339
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Aimandscope
Theaimofthis paper is to introduce new simulator
training programme established for Finnish oil spill
response authorities and the rationale behind the
learning methods chosen. Responsibility in marine
pollution response in Finland is divided between
environmental and emergency authorities. The
Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE) is the
competentgovernment pollut
ion response authority.
SYKE, accompanied with the Finnish Border Guard
andTheFinnishDefenceForces,conductstheoilspill
responsemeasuresontheopensea.SYKE isalsothe
nationallyappointedauthoritythatisempowered to
request and give international assistance. The
Regional Fire and Rescue Services (RFRS) are in
chargeofoilresponseoperationsincoastalareas.The
Centres for Economic Development, Transport and
theEnvironmentassisttheRFRSsinorganisingtheoil
spill response operation as well as a
pprove the
regionalcontingencyplansoftheRFRSs’.Thenumber
of agencies participating in an oil spill response
New Learning Methods for Marine Oil Spill Response
Training
J
.Halonen,A.Lanki&E.Rantavuo
South‐EasternFinlandUniversityofAppliedSciences,Kotka,Finland
ABSTRACT:InFinlandtheRegionalFireandRescueServices(RFRS)areresponsiblefornearshoreoilspill
responseandshorelinecleanupoperations.Inaddition,theyassistinothertypesofmaritimeincidents,suchas
searchandrescueoperationsandfire‐fightingonboa
rd.ThesestatutoryassignmentsrequiretheRFRStohave
capability to act both on land and at sea. As maritime incidents occur infrequently, little routine has been
established.Inordertoimprovetheirperformanceinmaritimeoperations, theRFRSareparticipatinginanew
oil spill training programme to be launched by South‐Eastern Finland University of Applied Sciences. This
training progra
mme aims to utilize new educational methods; e‐learning and simulator based training. In
addition to fully exploiting the existing navigational bridge simulator, radio communication simulator and
crisismanagementsimulator,anentirelynewsimulatorisdeveloped.Thissimulatorisdesignedtomodelthe
oil recovery process; recovery method, rate and volume in va
rious conditions with different oil types. New
simulatorenablescreationofacomprehensivetrainingprogrammecoveringtrainingtasksfromadistresscall
tothecompletionofanoilspillresponseoperation.Structureofthetrainingprogramme,aswellasthetraining
objectives,areba
sedonthefindingsfromcompetenceandeducationsurveysconductedinspring2016.Inthese
results, a need for vessel maneuvering and navigation exercises together with actual response measures
training were emphasized. Also additional training for maritime radio communication, GMDSS‐emergency
protocols and collaboration with maritime aut
horities were seemed important. This paper describes new
approach to the maritime operations training designed for rescue authorities, a way of learning by doing,
withoutmobilisingthevesselsatsea.
http://www.transnav.eu
the International Journal
on Marine Navigation
and Safety of Sea Transportation
Volume 11
Number 2
June 2017
DOI:10.12716/1001.11.02.18
340
operationismanifold.Thispaperconcentratesonthe
field of operation of RFRSs. Furthermore, as the oil
spill response involves various elements of both
onshore and at‐sea countermeasures, this paper
focuses on the at‐sea phase of an oil spill response
operationand the maritimeskills related. This focus
was set on the basis of the competence survey
conducted prior to the development of the training
programme. The results of the survey indicated an
apparentneedforadditionalmaritimetraining.
1.2 Structureofthepaper
The paper presents the current situation of oil spill
responseeducationandthecontext
inwhichthenew
marine oil spill response simulator training is
developed. Research directing the development is
described and the main findings highlighted. The
designed training structure is presented and the
learning methods are discussed in order to assess
their applicability to meet arisen training needs. In
conclusion, the training development
processes is
summarised and future application of the enhanced
simulatorenvironmentisintroduced.
2 SIGNIFICANCEOFOILSPILLRESPONSE
TRAINING
Even though the risk of oil spills is minimised by
improved maritime safety and jointly adopted
international or regional risk preventing measures,
the capability to deal with the consequences of
a
marine oil spill is needed (Lampela & Jolma 2011).
