Navigating Risk: Perspectives of Semester 3 Cadets at the Maritime Institute Jakarta on Risk Assessment Approaches for Offshore Structures
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51903/pendekar.v1i6.573Keywords:
Cadet Perspectives, Curriculum Refinement, Language Proficiency, Maritime Education, Risk AssessmentAbstract
This study delves into the perspectives of 240 Semester 3 cadets at the Maritime Institute Jakarta (STIP Jakarta) regarding Risk Assessment Approaches for Offshore Structures. Employing a qualitative descriptive approach, the research unfolds over three semesters, encompassing approximately 18 months of academic, mental, and professional preparation for internships in the maritime industry. The cadets, hailing from diverse regions across Indonesia, undergo an international program at STIP Jakarta, necessitating a mastery of English communication in line with International Maritime Education standards. The research navigates through the complexities of maritime education, focusing on academic preparedness, motivations, language proficiency, and perspectives on risk assessment. Academic preparedness reveals a commendable level among cadets, yet the identification of lower preparedness levels signals potential areas for curriculum refinement. Intrinsic motivation, predominantly rooted in a passion for the maritime profession, underscores the institute's success in instilling commitment and purpose among cadets. Language proficiency emerges as a critical determinant, with recommendations for targeted language support to bridge proficiency gaps. The qualitative analysis of cadet perspectives on risk assessment unveils themes of practical application, interdisciplinary understanding, and the pivotal role of language proficiency. These themes advocate for a paradigm shift in teaching methodologies and curriculum design to align with industry demands. The research concludes with implications for curriculum refinement, passion cultivation, language support programs, practical integration, interdisciplinary collaborations, and a continuous feedback mechanism. These recommendations serve as a blueprint for STIP Jakarta's evolution, ensuring the institute remains at the forefront of excellence, innovation, and global relevance in maritime education.
References
Bertram, C., Meierkord, A., & Day, L. (2018). The cadet experience: understanding cadet outcomes. Department for Education.
Chircop, A. (2015). The international maritime organization.
Christenson, S., Reschly, A. L., & Wylie, C. (2012). Handbook of research on student engagement (Vol. 840). Springer.
de la Peña Zarzuelo, I., Soeane, M. J. F., & Bermúdez, B. L. (2020). Industry 4.0 in the port and maritime industry: A literature review. Journal of Industrial Information Integration, 20, 100173.
Ferritto, V. R. (2016). Maritime education factors and presenteeism: a comparative quantitative study. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 15, 353–380.
Ghosh, S., Bowles, M., Ranmuthugala, D., & Brooks, B. (2014). On a lookout beyond STCW: Seeking standards and context for the authentic assessment of seafarers. 15th Annual General Assembly of the International Association of Maritime Universities, IAMU AGA 2014-Looking Ahead: Innovation in Maritime Education, Training and Research, 77–86.
Guided Design: Critical Thinking and Proficiency in the University Foreign Language Classroom. (2013). In Thinking Across Cultures (pp. 446–454). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203056844-49
House, D., & Saeed, F. (2016). The seamanship examiner: for STCW certification examinations. Taylor & Francis.
IMO, S. C. E. (2018). IMO. London.
Katz, J. (2015). A theory of qualitative methodology: The social system of analytic fieldwork. Méthod (e) s: African Review of Social Sciences Methodology, 1(1–2), 131–146.
Mahboob, A., Paltridge, B., Phakiti, A., Wagner, E., Starfield, S., Burns, A., Jones, R. H., & De Costa, P. I. (2016). TESOL Quarterly research guidelines. Tesol Quarterly, 50(1), 42–65.
Mankabady, S. (1986). The International Maritime Organization, Volume 1: International Shipping Rules.
Manuel, M. E. (2017). Vocational and academic approaches to maritime education and training (MET): Trends, challenges and opportunities. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 16, 473–483.
Merriam, S. B., & Grenier, R. S. (2019). Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and analysis. John Wiley & Sons.
Neilson, B., & Rossiter, N. (2013). Still waiting, still moving: On labour, logistics and maritime industries. In Stillness in a mobile world (pp. 51–68). Routledge.
Saldana, J. (2014). Thinking qualitatively: Methods of mind. SAGE publications.
Sharma, A., Kim, T., Nazir, S., & Chae, C. (2019). Catching up with time? Examining the STCW competence framework for autonomous shipping. Proceedings of the Ergoship Conference, Haugesund, Norway, 24–25.
Thiel, T. A. (1996). Maritime English for Communication and Cooperation.
Trenkner, P. (2009). Maritime English requirements and the revised STCW. Szczecin: Proceedings of the International Maritime English Conference IMEC, 21, 5–10.
Young, C. (1995). Comprehensive Revision of the STCW convention: an overview. J. Mar. L. & Com., 26, 1.
