale, A. E., D. Chandler, and G. Best. Teaching

the Management of Medical Emergencies Using an InteractiveComputerTerminal. Med.Educ., v.16,No.1, 1982,pp.

27-30.

6. Farrand, L. L., W. L. Holzemer, and J. A. Schleutermann. A Study of Construct Validity: Simulations as a

Measure of Nurse Practitioners' Problem-Solving Skills.

Nursing Res., v. 31, No.1, 1982, pp. 37-42.

7. Fleisher, D. S., J. Schwenker, and M. Donnelly.

Isomorphic Patient Management Problems: A Counterpart to

Parallel MultipleChoiceTests. Papers in Research in Medical

Education, Proceedings of the Twenty-First Annual Conference Assoc. Amer. Med. Colleges, 1982, pp. 143-148.

8. Jones, G. L., and K. D. Keith. Computer Clinical

Simulations in Health Sciences. J. Computer-Based Instr., v.

9,No.3, 1983,pp. 108-114.

9. McGuire, C. H., and D. BabOOtt. Simulation Techniquein the MeasurementofProblem-Solving Skills. J.Educ.

Measurement, v. 4, No.1, 1967, pp. 1-10.

10. McGuire, C. H., L. M. So}omon,andP. G. Bashook.

Construction and Use ofWritten Simulations. Psychological

Corp. (New York), 1976,307 pp.

11. Norman, G. R., P. Tugwell, and J. W. Feightner. A

Comparison ofResident Performance on Real and Simulated

Patients. J. Med. Educ., v. 57, No.9, 1982, pp. 708-715.

12. Pryor, H. G., and G. Racey. Minicomputer Simulation of Medical Emergencies and Advanced Life Support. J.

Dental Educ., v. 46, No. 11, 1982, pp. 657-660.

13. Saunders, N. A., and B.J. Wallis. Learning DecisionMaking in Clinical Medicine: A Card Game Dealing With

Acute Emergencies for Undergraduate Use. Med. Educ., v.

15, No.5, 1981, pp. 323-327.

14. Umbers, 1. G. A Study of Control Skills in an

Individual Task, and in a Simulation, Using the Verbal Protocol Technique. Ergonomics, v. 24, No.4, 1981, pp. 275-293.

15. Flathers, G. W.,Jr., W. C. Giffin, and T. H.Rockwell.

A Study of Decision Making Behavior of Pilots Deviating

From a Planned Flight. Aviation, Space, and Envir. Med., v.

53,No. 10, 1982,pp.958-963.

16. Giffin, W. C., and T. H. Rockwell. Computer-Aided

Testing ofPilotResponse toCritical In-FlightEvents. Human

Factors, v. 26, No.5, 1984, pp. 573-581.

17. Jensen, R. S. Pilot Judgment: Training and Evaluation. Human Factors, v. 24, No.1, 1982, pp. 61-73.

18. Hunt, R. M., and W. B. Rouse. Problem-Solving

Skills ofMaintenance Trainees in Diagnosing Faultsin Simulated Powerplants. Human Factors, v. 23, No.3, 1981, pp.

317-328.

19. Olsen, W. C. Once Upon a Time (Training for

Emergency Situations). Presented at Health Physics Society

Meeting, Honolulu, HI., NTIS CONF-791203-6, Dec. 1979,

6pp.

20. Cole, H. P., G. T. Lineberry, and L. G. Mallett. A

New Technique for Teaching and Testing Mining Engineering Concepts. Paper in Proceeding of the Fifth Annual

Meeting ofthe Collegiate Association for Mining Education,

MSHA, Beckley, WV,October2-3, 1986,pp. 153-174.

21. University of Kentucky. Miner and Trainer Response to Paper and Pencil Simulated Mine Emergency Problems. Ongoing BuMines contract H0348040; for inf., contact

W. J. Wiehagen, TPO, BuMines, Pittsburgh, PA.
22. Lacefield, W. E., and H. P. Cole. Principles and

Techniques for Evaluating Continuing Education Programs.

