The DACUM Process and its Usefulness in Task Analysis for Instructional Developers by Shirley L.

King, 1999 Introduction Unless an accurate, detailed job analysis is undertaken prior to developing a training program, companies may discover after investment of considerable resources that tasks trained for were not essential and not required. This paper discusses the Develop A Curriculum (DACUM) as an approach to task analysis that may be quite useful for instructional developers interested in competency-based learning and training. This paper first discusses the origin, methodology, and underlying assumptions of DACUM. Next, advantages and limitations of the process are explored. The final section of the paper discusses ways of promoting the success of a DACUM process. In addition to references to the literature, comments and recommendations from an instructional designer experienced in DACUM facilitation, who was interviewed for this paper, are presented. Background The DACUM approach to job analysis originated in Canada in the 1960's as a quick, effective, low-cost way to develop competency lists drawing on the expertise of a committee of content experts or experienced workers (Coffin, 1993). Post-secondary institutions in Canada and, more recently, the United States use DACUM as an approach to competency-based learning "because of its success in developing high-quality content analysis in a short period of time compared with other commonly used curriculum analysis techniques" (University of Illinois Curriculum Centre, 1997). The DACUM approach makes it possible to develop a complete job profile, with duties and tasks identified and prioritized, usually in only two days. The profile can then be validated by a larger sample (Jones, 1998). DACUM Method A group of six to twelve experts who are competently performing the job are recruited to form the DACUM committee. Because of their current occupational expertise, committee participants do not need to make advance preparations other than freeing time to be available. A DACUM facilitator guides the committee to collectively develop the DACUM chart over a period of two to three days. Steps in this process include (Coffin, 1993; Stammen & Vetter, 1994): 1. Orientation to the process 2. Review of job description 3. Identification of general areas of competence (GAC's) 4. Identification of tasks and skills 5. Duties and related tasks are written in observable and measurable terms. 6. Organize and sequence task statements in relation to GAC's and complexity 7. Identification of behavior, attitudes, traits, general skills and knowledge, tools, and equipment required to perform the duties and tasks 8. Other options, as desired (e.g., leveling of tasks, addition of a rating scale) The DACUM chart is a detailed and graphic portrayal of the skills or competencies involved that represents the collective expertise and consensus of the DACUM Committee. An average DACUM chart contains between 10 to 14 GAC's and 180 to 200 tasks (Coffin, 1993).

GAC's are listed in the first column and are consecutively labeled with a letter, starting with A. Tasks are listed in columns to the right of the related GAC and labeled with the GAC letter and a task position number, i.e., A1, A2, A3, etc. Each task is further rated numerically to indicate how frequently it is performed, how important it is to perform it correctly, and how difficult it is to learn. These three ratings are totaled for each task to indicate its importance to the overall function of the job (Coffin, 1993; Jones, 1998). To view samples of DACUM charts, the reader is referred to http://www.interlynx.net/archway/Fig1.htm or http://www.waukesha.tec.wi.us/homepage/dacsamp1.htm. Once the DACUM chart is completed, an additional step of validation by a large sample of job performers and stakeholders may be undertaken (Coffin, 1993). Schwartz (personal interview, 1999) suggests a sample of 200 is usually desirable for this purpose. Validation may take two or more weeks. The DACUM panel is then recalled, along with first line supervision, to consider every submitted comment and to decide, by consensus, if any changes are required to the DACUM charts (Jones, 1998). DACUM is based on these assumptions: expert workers can describe and define their job more accurately than anyone else any job or outcome can be described in terms of the tasks expert workers perform all tasks, in order to be performed correctly, require certain knowledge, skills, tools, and attitudes experts are able to identify valid, reliable outcomes and competencies (Coffin & Morin, 1998; University of Illinois Curriculum Centre, 1997).

