Establishing a National Transit Industry Rail Vehicle Technician Qualification Program— Building for Success (2014)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

18 The Framework of Effective Rail Car Technician Training Building a National System of Qualification for Rail Car Technicians When the TCRP system of qualification project was getting started in 2008, the then-existing foundation for industrywide transit rail training innovation consisted of the National Rail Vehicle Training Standards Committee and their partially completed national training standards. The first question facing the project was straightforward: how to identify the best qualification framework for providing training to rail car technicians and then assess technician abilities in a consistent manner. The project identified the comparative method as the best way to study the features of successful national qualification systems for frontline technicians. The research team under- took structured case studies of durable and effective national qualification systems for frontline blue-collar technical occupa- tions in the United States and in other countries. In the United States, the high-quality systems are primarily for construction crafts. These systems have been developed and sustained over many decades for electricians, sheet-metal workers, plumbers and pipefitters, structural iron workers, and heavy equipment operators. Several of these national occupational systems were studied in depth. National frameworks for training and qualifying blue-collar technicians were also studied in a number of other countries, ranging from those with very effective systems that have been in place for more than 50 years (Austria, Germany, Switzerland, Denmark, and the Netherlands) as well as newer systems in Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom. (The principal results of this research are summarized in Appendix B of the contractor’s final report. Appendix B: Building Capacity for Transit Training: International and Domestic Comparisons can be found by searching for TCRP Report 170 on the TRB website.) The results of this comparative analysis showed strong underlying similarities across national training systems for frontline workers in other U.S. industries and in other countries: • Sectorwide training partnerships involving employers and sector unions, sometimes with government and academic partners • Use of a data-driven system with stakeholder engagement to develop and maintain standards-based curriculum content • Provision of a stable source of funding • Training and certification for new hires through training and apprenticeship systems combining classroom learning with paid on-the-job learning • Training and certification for lateral entrants and experienced incumbents • Training as an essential prerequisite to assessments and certification The members of the National Rail Vehicle Training Stan- dards Committee and the TCRP Project E-07 panel agreed that a similar structure could be built for the U.S. transit industry. The foundation provided by the industry’s national training partnership and consensus training standards is a good one, as shown in Table 3. The TCRP Project E-07 panel and the National Rail Vehicle Training Standards Committee agreed that a standards-based approach drawing on training partnerships at the national and local level offers the best approach for a robust system of qualification for transit rail car technicians. In the effective systems in other U.S. industries and other countries, quality results are achieved through a combination of components that includes “training” in the narrow sense but also goes further. These “systems of qualification” combine standards-based training with associated curriculum and courseware, coordi- nation of classroom and on-the-job training, mentoring to support learning in the field, training of trainers and mentors in the effective use of the system, assessments to confirm that C H A P T E R 2

19 Region Sector Partnerships: National and Statewide Local Partnerships Data-Driven Training: Classroom and On-the-Job Curriculum Secure Funding Youth and New Entrants: Training/Certification Lateral Entrants: Training/Certification and Incumbents: Refresher Training International: Northern Europe Australia UK Canada Tripartite Bipartite National and/or regional for major industries & occupations Secure blend of public and work- related funding via legislation and bargaining Training and apprenticeship Well provided in some countries (Denmark, the Netherlands, etc.) weaker in others United States: Industrywide Partnerships Bipartite Bipartite Through national and local joint apprenticeship and training committees (JATCs) Negotiated in contracts Strong apprenticeship training systems Testing and fill-in-the-gap training, certification U.S. Transit: Traditional Baseline None Few and unstable None (or a few local uncoordinated initiatives) No Sporadic, local variation Sporadic, local variation Recent U.S. Transit Innovations Bipartite – Transportation Learning Center; National Framework for Apprenticeship PA, NY, UT, GA, Northern CA, and other states in the pipeline Joint national training guidelines for five maintenance occupations 2008 To be determined – could be addressed in reauthorization of federal transportation bill Implement national guidelines with courseware sharing; third party Testing and fill-in-the-gap training and certification under new apprenticeship Possible Future U.S. System Broader implementation In all states Completed guidelines for all occupations Stable combination of public and bargained funds Complete system, articulate with school programs Extended Table 3. Comparison of international and domestic training systems. skills have been learned, and an integrated credential man- agement system to track the advancement of learners. All of this is capped by an industrywide apprenticeship that can be customized for local implementation. It is this comprehensive and integrated “system of qualification,” rather than a smaller set of training components, that is the goal for rail vehicle technicians and other frontline technical workers in the transit industry. National Rail Vehicle Training Standards Committee As shown in Figure 6 (Chapter 1) the process for creating a national system of qualification is rooted in an occupa- tional National Rail Vehicle Training Standards Committee composed of SMEs from both labor and management. The National Rail Vehicle Training Standards Committee, which was formed prior to TCRP Project E-07 to develop national training standards, worked with the TCRP Project E-07 over- sight panel to provide valuable guidance in developing the system of qualification. Individual labor-management rep- resentatives also served locally on the training committees at their own agencies to direct and customize training activities to suit their own equipment and operating environments. National Training Standards and Standards-Based Curriculum and Courseware Overview The backbone of the system of qualification for rail car technicians is the consensus, industry-recognized, training standards for rail vehicle technicians. These training standards were developed by SMEs from both labor and management. The standards were finalized within the TCRP Project E-07 framework in 2009 and adopted within the APTA standards system in 2010. The standards contain all of the learning objectives that must be accomplished in order to be a top rail vehicle technician. These standards are being used to both validate pre-existing courseware and to create courseware from scratch using the learning objectives as the backbone of the material. The national training standards reflect a system of progressive learning, from general skills at the 100 level, through occupation-specific skills at the 200 level, to advanced diagnostics and troubleshooting skills at the 300 level. For transit rail car technicians, the National Rail Vehicle Training Standards Committee introduced a level 250 into the cur- riculum for overhaul and rebuild of rail vehicle components,

