Organizational Self-Determination and New Digital Self-Study Applications as Means for Developing Nuclear Power Plant Operation Training

  • Mikael WahlströmEmail author
  • Timo Kuula
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9753)


New learning is required from nuclear power plant operators: subtle changes to work emerge as new changes to safety improvements are introduced. This study reports challenges, trade-offs and potential solutions related to career long learning in NPP operation. A NPP operating organization was studied with two focus groups sessions (N = 9). The focus group session outline was generated based on individual (N = 2) and group interviews (N = 6) along with existing published studies and concepts of learning theory. The identified challenges reflect limited resources and limited self-determination of a specific functional group as part of bigger organization.


New learning Nuclear power plant operation Training development 



The study was supported by the SAFIR2018 programme, the Finnish State Nuclear Waste Management Fund (VYR), VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland Ltd, and Finnish Institute of Occupational Health FIOH. We would like to thank Marika Schaupp (FIOH) for planning and participating in background data collection and analysis, and Heli Heikkilä (FIOH) for commenting the focus group outline draft. Warm thanks also for the personnel at the studied NPP site.


  1. 1.
    Hollnagel, E., Woods, D., Leveson, N.: Resilience engineering: Concepts and precepts. Ashgate Publishing Ltd, Vermont (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Virkkunen, J.: The Change Laboratory: A tool for collaborative development of work and education. Springer, New York (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Savioja, P., Norros, L., Salo, L., Aaltonen, I.: Identifying resilience in proceduralised accident management activity of NPP operating crews. Saf. Sci. 68, 258–274 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Norros, L., Savioja, P., Koskinen, H.: Core-Task Design: A Practice-Theory Approach to Human Factors. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jonassen, D.: Designing constructivist learning environments. nstructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, vol. II, pp. 215–239 (1999) Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wenger, E.: Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Engeström, Y.: Expansive learning at work: toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. J. Educ. Work 14(1), 133–156 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hsieh, H., Shannon, S.: Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual. Health Res. 15(9), 1277–1288 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bainbridge, L.: Ironies of automation. Automatica 19, 775–779 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kapp, K.: The gamification of learning and instruction: game-based methods and strategies for training and education. Wiley, New York (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland LtdEspooFinland

Personalised recommendations