ABSTRACT
The Master Resilience Training (MRT) course is the U.S. Army’s resilience program of record to develop soldiers as resilience trainers within their home units. The Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR) recently conducted an MRT Quality Improvement Evaluation (QIE) to understand perceptions of the MRT course, determine the effectiveness of the course, and provide revision recommendations for the next iteration of the course. Soldiers who were completing the MRT course were invited to take surveys and participate in interviews. Results from quantitative and qualitative data suggest that most participants felt satisfied with the training and that it was relevant for soldiers. Most participants also agreed that the training would help them become better soldiers and leaders. Along with positive feedback about the course, participants also identified areas that could be improved. Soldier feedback along with program evaluators’ observation informed recommendations for improving the overall MRT course and its implementation. Program evaluators recommend MRT participants learn fewer and less complex skills, focus on coach education throughout the course, and highlight leader development by promoting motivation and enhancing effective communication. Program evaluators recommendations for ways to improve buy-in from leaders and graduated MRTs are also discussed.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the following people for their contributions to this evaluation effort: Dr. Amy Adler, Ms. Pam Kumparatana, Ms. Casey Eidemiller, Mr. Alex Rivera, Ms. Kourtney Sappenfield, and MAJ Carl Smith.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Data availability statement
The data and material for this study are not publicly available due to institutional regulations related to human participant protection requirements but can be made available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request (may require data use agreements to be developed).
Disclaimer
Material has been reviewed by the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research. There is no objection to its presentation and/or publication. The opinions or assertions contained herein are the private views of the author, and are not to be construed as official, or as reflecting true views of the Department of the Army or the Department of Defense.
The investigators have adhered to the policies for protection of human subjects as prescribed in AR 70–25.
Supplementary Material
Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/08995605.2024.2346449.