20 which is a major feature of the public transportation rail industry. Level 100—Fundamental Skills for Transit Maintenance Level 200— Vehicle Operations Overview and Standard Mainte- nance of Rail Vehicles Level 250—Overhaul and Rebuild of Rail Vehicles Components Level 300— Advanced Theory of Operation and Troubleshooting of Systems The National Rail Vehicle Training Standards Committee divided the curriculum and learning objectives at the 200 and 300 level to correspond to the 11 major subsystems that make up transit rail vehicles (see Table 4). Courseware Collected and Produced as Part of TCRP Project E-07 Courseware on Fundamental Topics With the training standards in hand, the Transportation Learning Center collected training materials used at partici- pating locations including Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA), Utah Transit Authority Table 4. Training standards and curriculum for rail car technicians. Level 100—Fundamental Skills for Transit Maintenance 100 Property Specific Orientation (including track safety, flagging, emergency evacuation) 101 Orientation and Background 102 Electrical and Job Safety 103 Tools and Material Handling 104 Basic Mathematics 105 Introduction to Electricity 106 Electrical Meters 107 Wiring Technologies and Equipment 108 Direct Current (DC) Fundamentals 109 Alternating Current (AC) Fundamentals 110 Basic Hydraulic and Pneumatic Theory and Applications 111 Basic Mechanical Theory and Application 112 AC Motors, DC Motors, and Generators 113 Introduction to Electrical Ladder Drawings 114 AC Circuit Analysis 115 Semiconductor Fundamentals 116 Digital Fundamentals Level 200—Vehicle Operations Overview and Standard Maintenance of Rail Vehicles 200 Vehicle Theory of Operation and Overview of Major Systems 201 Couplers—Introduction and Preventive Maintenance 202 Trucks and Axles—Introduction and Preventive Maintenance 203 Propulsion and Dynamic Braking—Introduction and Preventive Maintenance 204 Auxiliary Inverters and Batteries—Introduction and Preventive Maintenance 205 Friction Brakes—Introduction and Preventive Maintenance 206 HVAC—Introduction and Preventive Maintenance 207 Current Collection and Distribution—Introduction and Preventive Maintenance 208 Car Body—Introduction and Preventive Maintenance 209 Doors—Introduction and Preventive Maintenance 210 Communication Systems—Introduction and Preventive Maintenance 211 CBTC (ATP - ATO)—Introduction and Preventive Maintenance 212 Monitoring, Diagnosing, and Troubleshooting Overview Level 250—Overhaul and Rebuild of Rail Vehicle Components Level 300—Advanced Theory of Operation and Troubleshooting of Systems 300 Advanced Methods of Monitoring, Diagnosing, and Troubleshooting 301 Couplers—Advanced Theory of Operation and Troubleshooting 302 Trucks and Axles—Advanced Theory of Operation and Troubleshooting 303 Propulsion and Dynamic Braking—Advanced Theory of Operation and Troubleshooting 304 Auxiliary Inverters and Batteries—Advanced Theory of Operation and Troubleshooting 305 Friction Brakes—Advanced Theory of Operation and Troubleshooting 306 HVAC—Advanced Theory of Operation and Troubleshooting 307 Current Collection and Distribution—Advanced Theory of Operation and Troubleshooting 308 Car Body—Advanced Theory of Operation and Troubleshooting 309 Doors—Advanced Theory of System Operation and Troubleshooting 310 Communication Systems—Advanced Theory of Operation and Troubleshooting 312 CBTC (ATP - ATO)—Advanced Theory of Operation and Troubleshooting

21 (UTA), Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Author­ ity (SEPTA) and Sacramento Regional Transit (SacRT). The majority of this courseware covers only 100 level fundamen­ tal topics such as alternating current/direct current (AC/DC) Fundamentals and Basic Hydraulic and Pneumatic Theory and Applications. Center staff validated the collected courseware to the national training standards (see section below on courseware validation). To further this process and take advantage of the peer interaction that was possible because of the project, the Transportation Learning Center facilitated a process where participating locations anonymously evaluated the instruc­ tional material that had been collected from other agencies. The training material along with the SME evaluations has been cataloged in a spreadsheet. A sample spreadsheet and SME evaluation are shown in Figures 9 and 10, respectively. These files are currently being migrated to the Transit Train­ ing Network (TTN) at TransitTraining.net, a website developed by the Transportation Learning Center to provide a platform for industry occupational training committee members and local training practitioners to view the most updated industry training standards and share and rate courseware developed by committees or individual agencies. Introductory Material on Fundamental Rail Car Maintenance Topics While the collection of courseware covering fundamental topics was of great benefit to the participating transit locations, members of the National Rail Vehicle Training Standards Committee found that there was a need to cover topics spe­ cific to rail vehicle maintenance in a manner that was specific to the mass transit environment. To handle this task, SMEs from the National Rail Vehicle Training Standards Committee paired up with instructional designers at the Transporta­ tion Learning Center to develop primers on 11 rail car sub­ systems for topic areas at the 200 level along with Monitoring, Diagnosing, and Troubleshooting. These primers follow a standardized format that on a very simplistic level covers the learning objectives outlined in the national training standards. Sections include definitions and abbreviations, text by topic area, bibliography, relevant original equipment manufacturer (OEM) contact information, and the pertinent section of the national training standards for that primer. The primers are intended as introductory materials and are not meant to be a textbook for the subject covered. Completed primers are available on TTN and in Appendix D to the contractor’s final report. (Appendix D: 200 Level Primers can be found by searching for TCRP Report 170 on the TRB website.): • Course 201: Couplers • Course 202: Trucks and Axles • Course 203: Propulsion and Dynamic Braking • Course 204: Auxiliary Inverters and Batteries • Course 205: Friction Brakes • Course 206: Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) • Course 207: Current Collection • Course 208: Car Body • Course 209: Doors • Course 210: Communication Systems Figure 9. Screenshot of spreadsheet used to catalog collected training materials.