Theuniquenessofthe BalticSea,theshallowwaters
withslowexchangeofwatermakesithighlysensitive
tooilpollution.Alsocoldwintersandlongperiodsof
ice cover slow the physical, chemical and biological
decomposition of harmful substances. (SYKE
2017;
HELCOM 2010; HELCOM 2016.) The sea‐area is
characterized by shallow waters, rocky shores and
narrow fairways as well as a partial ice‐coverage
during the wintertime. Finnish fairways are mainly
constructedaccordingtothePIANC parametersand
guidelines.Insomenavigationalareastheparameters
regarding the fairway geometry
can not be fully
compliedwithduetothescatteredrockyformations,
islands or the features of the sea bed (Larjo et al.
2010). These demanding navigational characteristics
of Finnish waters combined with the increasing oil
transportation pose a severe risk to the marine
environment.The rapid response actions are needed
alsobecauseofthevastsosio‐economicimpactsanoil
spillmightcause.(SYKE2017;HELCOM2016.)
The Finnish Environment Institute (Suomen
ympäristökeskus, later SYKE) estimates that about
2,000accidentaloilspillsoccureachyearinFinland,
although in most of these incidents only small
amounts of oil are released
into the environment.
There has been no large‐scale oil spill since 1980’s
(SYKE 2017). Therefore it is crucial to maintain spill
response ability with continuous training as real‐life
experience is not gained and routine can not been
established. Although the probability of an oil
incident is not very high
in the light of realised
incidents,theconsequencesofanoilspillemphasises
thenecessity of immediate preparednessattainedby
comprehensiveoilspilltraining
3 MARITIMECOMPETENCIESINRESCUE
SERVICES
Regional Fire and Rescue Services (RFRS) are
responsible for the prevention of and response to
marine oil spills within the
coastal region. Despite
their statutory role in the marine spill response,
maritime studies are not included in the vocational
educationoffireandrescuepersonnel.Manoeuvring
of vessels, navigation as wellas maritime
communicationpracticesaretodayeducatedasanin‐
service training by the RFRSs themselves. Assigned
officers have Certificates
for Small Craft Operator
issued by the Finnish Maritime Administration.
However,maintainingthemaritimeskillshas proven
tobeachallengeduetotherestrictedpossibilitiesfor
onboard training. According to the competence
survey, the maritime skills varied among the RFRSs
and an apparent need for more comprehensive
maritimeeducation
wasrecognised.
4 SURVEYSONRESPONSETRAININGNEEDS
To ensure the feasibility of the education proposed,
responsetrainingneedswerestudiedindetailbythe
means of online semi‐structured survey with open
questionstogetherwithfixedselectionmatrix.Survey
consistedoftwoparts.Firstonestudiedtheresponse
trainingneeds
ina strategical level(later referredas
an Education survey), and the other part the actual
competenciesinanoperationallevel(laterreferredas
aCompetencesurvey).
Education survey was targeted at the rescue
officers designated as oil spill response trainers in
RFRS or other organisations assigned to oil spill
response. This survey was aimed to provide
background information on the current state of and
the future requirements for the oil spill education,
prospects for education arrangements, scale and
scopeoftheeducationandotherrestrictionsaffecting
thefurtherimplementation.
Competencesurveywasdirectedtotheemployee
levelofRFRSand
otherassociatedorganisations.The
aim was to define the key areas of expertise in the
field of oil spill response, and to examine if any
competency deficiencies exist. In addition subjective
viewsonthelevelofimportanceofspecifiedresponse
competencieswerestudied.
Both parts of the survey were conducted
nationwide. Respondents represented 39
organisationsintotal,andincludedthemainresponse
authorities,responseagenciesandvoluntaryresponse
organisations in Finland. Main target group, RFRSs,
composed51,4%ofthesurveyparticipants.Majority
(81,8 %) of the Finnish rescue services was
represented as 18 of 22 Regional Rescue and Fire
Services
attended the survey. Other respondents
included i.a. Finnish Environment Institute SYKE,
Finnish Border Guard, the Finnish Defence Forces,
Finnish Transport Safety Agency, Finnish
341
Meteorological Institute and WWF Finland. Also
several response related enterprises gave their
outlooktothesubject.Survey participationrate was
67,2%andthe numberof answers189 intotal.This
was considered an adequate broad base of data for
trainingpriorityanalysis.