The Military Engineer, v. 78, No. 511, 1986, pp. 594-600.

23. McGuire, C. Medical Problem-Solving: A Critique

of the Literature. Paper in Research in Medical Education:

1984 Proceedings of the Twenty-Third Annual Conference.

Assoc. Amer. Med. Colleges, 1984, pp. 3-13.

24. University ofKentucky. Measuring Mine Health and

Safety Skills. Ongoing BuMines contract H0348040; for info

contact W. J. Wiehagen, TPO, Pittsburgh Research Center,

BuMines, Pittsburgh, PA.

25. American Red Cross. First Aid and Personal Safety

Course ofthe AmericanRedCross. Doubleday, 1981,269pp.

26. Burkes, M. E. (undated). Burkes Emergency Care

Knowledge Test II. Available upon request from OH State

Univ., Columbus, OH.

99

27. Pickar, E. R. Emergency Medical Needs of Coal

Miners. Orkand Corp., (Silver Spring, MD),NTIS PB 80-194

651, 1977, 159 pp.

28. Mine Safety and Health Administration (Washington, DC) Coal-Underground Fatalities. First and Second

Quarter. 1984,30 pp.

29. Bransford, J., R. Sherwood, N. Vye, and J. Rieser.

Teaching Thinking and Problem Solving: Research Foundations. Am. Psycho!., v. 41, No. 10, 1986, pp. 1078-1089.

30. Gagne, R. M., and L. J. Briggs. Principles of

Instructional Design. Holt (New York) 2d ed., 1979,321 pp.

31. Halpern, D. F. Thought and Knowledge: An

Introduction to Critical Thinking. Erlbaum, (Hillsdale, NJ),

1984,402 pp.
100

APPENDIX. - SAMPLE EXERCISES
MARVIN R. LETCHER FIRST AID SIMULATION

A Training Activity

Behavioral Research Aspects of Safety and Health Group (BRASH)

Institute for Mining and Minerals Research (IMMR)

University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky

November 1987

This role play simulation exercise was developed and field tested under U. S. Bureau of Mines research

Contract No. H0348040. Information about the design and characteristics of the exercise and the field test

results are available in the project technical reports filed with the Bureau of Mines Research Center in

Pittsburg, PA. This is one of more than 30 exercises designed for use in annual refresher training to teach

and test critical skills for coping with mine emergency situations. The views and conclusions contained in

this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the

official policies or recommendations of the Interior Department's Bureau of Mines or the U. S. Government.

101
102

Contents

Marvin R. Letcher Simulation Problem

Accident Scene Illustrations (Figures 1 and 2)

Accident Scene Illustration (Figure 3)

Marvin R. Letcher First Aid Simulation

Becoming Familiar with the Exercise

How to Use this Exercise

Before the Simulation

During the Simulation

After the Simulation

Other Inforn1ation and Ideas

Time

Replications

Alternative Methods

Appended Materials

Performance Objectives

Performance Rating Form

Trainee's Questionnaire

Special Instructions for the "Victim" and "Rescuers"

Tags

Additional Illustrations (Figures 4, 5, 6 and 7)

References

2

Marvin R. Letcher Simulation

3

4

5

6

6

7

7

9

9

10

10

10

10

11

13

14

16

17

18

21

24
Marvin R. Letcher Simulation

MARVIN R. LETCHER SIMULATION PROBLEM

Background

You are driving 8 entries in 42 inch coal.

Eleven miners are at work on the section.

The portal is 4,000 feet outby the face.

It is just after lunch. (Marvin ate a big meal.)

The EMT normally on this section is absent today.

The top is drummy and poor.

103

Problem

You are the pinner operator. You are bolting the roof in the

#2 entry at the face. Your helper, Marvin R. Letcher, has

gone out ahead of the bolter to mark the roof. You yell at

him to get back. He almost gets back to supported roof

when a piece of draw slate falls trapping both of his legs.

(See Figures 1 &2.) Marvin is lying down, screaming. The

roof is dribbling across the whole entry just past the last row

of bolts.