22 • Course 211: Computer­Based Train Control (CBTC) • Course 212: Monitoring, Diagnosing, and Troubleshooting Courseware Validated to the National Standards Courseware, the materials used to provide training, is only complete and effective if it contains full and appropriate content. To ensure this, the Transportation Learning Center has developed a self­evaluation process through which transit agencies, vendors, or any third­party organization developing course materials can evaluate courseware against the national training standards. Such a tool allows training departments to determine just how complete their written training materials are. Because the standards were developed jointly by SMEs from labor and management, the learning objectives that make up the standards are true reflections of the knowledge and skills that need to be imparted during the training. Most transit rail agencies rely extensively on training materials provided by OEMs when rail cars are purchased. Without an evaluation against the national training standards, local training could miss the mark and fail to provide technicians with the instruction needed to effectively, efficiently, and safely repair and maintain transit equipment. The process developed by the Transportation Learning Center is voluntary, intended as a simple methodology to make sure that training course materials exist and are documented. Instructors may have the ability to impart the appropriate learning objectives without these training materials on the basis of their years of experience. However, translating that knowledge into courseware that meets the learning objectives established by SMEs on a national level not only ensures that the materials are complete, but also that they can be updated and used by all instructors so that appropriate training content is being disseminated over time in a consistent manner. This is especially useful in cases where highly experienced instructors take other positions or retire and their training ability and knowledge goes out the door with them. Courseware validation is much like taking an inventory to make sure all training materials are in place. Using a mechanic’s toolbox as an analogy, determining exactly which tools should be included becomes subjective and arbitrary without a defined list of tasks to be covered. An “appropriate” set of screwdrivers Figure 10. Peer assessment of courseware.

23 may mean a basic set of only five to a less proficient mechanic. However, to a group of SMEs convening to define a suitable toolbox, an appropriate set would include 15 such tools to accommodate the wide variety of fasteners existing on tran- sit vehicles today. As with the mechanic’s toolbox, a national focus regarding courseware ensures that the appropriate mix of learning objectives is included. The process to validate courseware to the national training standards is straightforward. The process involves participa- tion by labor and management representatives, typically an instructor who has delivered the course, and a mechanic who has taken the course. In the first step, they determine which course to validate and then identify all of the courseware used in delivering that course. The validation document is actually a checklist that contains all of the learning objectives identi- fied in a particular standard. In the rail vehicle standard, the learning objectives in Course 201: Couplers Introduction and Preventive Maintenance include all of the skills and knowledge that need to be imparted during the training so students are able to • Inspect linear actuators/motors • Service actuators/motors • Perform basic repairs on linear actuators/motors • Replace linear actuators/motors Placing learning objectives in a checklist format allows the joint labor-management validation team to take each one and indicate whether courseware exists to support it. Another column in the checklist is used to add any notes and indicate whether the particular learning objective is supported by hands- on exercises. Having both labor and management partici- pate in the process ensures that the evaluation is balanced, that all missing course elements are identified, and that the approach to strengthen course materials involves both stake- holders. Sometimes a mechanic who has taken a course has a perspective on improving courseware that the instructor may not be aware of and vice versa. Table 5 shows a portion of the brake standard being used to validate courseware. The first column lists the learning objective contained in the standard, while the second column is used to indicate whether courseware is available to support the learning objective. In some cases, the learning objective does not apply. It may be covered in another course. In other cases, because the standards are developed on a national basis and include a wide range of technologies and equipment, a particular learning objective may not apply to a particular agency. The third column is used to provide the courseware title where appropriate, include any notes or comments, and to indicate whether the learning objective is supported by any hands-on activity. As noted in Table 5, some learning objectives are supported by courseware, some by both courseware and hands-on exercises, while others are missing courseware or the learn- ing objective is not applicable because it is covered in another course. After determinations are made for each learning objec- tive contained in the standards, the results are tabulated in an outcome summary table. Table 6 is a sample outcome summary table that shows the number of learning objectives applicable to the course being validated, those supported by courseware, and those supported by hands-on exercises. Having this information allows the joint labor-management training team to identify deficient courseware and devise an approach to add the missing elements. It also allows the team to determine just how much hands-on applications are being used, if more are needed, and, if so, in what areas. Above all, the process gives both labor and management an opportunity to improve their training program in a collaborative manner, one that is consistent with nationally developed and recognized standards. The Transportation Learning Center has success- fully used this process in several projects and is available to work with other agencies to do the same. Table 5. Sample courseware validation checklist. 201 Couplers Introduction and Preventive Maintenance Learning Objectives Is Courseware Available to Support the Learning Objective? Courseware Title, Notes/Comments, Hands-On Application Inspect linear actuators/motors Yes #4 student manuals, automatic train control (ATC) student guide, heavy repair and maintenance on the Rohr books (1000 series books) Service actuators/motors No Do not have updates on the 1000 system couplers, friction brake guide/schematics Perform basic repairs on linear actuators/motors N/A Field trips (Greenbuilt shop-1 day, coupler shop) and hands-on (use gauges) Replace linear actuators/motors Yes Coupler Head Trainline pins.pdf