Main results of the Competence survey and
the
EducationsurveyconcerningtheRFRSsareoutlined
inthefollowing.Assurveycoveredbothoperational
and strategical (employee and employer) point of
views, the equivalence between reported needs and
goals could be compared. Subtle differences in
training priorities were detected between the
respondent groups. This lead to the customization
and modularization of training programme to be
discussedlaterinthispaper.
4.1 Competencesurvey
Operational level survey examined competence
deficiencies of the RFRS employees by 64 fixed and
ten(10)openquestionsconcerningareasofexpertise
related to the oil spill response. Respondent was
asked to assess the level of
personal competence in
specifiedresponsetaskinnumeralscalefrom1to5,
highest value (5) representing excellent level of
competency. In addition, respondent was asked to
assess the level of significance of the competency in
questioncontributingtotheoverallsuccessoftheoil
spillresponseoperation.
Highest level
of competencies (good to excellent
competency) are currently displayed in skills to
conductreconnaissanceoftheoiledareasandtheon‐
scene assessment of the situation. Second highest
competencies(fairtogoodcompetency)arerelatedto
environmental and sosio‐economic impacts of an oil
spill,countermeasurestoprotectsensitivespeciesand
skillstomaintainsafeworkingproceduresintermsof
occupational safety. Respectively the current key
strengthsidentifiedarerelatedtothepracticaloilspill
response and oil recovery skills such as response
tactics and techniques in different operational
environmentsandambientconditions.
Levels of competencies and levels of significance
were
comparedinordertofindpotentialcompetence
deficiencies and thus top priority training needs to
focuson.Asaresult,themostsignificantcompetence
deficienciesseemedtofallupontwomaincategories,
maritime related skills and marine oil spill response
skills.
Regarding to the maritime related skills, the
competence deficiency is
greatest in vessel
manoeuvring and navigation skills as illustrated in
Figure1.Theseskillsaremainfactorscontributing to
theoverallsuccessoftheresponseoperationandare
to be taken into account in designing the training
programme accordingly. Based on the survey
findings, new oil spill response education should
include training modules in i) operating response
vesselsinformations,ii)useofradarandnavigating
in restricted visibility and iii) maritime radio
communication including GMDSS‐emergency
protocol. Multi‐agency collaboration is reasonable to
includeboth in response planning tasks and in joint
simulatorexercises.
Figure1. Maritime skills with greatest distinction in
competencyandsignificanceoftheskill.
Regarding to the oil spill response skills the
greatest competence deficiencies reported were
related to the various oil recovery and containment
techniquesaspresentedinFigure2.
Figure2. Marine oil spill response skills with greatest
distinctionincompetencyandsignificanceoftheskill.
Inorder to reinforceresponse skills and decrease
the competence deficiencies in marine oil spill
response,futuretraining programme should include
thefollowingmodulesi)oil spillresponsetacticsand
techniques, ii) oil containment and booming and iii)
on‐waterandonshoreoilrecoverytechniques.
The results presented above are based
on the
answersof127fireandrescuepersonnel.Thenumber
ofrespondentsinthecompetencesurveywas144in
total representing 21 separate organisations. The
competence levels of each respondent groups were
studiedalike. To verify improved skills, competence
surveywillberepeatedaftereachtrainingcourseand
needed
steps are taken to develop the training
programme towards achieving the best
correspondence.
4.2 Educationsurvey
Educationsurveywasaimedatthepersonsincharge
of the response preparedness in a strategical level.
Survey consisted of eight (8) open questions
examining the current education situation and the
future needs. The results
indicated that demand for
response education exists. Nearly half of the
respondents (45,7 %) stated that the current state of
theoilspillresponseeducationdoesnotmeasureup
342
withtheirrequirements.Respondentspartlysatisfied
with the current situation comprise 26,1 % and
respondentsfullysatisfiedwiththecurrenteducation
situation comprise 19,6 % of the number of survey
participants,8,7%representingrespondentsnotable
to express their opinion. The results of education
surveyisbasedonthe
answersfrom45 respondents
intotalrepresenting37separateorganisations.
Figure 3 shows the educational needs detected.