3
104

FIGURE 1.-Draw slate falls from roof.

~~ffrirZ!E~~~ "

--.::----

'/,

FIGURE 2.-Draw slate hits Marvin's Ie9s.

4
105

+

+

~--#-Top

working

+

" /+ Roof bolts

I \- ~- Roof bolter L----

+ + + +

Crosscut (bolted roof)

+ + + + + +

Stretcher and first-aid kit at the dinner hole

dinner hole 240 ft away.

Mine pager at tailpiece 200 ft away.

FIGURE 3.-Details of Marvin's position.

5
106

Marvin R. Letcher Simulation

Marvin R. Letcher First Aid Simulation

This is a companion exercise to the Marvin R. Letcher latent image exercise. It uses the

same problem. While the latent image exercise teaches and assesses judgment and

decision making skills, this exercise is designed to teach and assess proficiency in first

aid care for a miner with injuries like Marvin's.

This exercise can be used without using the latent image exercise. If so, it will be more

like the situation miners would face in an actual emergency. If used after the latent

image version of Marvin R. Letcher, the class members will be informed about the

problem and know the first aid procedures. They will also be motivated to practice the

procedures. Used either way, this simulation exercise provides hands on practice in

carrying out the first aid procedures needed to help a miner with injuries like Marvin's.

The activities for carrying out this simulation are simple and easy to use. After you have

read through the materials it is easy to prepare for class. Once you have prepared for

one class, you can use the simulation repeatedly in other classes without additional

preparation.

Becoming Familiar with the Exercise

This document is an instructor's guide. It provides not only the simulation exercise, but

detailed instructions, procedures, and materials needed to prepare for class and carry

out the activity. There are five things you can do to become familiar with the exercise if

you decide to use it in your classes.

First, look over the Table of Contents found just after the exercise title page. All the

parts of the instructor's guide are listed here and you can quickly see what these are

and where they are located.

Second, read the "Marvin R. Letcher Simulation Problem" on page 2 and look at

Figures 1 and 2 (page 3) and Figure 3 (page 4). Think about this situation and how you

would deal with it.

Third, read through the remainder of this instructor's guide. It tells you how to prepare

for class.

Fourth, read the "Performance Objectives" and the "Performance Rating Form." These

are found in the appendix. They tell you what your class members should be able to do

when the exercise is completed.

Fifth, if you have a master copy of the Marvin R. Letcher latent image exercise, look at

the questions, the answers, and the "Instructor's Discussion Notes." Although you do

not need to do this to prepare for this class, it may provide you with additional ideas.

6
Marvin R. Letcher Simulation

How To Use This Exercise

This section lists the directions for carrying out the simulation. There are three parts.

These explain what to do before, during, and the simulation. Each step is

numbered.

Before the Simulation

1. Gather all the materials you need for the simulation. These include:

-slate bar (simulate or use a real bar)

-roof bolting machine (simulate with a desk or similar object)

-four temporary roof jacks or timbers (simulate with appropriate lightweight

objects such as styrofoam blocks, or cardboard tubes)

-large old trousers or coveralls that can be slipped over the "victim's" regular

clothing

-large flat cardboard box (to simulate the draw slate on Marvin's legs)

-broken wooden dowel, 6 to 7 inches long and one inch in diameter (taped over

Marvin's pants on his right upper 'front thigh to simulate a compound fracture of

the femur)

-a mine first aid kit and stretcher (Place these out of sight in another room

or at the back of the room so the "first aiders" will have to go get them or send

someone for them.)

-a mine phone (Use a real phone or simulate with a small object. Place the

"phone" at the back of the room at the "tailpiece.")

-tags (These are in the appendix. Copy them, cut them out, and laminate

them so they can be used again. Attach these to MaNin and the objects.)

-"Instructions for the Victim" & "Instructions for the Rescuers" (These are in the

appendix. Copy them, cut them out, and laminate them so they can be

reused.)

-Performance Rating Form, one copy for each class member (Make an

overhead transparency of this form so you can use it after the simulation in the

discussion.)