24 Another benefit to the evaluation methodology is that by assigning a unique identifier to each learning objective con- tained in the standards, the Transportation Learning Center can more easily assist agencies to locate missing courseware elements. Using the example of the couplers course intro- duced above, by giving the “Inspect Linear Actuators/Motors” learning objective a unique identifier (e.g., Coupler-LO-23), courseware identified by other agencies that support the learning objective could be shared with others. If an agency needed courseware to address a specific learning objective, the Transportation Learning Center could initiate a search of its database that contains all completed assessments using the unique numeric identifier. Additional information on course- ware sharing is provided below. Courseware Sharing Courseware based on recognized standards is the foun- dation of training and consists of the written materials that instructors use to deliver training and that student tech- nicians use as study guides. Unlike other industries where competition naturally restricts the ability to share training materials, public transit has no such limitations. Larger agen- cies, which typically have the resources to develop and obtain a wide range of courseware, are in a perfect position to share those materials with other agencies that could greatly ben- efit from this assistance. This is especially true since there is much commonality among transit equipment. The sharing of training materials across agencies greatly reduces the costs associated with each agency having to develop materials on their own. Understanding the benefits of sharing courseware, the Trans- portation Learning Center has developed a courseware shar- ing mechanism through its TTN website (TransitTraining.net). Over the years and through its various projects, the Trans- portation Learning Center has been collecting courseware from a number of sources. Some of the courseware has been developed by transit agencies, others by OEMs or third-party organizations. In some cases, agencies participating in various Transportation Learning Center projects have validated their courseware to the national training standards, providing a more detailed analysis of the material. In other cases, the courseware has just been reviewed and summarized by the Transportation Learning Center. This courseware has been uploaded to a forum where users can comment and/or contribute their own materials (see Figure 11). TTN serves as a logical platform for sharing the collected materials within the transit community. In some cases, the training materials could be used to provide instruction “as is.” In the majority of cases, however, agencies will use only those segments of the courseware that enhance their own materials. Either way, agencies now have a place to locate courseware that they could apply to improve their training programs. In addition to courseware, TTN provides a library of other useful training documents to share including training stan- dards, papers on various training subjects, research on training metrics, and other subjects. Courseware listed on TTN is cataloged according to the same subject groupings used in the national training standards developed for bus, rail, elevator/escalator, and other transit subject areas. After reviewing the summaries, agency personnel can down- load the material. Materials are only available to participating agencies and their designated employees through a secure login procedure monitored by the Transportation Learning Center. Additional information on the Transportation Learning Center’s TTN site and courseware sharing project is available by contacting the Transportation Learning Center at info@ transportcenter.org or 301.565.4713. Learning Objectives Applicable to this Course Applicable Learning Objectives Supported by Courseware Applicable Learning Objectives NOT Supported by Courseware Applicable Learning Objectives Supported by Hands-on Instruction Notes/Comments 82 66 16 59 The agency and union will review missing courseware elements and work to add the missing materials SCORE: 80 percent of learning objectives applicable to this course are supported by courseware SCORE: 72 percent of learning objectives applicable to this course are supported by hands-on exercises Table 6. Sample courseware validation outcome summary.

25 National Training Consortium The standards-based system of qualification can be more easily implemented by recruiting transit rail stakeholders on an industrywide basis to occupational training consortia. This has already been done, with co-sponsorship by FTA, for transit elevator-escalator and signals training consortia. Creating a transit rail car consortium could lead to the devel- opment of all the components of a system of qualification as prioritized by the industry. Discussions are already underway with the U.S. transit rail industry for a rail car training con- sortium focused on developing instructors and mentors who can use effective instructional delivery methods to make both classroom and on-the-job learning more effective. Train-the-Trainer and Mentor Training Programs Instructor Qualifications and Effective Training Methods The key to training delivery is the instructor and mentor charged with providing instruction. All too often instructors are former technicians who possess immense technical exper- tise but have not been adequately prepared for their new role as teachers. TCRP Project F-19, “A National Training and Certi- fication Program for Transit Vehicle Maintenance Instructors” addresses this issue. The project seeks to develop a business plan for potential implementation of a vehicle maintenance instructor and mentor training and certification program. While many transit agencies have a process in place to identify key attributes for qualified instructors, few have programs in place to develop these attributes and adequately prepare instructors for their jobs. In the absence of such programs, one method to ensure that instructors have some preparation is to screen candidates for technical knowledge, work habits and desire, and then use local community colleges and courses offered by the National Transit Institute (NTI) to enhance communication skills. As mentioned previously in this report, training programs that integrate classroom training approaches and interactive methods in the field that engage technicians will be the most effective in a technical training setting. The best prepared technical trainers go beyond their own technical knowledge. Traditional Classroom Lecture A traditional model of classroom education is a lecture- based delivery method in which a professor/instructor who Figure 11. Screenshot of TTN forum used to share rail vehicle courseware.