Themosturgentneedsarerelatedtothemanagement
of an oil spill response operation, the response
techniques and tactics as well as the multi‐agency
collaboration. These aspects were also recognised in
operationallevel.Proactiveriskcontrolmeasuresand
options to minimise the consequences of the spill
seemalsoneedmoreconsideration.Inadditiontothe
current needs, the respondents were asked to assess
theemergingeducationalneedsassomerevisionsin
responseresponsibilitiesareexpectedinthefuture.
Figure3.Mosturgentoilspillresponseeducationneeds.
Comparison of reported education needs to the
existing education offering was conducted. The
resultswerealsocomparedto thefindings ofearlier
studies (i.e. Lonka 1998; Kymenlaakso University of
AppliedSciences2011;Kujala2012;Kulletal.2012).
Thoughtheresearchdataofthesestudies,thenumber
of research subjects and
respondents, was more
limited, some similarities were found. The
educational needs have remained same over two
decades (Lonka 1998; Kujala 2012). Also the
challenges in educating fire and rescue personnel
seemrepeatedlyculminateintherestrictedresources
of time and personnel the RFRSs are able to release
from daily operations
to participate in trainings
(Lonka 1998; Kymenlaakso University of Applied
Sciences2011;Kujala2012).Theserestrictionsdirected
the designing of new training programme and
highlighted the importance of utilising space‐ and
time‐independentlearningmethods.
5 DESIGNINGTRAININGPROGRAMMEAND
TRAININGMETHODS
Training programme design was outlined by the
target group’s
limitation to attend contact teaching
lessons and the practical nature of the oil spill
responseasastudytheme.Topicsofthelessonswere
derivedfromtheresults ofsurveys describedearlier
inthistext.
Applicability of existing teaching aids and
arrangements in oil spill response training was
evaluated. As
a result, training provider’s facilities
seemedfeasible. Operatingtheresponsevesselscould
be easily trained in the existing navigational bridge
simulator yet the full adaptation required some
scaling;new models for smallervessels,workboats,
bargesandtugs,neededtobeinstalled.Asthebridge
simulatormainlyusedforSTCW‐training
ofseafarers
will be now utilised to train non‐seafarers, each
trainingtaskwasassessedtofindthemostbeneficial
usageoftherelevantfunctionsofbridgecontrolsand
to determine the adequate scale and depth of
exercising. Virtual training environment for the on‐
wateroperationswasaccomplishedbyupgrading
the
bridge simulator software with the oil spill
functionalitymodule.Maritimeradiocommunication
simulator and crisis management simulator can be
utilisedtostimulatedecision‐making,leadershipand
situationalawareness.However,noneoftheavailable
oilspillsimulatorsmodelledtheoilrecoveryprocess
inasatisfactorydegree.Therefore,developmentofa
new
simulator commenced.Future simulator
modelling oil recovery will consist of real‐time
simulator engine software, computation of oil
behaviour,fate,andoil‐water‐recovery‐rateandcabin
type work station with authentic control levers.
Integrationofenhancedbridgesimulatorandnewoil
recovery simulator creates a unique learning
environment in
which the marine oil spill response
operationscanbetrainedrealisticallywithoutaneed
for mobilisation of response troops or manning the
vessels.
Thesimulatorenvironmentenablessafetraining in
variableseastatesandvisibilities.Changingambient
conditions or introducing malfunctions of response
equipmentorenginefailuresofvesselswillforce
the
trainers to re‐assess their response strategy and
tactics. This kind of use of simulators enables
contributing to the problem‐based learning by
developing students’ reasoning skills (Savin‐Baden
2000).Simulatortrainingalsoenableslearningtotake
place within a context relevant to the the students,
andthusensures
thatlearningisattunedtoworldof
work,whichare the salient features ofthe problem‐
basedlearning(Savin‐Baden2000).
Another approach applied to the training
programme design was promoting the case‐based
reasoning (CBR) in executing training tasks. CBR
exploits the past cases in dealing with similar new
cases
withfourstepapproachknownasCBR‐cyclei)
retrieve,ii)reuse,iii)reviseandiv)retain(Prentzas&
Hatzilygeroudis 2011). Theory lectures providing an
overview of earlier spill response cases support the
students to apply what they learnt in a simplistic
simulator exercise and when appropriate, increasing
the level
of difficulty by adding more variables,
students revise their actions to demonstrate their
understanding.
