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.
T R A N S I T C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M TCRP REPORT 178 TRANSPORTAT ION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2015 www.TRB.org Research sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration in cooperation with the Transit Development Corporation Subject Areas Public Transportation â¢ Education and Training A National Training and Certification Program for Transit Vehicle Maintenance Instructors TransporTaTion Learning CenTer Silver Spring, MD w i th eduCaTionaL daTa sysTems, inC. Dearborn, MI
TCRP REPORT 178 Project F-19 ISSN 1073-4872 ISBN 978-0-309-30851-9 Â© 2015 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the Transit Cooperative Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Gov- erning Board of the National Research Council. The members of the technical panel selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, and the sponsors of the Transit Cooperative Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturersâ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM The nationâs growth and the need to meet mobility, environmental, and energy objectives place demands on public transit systems. Current systems, some of which are old and in need of upgrading, must ex- pand service area, increase service frequency, and improve efficiency to serve these demands. Research is necessary to solve operating prob- lems, to adapt appropriate new technologies from other industries, and to introduce innovations into the transit industry. The Transit Coopera- tive Research Program (TCRP) serves as one of the principal means by which the transit industry can develop innovative near-term solutions to meet demands placed on it. The need for TCRP was originally identified in TRB Special Report 213âResearch for Public Transit: New Directions, published in 1987 and based on a study sponsored by the Urban Mass Transportation Administrationânow the Federal Transit Admin istration (FTA). A report by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), Transportation 2000, also recognized the need for local, problem- solving research. TCRP, modeled after the longstanding and success- ful National Cooperative Highway Research Program, undertakes research and other technical activities in response to the needs of tran- sit service providers. The scope of TCRP includes a variety of transit research fields including planning, service configuration, equipment, facilities, operations, human resources, maintenance, policy, and administrative practices. TCRP was established under FTA sponsorship in July 1992. Pro- posed by the U.S. Department of Transportation, TCRP was autho- rized as part of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). On May 13, 1992, a memorandum agreement out- lining TCRP operating procedures was executed by the three coop- erating organizations: FTA, the National Academies, acting through the Transportation Research Board (TRB); and the Transit Develop- ment Corporation, Inc. (TDC), a nonprofit educational and research organization established by APTA. TDC is responsible for forming the independent governing board, designated as the TCRP Oversight and Project Selection (TOPS) Committee. Research problem statements for TCRP are solicited periodically but may be submitted to TRB by anyone at any time. It is the responsibility of the TOPS Committee to formulate the research program by identi- fying the highest priority projects. As part of the evaluation, the TOPS Committee defines funding levels and expected products. Once selected, each project is assigned to an expert panel, appointed by the Transportation Research Board. The panels prepare project state- ments (requests for proposals), select contractors, and provide techni- cal guidance and counsel throughout the life of the project. The process for developing research problem statements and selecting research agencies has been used by TRB in managing cooperative research pro- grams since 1962. As in other TRB activ ities, TCRP project panels serve voluntarily without com pensation. Because research cannot have the desired impact if products fail to reach the intended audience, special emphasis is placed on dissemi- nating TCRP results to the intended end users of the research: tran- sit agencies, service providers, and suppliers. TRB provides a series of research reports, syntheses of transit practice, and other support- ing material developed by TCRP research. APTA will arrange for workshops, training aids, field visits, and other activities to ensure that results are implemented by urban and rural transit industry practitioners. The TCRP provides a forum where transit agencies can cooperatively address common operational problems. The TCRP results support and complement other ongoing transit research and training programs. Published reports of the TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academyâs purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transporta- tion Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Boardâs varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individu- als interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org
C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S CRP STAFF FOR TCRP REPORT 178 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Gwen Chisholm-Smith, Senior Program Officer Jeffrey Oser, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Margaret B. Hagood, Editor TCRP PROJECT F-19 PANEL Field of Human Resources Matthew O. Tucker, North County (CA) Transit District, Oceanside, CA (Chair) Russell A. Anderson, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, San Jose, CA LaKeisha G. Brown, Miami-Dade Transit Department, Miami, FL John H. Buckner, Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, Philadelphia, PA Marion Jane Colston, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Los Angeles, CA Dennis M. Cristofaro, MV Transportation, Batavia, IL Mary J. Davis, McGlothin Davis Inc., Denver, CO Diana L. Long, Rahall Transportation Institute, Charleston, WV Carl J. Rokos, Connect Transit, Normal, IL Betty F. Jackson, FTA Liaison Raymond Bedard, Canadian Urban Transit Association Liaison Jeff Hiott, APTA Liaison Robert Hykaway, ATU Liaison James W. Bryant, Jr., TRB Liaison ACKNOWLEDGMENTS It is important to recognize the contributions to this project from a number of industry leaders. The members of Panel F-19 are listed in this report. The project team is led by principal investigator Dr. Chuck Hodell, Senior Program Director of Instructional Design of the Transportation Learning Center and Associ- ate Director of Graduate Program in Instructional Systems Development, University of Maryland, Baltimore County. Center staff who contributed to this effort includes Xinge Wang, John Schiavone, Robin Gillespie, and Brian J. Turner. Contributors from Educational Data Systems, Inc. (EDSI) included Brian Lester and Ken Mall. Melissa Huber, Principal of Huber & Associates, also contributed to the program design and development. The industry-wide organizations contributing to this effort included American Public Trans- portation Association and the national transit unions, Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) and Transport Workers Union (TWU), and the various subject matter experts groups from those organizations that pro- vided valuable feedback.