26 has been deemed an SME speaks at length on the theory and application of the course content. Interaction is minimal so as not to disrupt the instructor’s narrative and to allow students to take in the knowledge through listening and taking notes. This traditional approach, however, teaches students to be passive observers in the workplace. Problems can result when technicians are trained solely with this delivery method. From a labor perspective, people taught to be passive will be less willing to take action to improve their work conditions. From a management perspective, passive employees tend to be less willing to demonstrate creative problem solving or to take on the challenges of new technology. An integrated approach that focuses on providing the maxi- mum opportunity for students to interact with each other and the instructor is widely believed to be the most successful at producing an effective transfer of learning from the classroom to the jobsite. Interactive Training Methods The importance of interactive learning is not a new concept. It was Aristotle who observed “what we learn to do, we learn by doing.” John Dewey asked in 1916, “Why is it that . . . learning by passive absorption . . . is still so entrenched in practice?” (Dewey 2010). Dewey saw education as an active, constructive process—a perspective that is especially relevant for front- line technicians. What Aristotle and Dewey understood about learning is 100-percent applicable to effective training of transit technicians. Understanding the importance of learn-by-doing training in technical settings where technician’s jobs are largely tactile in nature, the Transportation Learning Center developed a paper on the subject as part of TCRP Project E-07 that is available as Appendix E of the contractor’s final report and can be found by searching for TCRP Report 170 on the TRB website. Appendix E: Learning by Doing: Hands-On Training for Transportation Technicians provides important insight into how people learn and emphasizes that student techni- cians are better served by instructors who teach them to do things, rather than telling them how to do it. Among other topics, the paper discusses instructional system development (ISD), which supports learn-by-doing methods. ISD is a series of processes through which “what, where, how, and when” to teach the skills and knowledge needed to perform given job tasks can be determined. Through the implementation of ISD and current learning theory, the U.S. Navy has deter- mined that lecture should be reserved for large group pre- sentations lasting less than 30 minutes and that the most common method of instruction is interactive (U.S. Depart- ment of the Navy 1992). Interactive training methods, which encompass a wide range of delivery approaches, are summarized below. Displays and Mockups Using displays and mockups is an effective way to get students to interact with equipment they will be responsible for maintaining and repairing on a regular basis after the training concludes. A simple example would be the distribu- tion of dust masks, gloves, and goggles to students while an instructor is providing classroom lecture on personal pro- tective equipment (PPE). A more involved example would be passing around an electrical relay and switch in the classroom as part of a presentation describing electrical circuits. Other mockups include display boards where working system com- ponents (e.g., brakes or electrical circuits) are installed. Lab Exercises Lab exercises typically involve electrical, electronic, pneu- matic, and hydraulic applications, as well as other major vehicle systems. Unlike equipment simulation used to enhance class- room presentations, lab exercises are entirely hands-on and interactive, conducted in a dedicated room or “laboratory” where equipment is placed on tables or benches. Computer Simulation The use of computers and software can play an important role in interactive training, supplementing classroom lecture with exercises that also engage students to learn. Computer simulations are available in nearly every subject area and can break up classroom lecture in an engaging way that enhances the learning process. Simulations can take static classroom presentations to a state of near reality. Distance Learning Distance learning is another form of computer-based inter- active delivery. It delivers training to students who are not physically present in a particular educational setting, providing access to learning when the source of information and the learners are separated by time and distance, or both. Hands-On Vehicle and Component Exercises After students learn theory and application through class- room and various interactive activities, taking them to a vehicle or other equipment where components are installed gives them actual placement and orientation. Providing a more thorough demonstration of equipment placement reinforces the learning that has already taken place and puts everything in proper context. Mentoring The final step in the interactive learning process is to have students work with a mentor. Mentoring provides an excellent

27 training opportunity because it links an experienced person (mentor) with a less experienced trainee to help foster the trainee’s abilities, career development, and professional growth. Mentors provide an aspect to learning that other training cannot replicate. Mentors get to pass along years of experience and “tricks of the trade” that novice technicians can greatly benefit from, helping them to apply what they learned in the classroom and through lab exercises and computer simulations to a real-world workshop environment. As part of TCRP Project E-07, the Transportation Learning Center has produced a Mentoring Guidebook to assist agen- cies develop their own mentoring program, which is avail- able as Appendix F of the contractor’s final report and can be found by searching for TCRP Report 170 on the TRB website. Appendix F: Mentoring Guidebook outlines three types of mentoring approaches: • Informal mentoring • Self-mentoring • Structured mentoring Informal mentoring, also known as traditional mentoring, is loosely structured—tasks and outcomes are not defined. Self-mentoring is more of a strategy than a type of mentoring; instead of having an established mentoring program that seeks to promote the development of a trainee and enhance agency goals, the worker takes the initiative to cultivate his or her own professional growth. A structured mentoring pro- cess brings the mentor and trainee together to reach specific learning goals and to provide sufficient feedback to ensure that the goals are reached. Selecting Effective Methods of Training Delivery Every learner will bring his or her own interests and back- ground to the training experience, and not all individuals fit neatly into pre-designed training boxes. That said, there are several generalizations that can serve as guidelines in devel- oping delivery methods to suit specific learners: • A blended approach, involving a variety of teaching methods that actively engages participants in the