This approach complies with the established
assessment of proficiency applied in the maritime
field. The international Standards of Training,
CertificationandWatchkeeping forSeafarers(STCW
Code) defines competence as a level of proficiency
consistingofi)knowledge
ii)understandingandiii)a
demonstratedskill.Thisdefinitionwasusedasbasis
for setting objectives and evaluating the simulation
343
tasks. Each task has an objective that will require
learned knowledge, increased understanding or
acquiredanddemonstratedskill.(IMO2011.)
Simulators are considered most applicable in
training the pra ctical skills, decision‐making,
teamwork, communication skills (Salakari 2010) and
situational leadership (Edgley & Smith 2015).
However,trainingsessions shouldnot solely
consist
ofsimulatorexercises.Excessiveamountofsimulator
traininginonesessionisprovedtobeexhaustingand
doesnotsupportstudents’learningabilities(Salakari
2010).Itisalsonoted,thatlearningbydoingdoesnot
displace other methods of learning but completes
them(Kalalahti2015;Salakari 2010).Balancebetween
simulator training and theory lectures should be
found(Salakari2010).
Thereforeoilspillsimulatortrainingwasdecided
to follow 10‐20‐70‐principle. This model includes a
combination of structured learning sessions, social
learning and simulation learning (Edgley & Smith
2015).Thestructuredlearning(10%oflearningtime)
consists of theory
lessons needed to provide the
knowledgebaseofthesubject.AsSavin‐Baden(2000)
emphasises, the problem‐based learning offers
students opportunity to embrace, challenge or
transcend the theories put before them, thus
indicating the necessity of presenting the theory.
Theory‐based approach is completed by social
learning (20% of
course time) including workshops
and group assignments. When appropriate, some of
these sessions take pla ce prior to actual course.
Instead of traditional contact teaching lectures, new
learning methods are used. An e‐learning platform
consisting of group and individual assignments,
exams and video‐blogs (vlogs) is created to support
the students’
self‐directedlearning. Simulator
learning(70%ofcoursetime)providesopportunities
topractice,testanddemonstratetherequiredskills.
Degreeofsuccessofthetrainingprogrammewill
be evaluated using a number of approaches. The
competence levels of participants were surveyed
before the course by the means on Competence
survey
andwillrepeatedafterthecourse.Thisallows
measuring a shift in competencies in order to
demonstratetheactualefficiencyofthetraining,and
torevisethetrainingprogrammeaccordingly.
6 ANEXAMPLEOFTRAININGSTRUCTURE
The structure ofthe RFRS pilot training programme
willconsistoffourmainmodules.The
modulesarei)
topical class lectures, ii) pre‐assignments and
workshops,iii)functional exercisesin a navigational
bridge simulator and iv) exercises with an oil
recovery simulator. A single module will consist of
threetoseventasksortopicsasillustratedinFigure4.
Thedurationoftheprogramme will
bethree to five
workingdays.
Figure4. Example of a basic level training programme for
response teams and programme structure demonstrating
the learning modules, exercises (missions) and their
relations.
Bridge simulator exercises‐module is constructed
from a set of missions. Bridge simulator exercises
(missions) may include simultaneous vessel
formations, manoeuvring and radio communication.
Studentswillbeabletomanageoilbooms,bargesand
other response objects in various configurations and
operatingenvironmentsincludingshallowwatersand
different lighting conditions. These
exercises
represent controlled, objective‐driven activities in a
prior scripted oil spill incident scenario. An
individual exercise focuses on one or two main
problems at the time. Duration of such a mission is
onetothreehours.Exercisesareprogressiveandthe
scenario increases in complexity as the simulator
environment
becomesmorefamiliarandtheskillsof
thetraineesimprove.
The bridge simulator module used in a single
training programme will consist of four to six
progressively complex individual missions. An
example of an easier basic level simulator mission
would be aligning two or three vessels in open sea
andin
calmdaytimeconditions.Thefocuswouldlie
in coordination, vessel handling and radio
communicationwithothertrainees.