TCRP Report 178: A National Training and Certification Program for Transit Vehicle Main- tenance Instructors provides a proposed national program structure and plan for training and certifying transit bus and rail maintenance instructors. The report also provides best practices used in the public and private sectors to prepare and certify technical instructors, as well as the attributes and instructional delivery methods found most effective for main- tenance instructors. The report is intended for use by maintenance operations managers, vehicle maintenance instructors, organized labor, and learning professionals. The public transportation industry has made significant progress in establishing a national training and certification program for transit bus maintenance technicians. An apprentice- ship program for bus maintenance technicians has been developed. In addition, a transit bus maintenance technician certification testing program has been developed through the National Institute for Automotive Service Excellence (ASE). In support of this testing certification program, standards for training curricula have been developed through the American Public Transportation Associationâs (APTA) Bus Standards Program. Similar work has also been conducted for a training and certification program for rail transit main- tenance technicians. In addition to these efforts, there is a need to define and establish credentials for a national certification for transit vehicle maintenance instructors. The Transportation Learning Center prepared this report under TCRP Project F-19. The objective of this research was to develop a plan for potential implementation of a vehicle maintenance instructor training and certification program. To accomplish this objective, a feasibility study to determine the viability of a national certification system for a vehi- cle maintenance instructor training and certification program was conducted. A series of online surveys and interviews with subject matter experts were conducted to provide the foundation for the Training and Certification Program Plan and the roadmap for implementation. F O R E W O R D By Gwen Chisholm-Smith Staff Officer Transportation Research Board
1 Summary 1 Defining and Addressing the Training and Certification Challenge in Transit Vehicle Maintenance 2 The Process for Developing a National System of Training and Certification 6 Next Steps 7 Chapter 1 Introduction and Research Approach 7 Introduction 9 Overall Research Approach 10 Major Tasks and Organization of the Final Report 12 Chapter 2 Feasibility Study 12 Overview 12 Data Collection 14 Instructor Population 17 Industry Interest and Support 18 Conclusion 20 Chapter 3 Best Practices from Transit and Related Industries 20 Data Collection 20 Transit Best Practices 31 Best Practices from Other Industries 39 Conclusion and Application of Best Practice Lessons 42 Chapter 4 Training and Certification Program Plan 42 Program Overview 42 Suggested Recruitment Qualifications for Entering the Transit Vehicle Maintenance Instructor National Program 46 Transit Vehicle Maintenance Instructor National Core Competencies and Courses 57 Course Design, Delivery Methods, Time Limits and Recertification 59 Methods for Validating Attainment 61 Course Substitution Guidelines 65 Certification 66 Chapter 5 Business Plan 66 Business Plan Overview 66 Structural Elements of AO 67 Potential Organizations for Program Development and Delivery 68 Core Competency Course Delivery 69 Initial Development Costs 70 Participation Projections and Operating Cost Analysis 74 Summary of Projections 81 Making the Business Case to Transit OrganizationsâImpact and Potential ROI of Instructor Training and Certification 86 Recommended Procurement Language C O N T E N T S
87 Chapter 6 Conclusion 88 References 89 List of Abbreviations, Acronyms, Initials, and Symbols 91 Appendix A List of Alternative Courses 103 Appendix B Potential Administrating Organizations