Advantages and Limitations In comparison with other job analysis techniques, DACUM has a number of advantages. DACUM has been successfully used to analyze a diverse range of occupations at all skill levels (Coffin & Morin, 1998; Stammen & Vetter,1994). It can be accomplished in a short time frame of less than three days. It is relatively inexpensive to develop, requiring minimal resources of a meeting room, facilitator, supplies, postage, telephone, and meals (University of Illinois Curriculum Centre, 1997). Because those performing the competencies are involved in the process, its accuracy and likelihood of acceptance by those who implement and receive the subsequent training is increased. It provides a detailed task analysis, a tool for performance appraisal, a basis for the development of competency-based learning and evaluation, and a means of identifying individual training needs (Coffin, 1993; Coffin & Morin, 1998). Despite its many advantages, DACUM is not without limitations. The process has been criticized as "very task oriented and is not concerned with the larger humanistic issues of maturation, self-actualization, and democracy" (Waukesha County Technical College,1996). Other criticisms are that it stifles creativity and there is no evidence that competency based education serves students better than traditional approaches (Coffin, 1993). Jones (1998) notes that the two-day process can be very draining for committee members and facilitator as each item will be discussed, debated, written, rewritten, revised and revisited.

Promoting a Successful DACUM Process The literature suggests that the selection of facilitator and committee members is key to a successful DACUM. A skilled facilitator who can maintain rapport and guide the group to consensus on every item efficiently and without prejudice is needed (Coffin, 1993; Jones, 1998). Jones (1998) states that a facilitator with little knowledge of the job to be analyzed will produce a better DACUM than a facilitator with detailed job knowledge. While authors agree that the success of a DACUM is especially dependent on how well the DACUM committee is selected, they disagree on what constitutes a well-selected committee. Coffin (1993) advocates a mix of workers and their supervisors, with the workers having greater representation and at least ten years of experience on the job. Jones (1998) states that no supervisors or instructors of the job should be included, as they are likely to influence worker input and the results. Schwartz (personal interview, 1999) concurs that managers and teachers are not the best people and further suggests that the ideal members are people who are doing the job full time, preferably for four to five years. She says this experience level is desirable because they still need to think about the tasks they are performing whereas long-term workers tend to perform the job without attention to specific tasks, thus have more difficulty identifying them. All agree that currency in the field is essential. Coffin (1993) suggests that a DACUM is more successful when members are team players, confident, articulate, and open-minded. He also suggests they should be viewed as leaders by their peers. Consistent attendance is also considered essential for DACUM success. In regard to attendance, Schwartz recommends a committee size of twelve to fourteen to enable four members at a time to rotate out for short periods for reflection and to avoid entrenchment, while maintaining a minimum of eight on task. This would also help to address the problem of fatigue that Jones (1998) identified as a limitation. Software to easily enter, manage and print DACUM chart information is now available and may contribute to the success of a DACUM process. DACUM Information System (DIS) is a windows program that will allow up to 23 duty rows for each DACUM. Each duty row can contain up to 90 tasks, allowing for a total of 2070 tasks per DACUM (DACUM Information System Software, 1999). Summary The DACUM process is effective for detailed task analysis, identification of individual training needs, performance appraisal, and development of competency-based learning. The careful selection of facilitator and committee members is important to a successful DACUM. A detailed, accurate DACUM chart can be created quickly at relatively low-cost. It can then be used by instructional developers as a basis for developing a training program, in which the tasks trained for are not only required for job performance, but can be addressed in order of priority.

References Coffin, L. (1993). DACUM Facilitator Manual. Canadian Vocational Association DACUM Training Program. *** Coffin, L., & Morin, P. (1998). Module II: Competency-based program development and implementation. Canadian Vocational Association DACUM Training Program. ***

DACUM Information System Software (1999). Retrieved February 16, 1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.interlynx.net/archway/Home.htm

Jones, M. (1998). DACUM approach to job analysis. Retrieved February 12, 1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.interlynx.net/archway/Dacum.htm *** Neaves, J. R. (1997). DACUM Process. J. R. Neaves Consulting. Retrieved February 12, 1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.jrneaves.com/dacum.html Schwartz, K. (Personal interview, March 8,1999). DACUM process: A facilitator's view. Stammen, R.M., & Vetter, R. (1994, December) Project title: Collaboratively created multimedia modules for teachers. US West Foundation Grant Application. Fargo: North Dakota State University. Retrieved February 12, 1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/instruct/stammen/uswest/about_grant/html/dacum.htm University of Illinois Curriculum Centre. (1997). DACUM. Retrieved February 12, 1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.uis.edu/~iscc/background.html Waukesha County Technical College. (1996). DACUM: Occupational Analysis for Electromechanical Technician. Retrieved March 8, 1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.waukesha.tec.wi.us/homepage/dacsamp1.htm.

Note: Asterisks (***) indicate resources the writer found most useful.

Please E-mail comments to me at sking@mtroyal.ca