An example of a more advanced mission would
consist of three or more vessels performing a
coordinated towing of oil boom(s) and/ or storage
bargesinFinnisharchipelagowithothervesseltraffic
while
theprevailingambientconditionsarenighttime
and rain. The focus would lie in advanced
coordination, vessel handling and communication
betweenothervesselsandtheVesselTrafficCentre.
Amoduleconsistingofmainlybasic levelmissions
would be targeted for on‐scene response teams
whereas a module with advanced and more
challenging
missions would be targeted for the
officers or trainees that have participated in the
programme before. This approach will keep the
programmerelevantforseveralyearsandallowsfor
refreshmenttrainingontheindividuallevel.
344
Described example module utilizes the
navigational simulator system with an oil spill
response functionality. Typically, bridge simulators
are used for single ship navigational training with
relatively large merchant vessel models. In this
programme the emphasis is in constructing training
tasks for non‐seafarers such as RFRS personnel.
Trainees will be
able to perform simulated, realistic
coordinated and simultaneous tasks and missions
withsmallervesselmodels.Atthetimeofpreparing
this paper, a study assessing the possibility of
constructinganexactdigitalmodelofanRFRSvessel
typeisunderprogress.
Complete programme will be constructed by
combining the modules
in a way, which reflects the
level of knowledge and skills of the trainee group.
The 10‐20‐70‐ratio can be adjusted to shift emphasis
toward the missions in the navigational simulator
instead of structured learning. Modular structure
allows flexibility and possibility for customization,
suchastailormadeprogrammesfor
astudentgroup
fromaspecificregionorgroupconsistingoftrainees
ofvariouspositionsand/orspillresponseduties.
7 CONCLUSIONS
Thispaperdescribedtheprocessofdevelopinganew
marineoilspillresponsetrainingforFinnishresponse
authorities,mainlytargetedattheRegional Fireand
Rescue Services. The contents
of the training
programme is based on the research on competence
strengths and educational needs. The key training
topics identified include the response tactics and
techniques along with the maritime skills, such as
vessel manoeuvring and booming configurations.
Navigational bridge simulator was considered the
most applicable learning environment for training
these
practical skills. The applicability of simulator
trainingwasendorsedasitalsocontributeslearning
of communication skills, situational leadership,
teamworkanddecisionmaking.
The training programme applies the method of
problem‐basedlearning;thetrainingsessionsarebuilt
onthescenario‐basedsettingsaccompaniedwiththe
theory‐based lessons. Creating
learning missions
permittingstudentstomanage,concludeandreview
operations develops the students’ problem‐based
learningabilities.Themodularstructureandamixof
exercises enables the customization of training
programme for diverse target groups. The blended‐
learningapproachwithnewe‐learningmethodsgives
flexibilitytotheimplementationofthe
course.
Evencomplexoilspillscenarioscanbetrainedina
simulator environment. The new oil recovery
simulator currently under development will
substantiallycompletethetrainingaids.Inadditionto
the training, this unique simulator environment can
be used as a risk analysis tool for oil spill response
contingencyplanning.
FUNDINGANDGUIDANCEFORDEVELOPMENT
WORK
ThetrainingprogrammeisconductedundertheEU‐
project SCAROIL Simulator Training for Cargo
Handling and Oil Recovery (S20604) and funded by
EuropeanSocialFund,FinnishMaritimeFoundation,
Palosuojelun Edistämissäätiö and William & Ester
Otsakorpi Foundation. The development of new oil
recovery simulator is funded
by European Regional
Development Fund and South‐Eastern University of
Applied Sciences in an EU‐investment project
SCAROILSimulators(A71714).
The project steering committee constituted to
guide the development of simulator training is
comprisedofthedesignatedspillresponsespecialists
representingtheRescueServicesofEastern‐Uusimaa,
Helsinki, Kymenlaakso, Lapland,
Northern Carelia,
NorthernSavonia,Oulu‐Koillismaa,SouthernCarelia,
Southern Savonia, Soutwest Finland and Western‐
Uusimaa, the Emergency Service College and the
Centres for Economic Development, Transport and
theEnvironmentofUusimaaandSoutheastFinland.
REFERENCES
Edgley,Graham&Smith,Andy2015.CanTheyDoItinthe
RealEvent?StrengthsandChallengesofUsingExercises
and Simulations Learning and Assessment Programs.
