Simulation Classification System
By Chris Musslewhite

The challenge
Ensure that trainers and facilitators succeed when they use simulations by matching trainer skill level and needs with simulation requirements.

The need
Trainers and facilitators indicate that they're concerned about using simulations for the following reasons:

  • complexity of preparation
    complexity of administration
  • anxiety about generating conflict and emotions
  • lack of experience with simulations
  • concern for inadequate facilitation skills
  • lack of predictability of outcomes
  • not enough time
  • difficulty selling the idea of simulations to clients
  • past negative experiences with simulations.

The Goal
Create a system that alleviates many of these concerns and accomplishes the following outcomes:

  • ensure that less experienced trainers and facilitators start with simulations with which they can be successful
  • help trainers and facilitators build their skill level by using simulations
  • guarantee a match between the facilitator’s skill, simulation complexity and participant learning objectives.

The Process
The process of developing the simulation classification system involved several steps.

Step 1. Interview trainers reluctant to use simulations to identify their concerns.

Step 2. Interview successful users of simulations to identify the criteria they use for choosing a simulation.

Step 3. Observe simulations in use.

Step 4. Have experienced users of simulations organize and review data to look for similarities and trends.

The Outcome
The criteria for selecting a simulation as well as the concerns for using a simulation fell into two basic categories: Issues around participant interactions and facilitator concerns.

Participant interaction issues included degree of interaction, predictability of outcomes, and potential for conflict and emotion.

Facilitator issues related to administrative concerns and skill level; including time to prepare for the simulation, complexity of running the simulation, number of facilitators required, level of feedback expected, and overall observation and debrief skills required.

The results yielded seven criteria for matching simulations to trainer and participant needs. This criteria falls into two categories: participant interactions and facilitator skill.

From this analysis four levels of simulations were identified. Four levels provided an adequate differentiation among the criteria. The table below presents a summary of the criteria matched to the levels.


The figure below compares the four levels in relationship to participant interactions and facilitator skill.

Applying the model
Clearly some subjectivity is required to assign a simulation to a Level. In the figures below, the model is applied to four simulations; one for each class.

Clearly this isn’t the final word on simulations, but the simulation classification system is proving helpful in the selection of Discovery Learning simulations and can be applied universally to interactive simulations.

Published: August 18, 2003

Chris Musselwhite is president and CEO of Discovery Learning; www.discoverylearning.com.


Terms and Conditions ASTD