7

107
108

Marvin R. Letcher Simulation

-overhead projector and screen

-overhead projector transparencies of the Marvin R. Letcher Simulation Problem

and Figures 1, 2, and 3 (These are found on pages 2, 3, and 4. They

are printed in large type for easy reading.)

2. Get a volunteer to play the part of Marvin, the "victim." (Give "Marvin" the

"Instructions for the Victim" so he will know his role. If no miners are willing, get

another instructor to play the role of Marvin.)

3. Select two or three miners to serve as the first aiders. (Give them a copy of

"Instructions for Rescuers." Then send them out of the classroom so they won't

see Marvin's injuries while you set up the accident scene. They should find the

injuries on their own.)

4. Set up the accident scene. (Simulate the accident scene depicted in Figures 2

and 3 as closely as possible. Have Marvin lie down on his stomach with his head

about 2 feet from a wall (mine rib), with his left side facing the class. Simulate the

draw slate on Marvin's legs with a cardboard box. Simulate the roof bolter with a

desk or similar object. Label both objects with the appropriate tags.)

Have Marvin tape a broken wooden dowel and the "MUCH BLOOD AND BONE

STICKING OUT" injury tag to his right upper front thigh on top of his pants. Then

have him put on an additional pair of old pants or coveralls that can be cut. Put

the "BLOOD SOAKED CLOTHING AND CROOKED LEG" injury tag on the outside

of the old coveralls on top of the broken wooden dowel. Put the "CROOKED AND

BRUISED" injury tag on the rear of the lower left leg on top of his coveralls, about

midway between his ankle and knee. Place the cardboard box over the back of

both legs so that it covers the injuries. Tape the injury tag "PULSE RAPID (120)

AND WEAK" to Marvin's neck over the carotid artery. Use transparent tape. Keep

the injury tag "VOMIT FLUIDS AND STRINGY MEAT" in your pocket. Tape to

Marvin's cheek after the first aiders have him fully immobilized and he is ready to

be transported.

5. Give every class member (except the "victim" and the "rescuers") a copy of the

Performance Rating Form. Ask each class member to look over the form. This will

alert them to watch for key first aid actions during the simulation. Do not give the

form to the miners playing the "first aiders." This would tell them what the injuries

are and what they should do.

8
Marvin R. Letcher Simulation

During the Simulation

6. Bring the "first aiders" in and have them stand at the back of the room.

7. Introduce the problem to the "first aiders" and other class members by showing the

overhead transparencies of the "Marvin R. Letcher Simulation Problem" and

Figures 1, 2 and 3. Explain the problem and point out that the "victim" is in the

same position as shown in Figures 2 and 3. (Don't tell the class and the "first

aiders" about Marvin's injuries. Just explain the accident scene as it is described.

Point out the "mine phone" at the "tailpiece" and explain that a first aid kit is at the

"dinner hole.")

8. Tell class members to move to a position where they can see the "first aiders" and

the "victim." Ask them to watch carefully and not to prompt the first aiders.

9. Start the simulation. Tell the "first aiders" to take care of Marvin. (During the

simulation, do .ll.Q1 interrupt the performance of the "first aiders." In the real

situation there might not be anyone to correct their errors or to tell them what to do.

Interrupt.o.n1Y. if they do something that might hurt the person playing the "victim.")

After the Simulation

10. Give each of the "first aiders" and the "victim" a performance Rating Form. Then

ask these people and all the other class members to complete the form. Have

everyone complete the whole form including the information at the top of the page.

(This activity will help the "first aiders" evaluate their own performance and correct

errors. Completing the rating form will also help the other class members learn

the correct first aid procedures. This is an important part of the exercise.)

11. Complete your own Performance Rating Form, including the information at the top

of the page.

12. Discuss the performance of the "first aiders" with the whole class. (Put a

transparency of a blank Performance Rating Form on the overhead projector. Talk

about each procedure and your rating of the "first aiders." Compare your ratings

with those of the "first aiders," the "victim," and the other class members. Be alert

to the observations, ideas and disagreements among class members. Discussion

of these matters can be an effective method of instruction.)