ArticleinInterspill2015ConferenceProceedings.p.2‐3.
HELCOM2010.HazardoussubstancesintheBalticSea.An
integratedthematicassessmentofhazardoussubstances
in the Baltic Sea. Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings no
120B.HelsinkiCommission.ISSN0357‐2994.p.68‐69.
HELCOM 2016. Baltic Sea Clean Shipping Guide.
Informationformarinersonenvironmentalandsafetyof
navigation measures in the Baltic Sea. Helsinki
Commission,Helsinki,Finland.p.3,17.
IMO 2011. STCW Convention and
STCW Code.
International Convention on Standards of Training,
Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers. London:
IMO Publication, 2011 edition. ISBN 978‐92‐801‐1528‐4.
p.75.
Kalalahti, Joanna 2015. Miten simulaatioita käytetään
sisäministeriön hallinnonalan oppilaitoksissa?
Tutkimuksenteoreettisenviitekehyksenesittely.Article
in Tuovi 13: Interaktiivinen tekniikka koulutuksessa 2015‐
konferenssin tutkijatapaamisen artikkelit.
University of
Tampere.Research Reports 15. ISBN 978‐951‐44‐9909‐8.
p.21.
Kujala,LisannaCarolina2012. Mitkäovatpelastuslaitosten
öljyntorjunnan koulutuksen
yhtenäistämismahdollisuudetItämerenalueella?Thesis.
Haaga‐Helia University of Applied Sciences, Business
Administration.p.22,34‐35.
Kull,Tarmo; Luht,Kadi &Kopti; Madli 2012.EnSaCo Oil
Spill Response
Curricula Module. Project Report.
Estonian Academy of Security Sciences and Estonian
MaritimeAcademy.
Kymenlaakso University of Applied Sciences 2011.
Koulutussuunnittelu. SÖKÖ Manuaali. Osa 19.
Kymenlaakson ammattikorkeakoulun julkaisuja. Sarja
A.Oppimateriaali.(Nro31).Tammerprint,Kotka.ISBN
(pdf)978‐952‐5963‐05‐2.
Lampela,Kari&Jolma,Kalervo2011.MechanicalOilSpill
Recovery in Ice; Finnish Approach. Article in
International Oil Spill Conference (IOSC) Proceedings.
p.2‐4.
345
Larjo, Kari; Lehtosalo, Jaakko & Loveson, Karl 2010.
Luotsaustyöjasen kehitys.Turvallisuusselvitys
(S1/2004M b) Onnettomuustutkintakeskus, Accident
InvestigationBoard.ISBN978‐951‐836‐279‐4.p.69‐72.
Lonka, Harriet1998. Öljy‐ ja kemikaalivahinkojen
torjuntavalmius Suomessa‐ympäristövahinkojen
torjunnan näkökulma. Suomen ympäristö (no 193).
Suomenympäristökeskus.OyEditaAb: Helsinki.ISBN
952
‐11‐0259‐4.p.104‐105.
Luht, Kadi; Kull, Tarmo & Tammepuu, A. 2012.
Development of marine and coastal pollution training
curriculumformaster’sstudylevel.Report.
Prentzas,Jim& Hatzilygeroudis, Ioannis 2011. Case‐Based
Reasoning Integrations: Approaches and Applications.
Articlein Case‐Based Reasoning:Processes, Suitability and
Applications.Leeland,
AntoniaM.(editor).NovaScience
PublishersInc.p.2.
Salakari, Hannu 2010. Simulaattorikouluttajan käsikirja.
Eduskills Consulting. Hakapaino Oy, Helsinki. ISBN
978‐952‐67429‐0‐8.p.10‐16.
Savin‐Baden, Maggi 2000. Problem‐based learning in
Higher Education: Untold Stories. The Society for
ResearchintoHigherEducation.OpenUniversityPress.
ISBN0‐335‐20338‐8.p.124.
SYKE 2017. Notable Previous Oil Spills in Waters where
FinlandisResponsibleforPollutionPrevention.Suomen
ympäristökeskus. Document available
<http://www.ymparisto.fi/en‐
US/Sea/Environmental_emergency_response_in_Finland
/Accident_updates/Previous_oil_spills_in_Finnish_wate
rs>[Ref.30.1.2017].