learning process is appropriate and effective for training most technical workers. • Learn-by-doing training methods involving mockups, lab work, and mentoring can enhance the learning experience and better prepare workers for the maintenance and repair jobs they ultimately will be responsible for. • Transit employees who work in offices and have regular access to computers and Internet sites will have an easier time using online learning resources than technicians working on the shop floor who may not have access to computers or whose access is limited to entering vehicle repair data. Therefore, if computer-based training is to be provided to maintenance technicians, a classroom with computer access is needed. • Younger employees or entry-level employees often have more familiarity with computers and connectivity than employees from the Baby Boom or Gen X cohorts. Basic instruction on how to use a mouse or find a website will not be needed for younger employees, whereas for some older workers instruction in these basic computer skills will be required for online learning. • For tech-savvy younger workers, educational use of com- puterized media in which learners need to acquire the skills to physically interact with vehicles and equipment may be unfamiliar; learn-by-doing methods will need to be blended. • Distance-based training holds promise as a future training delivery application, but it is more effective when done in conjunction with hands-on and on-the-job learning. • Mentoring can be a highly effective training delivery method when done in a structured manner and explicitly integrated with classroom and on-the-job learning, as part of a formal apprenticeship program. • Upper-level managers, especially those with graduate degrees, are more accustomed to learning in a classroom environment and on their own time and as a result may insist that frontline worker training take place in the same manner. That insistence will only serve to strain labor relations and lead to less than optimal outcomes for technical skill devel- opment. As mentioned previously, good training design begins with an understanding of the training audience. Given these generalities, each organization must decide what makes for good training delivery to their transit employees who work as technicians. As stressed throughout this report section, the process begins with knowing the audience and understanding their particular learning style. For technicians who work with their hands, training needs to engage them in a way that allows them to immediately apply what they have learned in the classroom to activities that will be required of them in their work environment. Skills Validation A key component of a complete system of qualification is the verification of knowledge gained and skills acquired at the end of classroom and hands-on training. In the Rail Vehicle Qualification program, a series of written and hands-on assessments have been designed to validate that technicians possess the practical knowledge and skills required to perform their jobs. Questions for the written assessments and task lists and scenarios for the hands-on assessments have been

28 developed by the SMEs on the National Rail Vehicle Training Standards Committee and subjected to rounds of validation by incumbent rail vehicle technicians at the participating agen- cies. These assessments track the sequencing of rail vehicle training standards and local training delivery. Detailed map- ping of all available assessments and associated qualification areas is provided in Chapter 3. General Guidelines for Rail Vehicle Technician Qualification Assessments To ensure that the newly established system of qualification will provide maximum benefits for both transit agencies and rail technicians, the following guidelines for the qualification assessments have been established: • Incumbents in place at the beginning of the new system of qualification will be grandparented into the new system and not be required to take any qualification assessments, unless they want to acquire a portable credential in the case of employer changes. • No worker will be forced through assessments without adequate training (local joint labor-management commit- tees provide sign-off that the worker has received adequate training or work experience before taking assessment). • Agencies will assume the costs of training and initial assess- ments (payment responsibility of assessment retakes will be determined at the local level). • Individual results of all assessments will be confidential. Only aggregated results will be shared with agency and union representatives to show training gaps. Written Assessment of Knowledge The Transportation Learning Center involved SME mechan- ics in devising written questions, determining passing score thresholds, and reviewing systems for assessment adminis- tration. Intensive processes were put in place to develop and validate the written assessment questions. Most of these ques- tions are generic to all rail agency equipment and technolo- gies. In cases where agency subsystems may be completely different because of the type of technology used, the written assessment is provided in two or more tracks. For example, in the written module of propulsion and dynamic braking, two tracks—AC and DC—are provided to include both ques- tions covering general knowledge across these two technologies and more advanced questions specific to AC or DC. Complet- ing either one successfully will make a technician eligible to move on to the propulsion and dynamic braking hands-on assessment and eventually achieve qualification status. A nota- tion will be made on the certificate of qualification to mark any special tracks. Written assessment results showing overall assessment results (pass or fail) and scores, as well as section scores, are sent con- fidentially and directly to the technicians to inform them of their areas of strength and weakness. Aggregated analyses are shared with management and union at each site to show (1) agency training strengths, (2) areas that need training improvements, and (3) provide a general indi- cation of the pass/fail rate. If the pass rate is low, data will be provided that support the need for additional training in a quantifiable way. The written assessment question bank can be used to design pre- and post-assessments. In piloting the TCRP Project E-07 rail car qualification project, the Transportation Learning Cen- ter worked with Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (GCRTA) and used the 200-level written assessment question bank to design pre- and post-assessments for trainees going through each training module as part of a new rail car appren- ticeship program. Improvements in trainee test scores indicate that training has been effective in improving trainee knowledge in the target area. Hands-on Demonstration of Skills A unique feature of the rail vehicle technician qualification program is its emphasis on hands-on skills demonstration as part of the learner assessment process. Hands-on assessments measure transfer that has occurred in learners’ behavior and practical understanding resulting from the training. These assessments are necessary to determine whether classroom learning can be translated effectively into the realities of the world of work. Some technicians can perform well on written tests but have trouble applying that knowledge in practice— particularly if hands-on practice is not built into the training program. Conversely, some technicians, despite strong practical capabilities, do not perform well on written tests. In developing the rail vehicle technician qualification pro- gram, hands-on assessments are built in as the second step, following written assessments, for achieving qualifications at the journeyperson level, and the only step at the master technician level. A generic hands-on scenario bank was devel- oped by SMEs and validated at multiple pilot locations. At the request of agencies that have provided associated training and are ready to administer a hands-on assessment, the Trans- portation Learning Center will work with agency SMEs to customize the hands-on scenarios and task lists to accom- modate agency needs. Portable Certificate of Qualification Passing the required written and hands-on assessments would lead to an issuance of a certificate of qualification in that technical area. A new hire may complete training modules

29 and assessments at the 100 level, for example, and move on to a number of modules at the 200 level through a local appren- ticeship program. Results from these assessments provide tangible proof that technicians are qualified to perform their jobs and gives technicians recognition for their abilities. Furthermore, the qualification status is portable if the qualified technician seeks employment at another agency. Apprenticeship Overview As TCRP Project E-07 project took form, it became apparent that a review of the state of training in the industry would be necessary to ascertain what was needed to create a com- prehensive training system that could produce the very best possible outcomes. Project research found that training in the industry was inconsistent in terms of both quality and quantity. Larger agencies tend to have the best training, but even in these agencies, training is not always of the highest quality. This was found to be true of all skills training not just for rail vehicle maintainers. The National Rail Vehicle Training Standards Committee and the TCRP Project E-07 panel became con- vinced that a critical element of any comprehensive system of training had to include a registered apprenticeship program. Based on the training standards already developed, the National Rail Vehicle Training Standards Committee began developing a formal national apprenticeship for rail car technicians, similar to those successfully developed for elevator-escalator by the Transit Elevator-Escalator Training Consortium and for transit bus maintenance technicians by the Bus Maintenance National Training Committee. (A similar effort is currently being undertaken by the Signals Training Consortium.) The apprenticeship proposal included devel- oping learning objectives and determining the amount of time to be devoted to each in classroom and on-the-job training. Incumbent workers will be able to take advantage of the extra training that will be available in apprenticeship programs. How- ever, the National Rail Vehicle Training Standards Committee felt very strongly that incumbents should be “grandparented” into the system and have their pay and seniority protected as the new apprenticeship and system of qualification are introduced. Until these recent initiatives to develop national frame- works for transit apprenticeship were registered with the U.S. Department of Labor, apprenticeships in the industry were essentially local arrangements only. Rather than enjoying the stability of apprenticeship and training programs seen in industries with national apprenticeships, local transit appren- ticeships have not been widespread in the industry, with fewer than 20 transit systems identified as having any apprentice- ships at all (Transportation Learning Center unpublished internal research). Moreover, strictly local transit apprentice- ships, in important cases, have proven to be fragile. Modern Apprenticeship Development Apprenticeship and standards-based qualification programs are a time-tested, high-quality solution to the challenge of developing and maintaining a well-qualified technical work force in the United States and other countries that place a high priority on developing their blue-collar workforce skills. Formalized apprenticeship and qualification programs present a means by which transit agencies can grow the skills of incum- bent workers and make transit jobs more attractive to a new generation of technical employees. Registered apprenticeship programs can lead to college credits for quality, work-based learning, helping with recruiting. Students and parents who see college as the only way to succeed may be convinced that a highly compensated trade with upward mobility is a fine alternative to the pursuit of academics in today’s work world. Apprenticeship offers an appealing means of producing skilled maintenance workers to cope with technological changes, looming retirements, and the maintenance demands brought by growing ridership and system expansion. The unique nature of the work performed in transit maintenance often prevents agencies from finding employees from other industries or graduates of technical education programs who have the technical skills or knowledge required for such work. This has led transit agencies to seek more effective ways of developing their own training. The attractiveness of apprenticeship for transit lies in its long-term commitment to progressive skill acquisition through a combination of practical on-the-job training and classroom instruction. Apprenticeships offer advantages over shorter-term training in that apprentice- ships are able to produce highly skilled, versatile workers with solid theoretical and practical knowledge. Developing workers with such characteristics is particularly important in transit maintenance, where the work can be varied and often unpredictable. There are exceptions to this generalization at some large agencies where technicians specialize and perform the same duties every day. Several features make apprenticeship attractive to employers and workers alike. For employers, apprenticeship can offer a guaranteed supply of “home grown” (upgrading the skills of incumbent workers) skilled workers. This is especially impor- tant in work that is unique and best learned through a com- bination of classroom instruction and on-the-job training. Apprenticeship provides an organized process through which older experienced workers can pass along their knowledge and skills to a new generation of workers (Glover et al. 2007). Finally, in a world where state or federal certification is increas- ingly required for safety-critical technical workers, registered apprenticeship is the gold standard of skill certification for many skilled blue-collar occupations.