13. During the discussion, correct any errors that were made. Show the "first aiders"

and other class members the proper way to carry out any first aid procedures that

were done wrong or omitted. (Let the "first aiders" demonstrate the correct

procedure under your direction. This will help them learn.)

9

109
110

Marvin R. Letcher Simulation

14. Encourage class members to practice particular first aid procedures until they

master them.

15. When you have finished the discussion and demonstrations, have all class

members complete the Trainee's Questionnaire. It is attached to the Performance

Rating Form. After the class, look over the completed Trainee Questionnaires.

These can be used to summarize the miners' evaluation of the exercise. This

information may assist you in improving the exercise in the future, and in reporting

the effectiveness of your classes to superiors. If you have ideas for improving the

exercise write these down and send them to the following address.

IMMR/BRASH

201 Porter Building, University of Kentucky

Lexington, Kentucky 40506-0205 (606) 257-3796

Other Information and Ideas

This section contains additional information about the exercise. It can help you plan

the amount of time you need to present the exercise, how to prepare the exercise for

several replications, and assist you in thinking about other ways to present the

exercise.

The whole simulation exercise should not take very long. In a real emergency, miners

would need to act proficiently and quickly. The discussion, practice, and demonstration

of procedures after the simulation may require somewhat more time. Overall, the

activity can be completed in approximately one hour.

Replications

Once you have used the exercise, all materials can be kept together and used again

with another class. This will minimize preparation time. You may also improvise and

add new ideas and procedures in replications of the exercise.

Alternative Methods

Some trainers report miners do not like to role play situations like this one. If this is true

in your classes there are some alternatives. First, a colleague can play Marvin's role.

You can yourself play the role of a first aider and have two or three class members help

10
Marvin R. Letcher Simulation

you. While it is better to perform these skills than to watch others do so, class members

can still/earn a lot 'from watching and using the Performance Rating Form. If you follow

this procedure, make sure everyone practices those particular skills you think are

critical, e.g. proper movement and lifting, proper treatment for shock, proper procedures

for immobilization, etc. You may wish to do this to ensure that all class members have

a chance to practice critical skills. With larger classes you might have several small

groups carrying out the simulation or parts of it all at the same time.

There are four other points worth noting. First, after working and discussing the latent

image version of the exercise, miners are excited and attentive to the problem.

Therefore, they are more likely to participate in and attend closely to the simulation.

Second, you may wish to point out that exercises similar to these are routi nely used to

train and test EMTs, military and medical personnel, and mine rescue groups.

Experience suggests that such activity is helpful in building and maintaining proficiency

in the skills needed in actual emergencies. Third, no individual miner's performance is

being rated. Rather, it is the quality of care the "victim" receives that is being assessed.

The information gathered is for instructional purposes. Fourth, you and individual

class members can learn much about the degree to which they are informed about

proper first aid procedures from examining the completed Performance Rating Forms.

If ratings of the class members differ greatly from your expert rating, you should

determine where the disagreements lie. Then you can correct any errors or

misunderstandings among class members.

Appended Materials

This appendix contains seven items. These materials are needed to carry out the

simulation and the class discussion. The first item is a list of the performance

objectives for this exercise. The objectives for the latent image version of the Marvin R.

Letcher exercise are similar to, but are not the same as the objectives for this simulation

exercise. The objectives for this exercise deal with hands on performance of fi rst aid

skills needed to rescue and care for a person with injuries like Marvin's.

Next is the Performance Rating Form. It is to be used by each member of the class to

rate the adequacy of first aid procedures carried out on Marvin. You also need to

complete one of these forms yourself so you can use it during the discussion period.

Next is the Trainee's Questionnaire. After the exercise is completed each miner should

complete this questionnaire. It is helpful to collect these and review the class members

reaction to the exercise.

The next item is the instructions for the "victim" and the "rescuers." These are printed

within boxes. They are designed to be duplicated, cut out, and mounted on a card to

be reused. These are the special instructions given to the persons who participate in

the simulation activity.

