U.S. military services implement the functions of training development, acquisition, and management through process models referred to as Instructional Systems Development (ISD) or Systems Approach to Training (SAT). Due to differences in their missions, organizational structure, defense systems, training delivery systems, and training product formats, the services have developed distinct variations in their ISD/SAT models. The great reliance now being placed in computers to help perform ISD/SAT analyses makes the exchange of training data, analyses, and products between services difficult to accomplish.

If the services are to effectively and efficiently achieve their training missions, the DoD training community will need to place greater emphasis on Joint Service training and the sharing of training data and analysis products. To foster the flow of training data between services, a Joint Service management initiative, named the Automated-Training Evaluation, Acquisition, and Management (A-TEAM) program, was undertaken from 1992 through 1995 to establish commonality, compatibility and interoperability in Department of Defense (DoD) training systems development and management. A key issue examined by the A-TEAM was the degree of commonality between the service-specific ISD/SAT processes.

This paper describes results of a comparative analysis performed on the ISD and SAT models used by the military services. The specific models analyzed include:

Service Model Key Documents

Air Force ISD AF Manual 36-2234 and AF Handbook 36-2235 series

Army SAT U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) Regulation 350-7 and TRADOC Pamphlet 351 series

Coast Guard ISD Commandant Instruction (COMDTINST) 1550. 9 and the Coast Guard Job and Task Analysis Aid

Marine Corps SAT Marine Corps Combat Development Command (MCCDC) SAT Guide and other related references

Navy ISD Naval Education and Training (NAVEDTRA)-130, -131, and -135

This analysis also aligned Military Standard (MIL-STD) 1379D tasks with the SAT/ISD models described above. As an ISD benchmark, the 1975 Interservice Training Review Organization (ITRO) ISD methodology (described in the rescinded NAVEDTRA-106A and TRADOC Pamphlet 350-30) provided the initial framework for the Joint Service process model.

The A-TEAM ISD/SAT comparative analysis produced two outputs. First, an all-encompassing "Master List" of DoD Training Development processes was identified. Second, a series of conclusions demonstrating that, although challenging and difficult, the successful exchange of training data and products across the services is possible regardless of ISD or SAT model differences.