30 Rail Car Registered Apprenticeship Now Available In June 2013, the Rail Car Maintenance Technician Appren- ticeship was approved by and registered with the U.S. Depart- ment of Labor’s Office of Apprenticeship (See Appendix G of the contractor’s final report. Appendix G can be found by searching for TCRP Report 170 on the TRB website). The apprenticeship program, from the development of national training standards to curriculum outline, was designed by the National Rail Vehicle Training Standards Committee with guidance from TCRP Project E-07. The Transportation Learn- ing Center is currently aware of approximately six public transportation agencies planning to implement or already implementing an apprenticeship program based on the one designed by the National Rail Vehicle Training Standards Committee. Apprenticeship Benefits Employers and Workers Apprenticeship is an effective approach that benefits both workers and employers. Workers are given a valuable set of skills that put them on a career ladder throughout their work life. Mentors strengthen their own skills and work processes by instructing apprentices. Employers find that the savings on parts and labor and reduced turnover contribute directly to their bottom line, as does the increased satisfaction of customers from clean, reliable equipment. Employers Apprenticeship is an attractive way to develop a highly skilled and productive workforce. Apprentices are trained in the skills that are fundamental to their position in an agency. A steady flow of apprentices will help agencies maintain a higher level of workforce knowledge and higher level of maintenance efficiency and effectiveness. Employers are dependent on the job market for skilled workers and with in-house certified training programs, they become more attractive to job seekers. Traditional sources of skilled workers are shrinking rapidly, which is why in-house registered apprenticeship training pro- grams are an important part of maintaining an efficient tech- nical workforce and subsequently a state-of-good-repair. Many studies have been published about the return on investment (ROI) to those employers that initiate apprentice- ship programs. There is a general consensus on tangible ben- efits (Mathmatica Policy Research 2012). The most common beneficial elements cited are the following: • Improved quality • Improved productivity • Improved customer satisfaction • Reduced supervisory and administrative costs • Higher employee satisfaction and retention These benefits all lead to sharpening a firm’s competitive edge and recognized position as an employer of choice and responsible steward of publicly invested funds. While transit agencies do not compete with one another, they do compete for scarce government dollars. The better an agency looks to the public, the better taxpayers and legislators feel about funding the transit agency. Transit authorities also compete for customers. Their product must be attractive enough to move commuters from their cars to trains and buses. A well-trained workforce ensures that a transit system has reliable, safe, and mechanically sound vehicles—all attributes of an attractive modal alterna- tive. Finally, employers compete with one another to attract and retain a capable workforce, and a commitment to quality tech- nical training and formal qualification helps on both fronts. In short, apprenticeship is a smart business decision and an investment in the future success of a business. Workers Apprentices are given the opportunity to earn while they learn. They gain confidence in their skills and reasoning abili- ties, while obtaining a clear path to job growth. If they have the ambition to learn and strive for more, it can lead to a manage- ment position and a whole new career ladder. Increasingly, in some programs, apprentices are able to translate registered apprenticeship training into college credits. The skills learned in an apprenticeship program are retained for a lifetime, and a certificate acknowledging apprentices’ accomplishments proves their qualifications. The Advantages to Registering an Apprenticeship Apprenticeship and certification/qualification programs are registered with either the U.S. Department of Labor or a state apprenticeship oversight organization. Registering an apprenticeship program through the national or state depart- ment of labor apprenticeship office validates its completeness and provides legitimacy. It also gives the worker a certificate of completion that is recognized nationwide and thus enhances the worker’s job mobility. How Is an Apprenticeship Structured? Industries like transit, with a relatively high degree of union representation of their frontline workforce, typically establish their national apprenticeship committee structures based on agreements between the industry and the union representing

31 workers in a particular occupation. There are several com- mon structural elements among apprenticeship/qualification programs that have successfully maintained quality training over a long period of time (See Appendix B of the contrac- tor’s final report. Appendix B: Building Capacity for Transit Training: International and Domestic Comparisons can be found by searching for TCRP Report 170 on the TRB website). Formal apprenticeship programs in the United States that have met the test of time (many existing for more than 50 years) all have jointly administered national committees made up of equal numbers of labor and management representatives. The Joint Apprenticeship and Training Committee (JATC) structure offers several advantages to unilaterally run pro- grams. Several studies have shown that joint apprenticeship programs have higher completion rates and a generally better track record than unilaterally run apprenticeships. The JATC structure • Increases the quality and quantity of training while reducing costs • Increases the visibility and influence of training within the industry • Offers greater durability of training efforts • Enhances employee relations by developing a collaborative commitment to quality and skill • Increases worker engagement • Improves worker recognition and morale • Strengthens the industry’s ability to work with key external parties to improve training Typically, a national apprenticeship and training partner- ship is formed between a single national union and the national industry association. This partnership then forms a national JATC to oversee and administer the work. Because transit workers are represented by a variety of unions in the United States, the Transportation Learning Center’s board of directors currently serves in this capacity; presidents of several national labor organizations serve on the Transportation Learning Center’s board along with the presidents of APTA and the Community Transportation Association of America (CTAA) and chief executive officers of several major transit systems. The transit industry’s emerging system of qualification for rail car technicians (and for other technical occupations) is already carrying out many of the responsibilities of the various levels of oversight in a public transportation joint apprenticeship/ certification partnership such as the following: • Analyze tasks and develop national standards • Provide guidance to local JATCs for national standards • Use national standards to develop skill certifications for individuals • Develop national standards and program certification for local committees • Develop common courseware for local programs to use • Train local instructors on course content and teaching techniques • Monitor technological changes and incorporate them into the courses • Negotiate with local and national educational institutions for college credit • Promote sharing of best practices • Coordinate with equipment manufacturers and OEM train- ing programs • Measure results and local committee effectiveness • Apply lessons to next round of training and certification standards promulgated by the NJATC Local training partnerships at individual training agencies function as local JATCs and carry out the following: • Negotiate local agreement including funding • Pick local JATC members • Oversee training process and logistics • Develop process for picking apprentices