11

111
112

Marvin R. Letcher Simulation

Next are the tags. These are also printed within boxes so that they may be copied, cut

out, and mounted on cards for reuse. Some tags are large and have large bold type.

Others are small and have small type. The size of the tag and its type are related to the

obviousness of the injury or item. For example, the pulse rate tag is small and

inconspicuous while the much blood and bone sticking out tag is large and noticeable.

The next items are Figures 4, 5, 6, and 7 and may be useful in the class discussions.

Finally, you will find included the references used in the design of this exercise.

12
Marvin R. Letcher Simulation

Performance Objectives for Marvin R. Letcher Simulation

113

Objective

number

1 FAlEE*

2 FA

3 FA

4 FA

5 FA

6 FA

7 FA

8 FA

9 FAJEE

Capability

verb(s)

Remove

Extract

Demonstrate

Perform

Simulate

Demonstrate

Describe

Communicate

Identify

Treat

Demonstrate

Demonstrate

Execute

Demonstrate

Simulate

Demonstrate

Description of desired performance and

conditions under which it is to occur

A victim from under a roof fall while minimizing

risk to self and victim

Clothing drag procedures for the rapid but gentle

removal of a victim from a dangerous place while

minimizing risk of further injury

Primary and secondary survey first aid procedures

given a simulated victim

To surface personnel the nature and extent of injuries

of a simulated victim

Compound and regular fractures of the upper and

lower legs of a simulated roof fall victim

Proficiency in use of a mine first aid kit and a mine

stretcher

Procedures for positioning and lifting a simulated

victim on a stretcher, supporting and immobilizing

fractured legs, bandaging wounds, and full body

immobilization on a stretcher prior to transporting

Procedures for identifyi ng and treati ng shock,

maintaining an open airway in an unconscious

person who is vomiting, using a simulated victim

Skill in organizing and directing rescue and "first aid

activity in a group setting of three or more persons

given a simulated victim

*Skill and knowledge domain abbreviation:

FA = first aid

EE = emergency evacuation and escape

13
114

Marvin R. Letcher Simulation

Performance Ra'Ung Form for Marvin R. Letcher Simulation

Instructor _ Company Date _

In this problem I was a(n): (Check the appropriate space(s))

--Victim --First Aider --Observer --Class Instructor

Circle the number that best describes the quality of first aid treatment you observe.

Procedures are assigned a maximum value of 2, if they are expertly performed.

Adequate, but not expert performance is rated a 1. Performances not attempted or

poorly completed are rated O. Add the numbers circled to obtain the total score. Look

over the entire form before you begin.

Yes Yes

Procedure Done well Adequate No

1. Was the mine roof properly supported before 2 a

the first aiders moved to and worked on the

victim?

2. Was the draw slate promptly and properly 2 a

removed from the victim?

3. Was the victim properly moved from under 2 a

the draw slate to minimize further injuries

to him and avoid risk to rescuers?

4. Was the victim given verbal encouragement 2 a

during rescue and care?

5. Was the victim promptly moved from the entry 2 a

to an area of well supported roof?

6. Was the victim positioned, handled, and moved 2 a

properly when moved from the entry to an area

of supported roof?

7. Was the primary survey properly carried out? 2 a

14
115

Marvin R. Letcher Simulation

Yes Yes

Procedure Done well Adequate No

8. Was the secondary survey properly carried 2 0

out?

9. Were both leg injuries immobilized? 2 0

10. Was help sent for promptly and properly? 2 0

11 . Was communication about the injury to the 2 0

surface clear, accurate, and complete?

12. Was the victim properly positioned and 2 0

lifted onto the stretcher?

13. Was the victim properly immobilized on the 2 0

stretcher on his or her back?

14. Was the victim treated for shock? 2 0

15. Was the immobilized victim's airway maintained 2 0

even when vomiting?

16. Overall, were the rescue and first aid efforts 2 0

well organized and efficient?

Sum

Total Score = + =

Comments:

Highest Possible Score

15

32, lowest = 0
116

Marvin R. Letcher Simulation

TRAINEE'S QUESTIONNAIRE (Simulation Exercise)

1) name of exercise

2) your age 3) your sex __ M __ F 4) years underground coal miner _

5) your job title

Check .all the areas in which you have special training, certification, and/or that you routinely perform.

6) Mine Foreman

7) Mine Safety Committee

8) Mine rescue

9) CPR

10) Advanced first aid

11 ) EMT

12) Advanced life support

13) Other

(describe)

Special

Training Certification

Routinely

Perform

Think about the exercise you just finished. Circle the number which tells how much you agree or disagree

with the following statements.

Definitely Yes Definitely No

14) This problem could happen in real life. 4 3 2

15) This exercise will help me remember something

important if I am ever in a similar situation. 4 3 2

16) I learned something new from the exercise. 4 3 2

17) The exercise took too long to complete. 4 3 2

18) I liked wori<ing the exercise. 4 3 2

19) The instructor's directions were clear. 4 3 2

20) The written directions in the exercise were easy

to understand. 4 3 2

21 ) The diagrams and tags were easy to understand. 4 3 2

22) The scoring procedures were easy to understand. 4 3 2

If you have anything more to say about the exercise, please write on the back of this page. Thank you.

16
INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE VICTIM

1. Scream for help and pretend to struggle to get out

from under the draw slate.

2. After your buddies get the rock off you get weaker.

Moan and say your legs hurt.

3. As your buddies move you, act dazed and sleepy.

Then you act like you are passed out.

4. When your buddies have you fully tied down on the

stretcher, pretend you are vomiting but still passed out.

INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE RESCUERS

1. You are upset by Marvin's screaming and the accident.

2. Use good first aid procedures to rescue and care for

Marvin and take care of yourselves.

17

117
118

DRAW SLATE

(Put on box.)

ROOF BOLTER

(Put on desk.)

ROOF JACK

(Put on simulated jack)

ROOF JACK

(Put on simulated jack.)

18
ROOF JACK

(Put on simulated jack.)

ROOF JACK

(Put on simulated jack.)

MUCH BLOOD AND

BONE STICKING OUT

(Put on right front thigh on victim's pants under coveralls.)

BLOOD SOAKED

CLOTHING

(Put on right front thigh on top of coveralls.)

19

119
120

MINE PHONE

(Put on phone at back of room)

Rapid weak

pulse (120)

(Put on Marvin's neck

over the carotid artery.)

20

BRUISED & CROOKED

(Put on Marvin's left rear lower

leg outside coveralls.)

VOMIT FLUIDS &

STRINGY MEAT

(Keep in your pocket until Marvin is

fully tied down on the stretcher.

Then attach to his cheek.)
121

Marvin R. Letcher Simulation

Additional Illustrations

Use overhead transparencies of these illustrations during the discussion to help

demonstrate proper techniques for moving, lifting and immobilizing Marvin.

FIGURE 4.-Emergency one-rescuer clothing drag.

21
122

FIGURE 5.-Emergency clothing drag with three rescuers.

22
.Sta.........

FIGURE 6.-Three-person lifting procedure for moving injured person.

FIGURE 7.-Ties for immobilizing Marvin's leg fractures.

23

123
124

Marvin R. Letcher Simulation

References

American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons. (1981). Emergency care and

transportation of the sick and injured (3rd ed.). Ct'licago, IL: Author.

American Red Cross. (1981). Standard first aid & personal safety (2nd ed.). New York:

Doubleday.

Aaron, J.E., Bridges, F. A.. , & Ritzel, D. O. (1972). First aid and emergency care

prevention and protection of injuries. New York: Macmillan.

Bergeron, J. D. (1982). First responder. Bowie, MD: Robert J. Brady Co.

Mine Safety and Health Administration. (1980). First aid book. Washington, DC:

U.S. Government Printing Office.

24

INT.-BU.OF MINES,PGH.,PA. 28713