I had a very interesting experience in the very first training class that I taught solo. It gave me valuable insight into how language can be a barrier for training, and also gave me a practical lesson on working with people from diverse cultural backgrounds.
My class consisted of one student from Israel, two from Belgium, three from Taiwan and one from Korea. The student from Korea was very reticent and almost never opened his mouth in class, except for a very terse yes or no. He preferred to respond through barely perceptible nods. Almost throughout the duration of the training, he kept browsing through a paperback novel (atleast that’s what it looked like) and kept flipping back and forth vigorously even as I was teaching. However, when I gave the class some practical exercises to do, he demonstrated a good grasp of the subject matter.
While I was happy at his skill on the subject matter, I felt intrigued – and also a trifle irritated – at the fact that he was browsing through a book while I was teaching. I did not feel comfortable about asking him to put the book aside (this being my first class as a trainer), but nevertheless, felt very curious about what he was reading.
Once, during a break, all the students left the class and I was alone in the classroom. Prompted by curiosity, I took a peek at the paperback that absorbed the Korean student’s attention. To my complete surprise, I realized it was a English-to-Korean translation guide. As I was teaching, the student was trying to figure out what I was saying! My irritation turned to sympathy at his struggle in trying to understand English. Like many Asian students, he felt shy about asking out loud whenever he did not understand my English.
Monday, July 26, 2010
Friday, July 9, 2010
Creating the right environment !
I sometimes like to visualize the learning process as being similar to the germination of a seed. When a seed is planted in the right conditions (soil, water, manure, nutrients, weather), it germinates automatically.
(Image from http://heliosmonroe.wordpress.com/)
Similarly, when a trainee is placed in the correct learning environment, an awakening of knowledge happens in his/her mind.
Three years back, I attended a three-day training course on instructional techniques. The course was conducted by a trainer from one of the world’s leading companies in this domain. It was a very intensive course, but when I was done, I had a strong feeling of satisfaction. I really came out of the training enriched in terms of knowledge that I could apply.
A remarkable thing about this course was the manner in which the trainer (who had flown in from overseas) created the right learning environment. Well before the course started, the trainer had sent a list of specifications – about the training room, layout of desks and chairs etc. A day before the actual start of the course, the trainer came to our company and spent a few hours transforming the training room into a great learning environment. There were posters and charts all over the wall – neatly and logically organized. The manuals and handouts were distributed on the tables, so there would be no distraction during the actual class. Teaching aids were arranged at strategic locations.
During the actual course, cellphones were strictly prohibited, as were laptops. For three tightly-packed days, we lived and breathed instructional techniques. By the end of the course, our mind was on a different level. I learnt the importance of creating the right environment. In fact, I would go to the extent of saying that, in the right environment, learning happens effortlessly – even automatically – like a seed germinating.
In this context, I am reminded of a beautiful quote – “The human mind is not a vessel to be filled in, but rather, a flame to be kindled”. Trainers should bear this firmly in their minds.
(Image from http://heliosmonroe.wordpress.com/)
Similarly, when a trainee is placed in the correct learning environment, an awakening of knowledge happens in his/her mind.
Three years back, I attended a three-day training course on instructional techniques. The course was conducted by a trainer from one of the world’s leading companies in this domain. It was a very intensive course, but when I was done, I had a strong feeling of satisfaction. I really came out of the training enriched in terms of knowledge that I could apply.
A remarkable thing about this course was the manner in which the trainer (who had flown in from overseas) created the right learning environment. Well before the course started, the trainer had sent a list of specifications – about the training room, layout of desks and chairs etc. A day before the actual start of the course, the trainer came to our company and spent a few hours transforming the training room into a great learning environment. There were posters and charts all over the wall – neatly and logically organized. The manuals and handouts were distributed on the tables, so there would be no distraction during the actual class. Teaching aids were arranged at strategic locations.
During the actual course, cellphones were strictly prohibited, as were laptops. For three tightly-packed days, we lived and breathed instructional techniques. By the end of the course, our mind was on a different level. I learnt the importance of creating the right environment. In fact, I would go to the extent of saying that, in the right environment, learning happens effortlessly – even automatically – like a seed germinating.
In this context, I am reminded of a beautiful quote – “The human mind is not a vessel to be filled in, but rather, a flame to be kindled”. Trainers should bear this firmly in their minds.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Remote Training Perils - Part 2
A major problem in remote training is student evaluation.
How does the trainer know whether the student has really understood the material or ot ? It is easier to evaluate in a direct instructor-led class - by asking questions and by the trainees' responses and body language.
But in a remote training session, the trainees are thousands of miles away. Often they do not have a microphone or webcam and prefer to type their questions/responses in a chat window (atleast in my experience). And often, the trainees are sitting next to each other in an office at a faraway location. Even if they are not sitting next to each other, they probably know each others' email address and can easily communicate behind the trainer's back.
How does the trainer know if the trainees are giving individual answers or getting answers from their classmates ?
How does the trainer make sure trainees are not collaborating on the exam questions ?
Are the homework answers from one student simply copied from another student, with some cosmetic changes (font size, drawings etc) ?
It is a very convenient thing to believe in the honour system - to claim that, in a multinational company, employees are too professional to indulge in such malpractices. While this logic is politically correct, it is not foolproof.
When real business results depend on training, it is simply not practical to depend on the honour system. Let's face it - everyone has plenty of demands on their time today and the temptation to take a colleague's exam answer and pass it off as one's own could be too big to resist.
Without a foolproof method to evaluate trainees and qualify them, training is a waste of resources.
So how can students be evaluated in remote training ?
My thoughts:
1) Make it mandatory for every trainee to have a microphone and webcam - and use it in the training session. It is much easier for the trainer to evaluate the trainee by asking questions real-time and forcing the trainee to answer verbally instead of typing answers. Also, this makes it difficult for the trainee to consult with classmates before answering. I certainly concede that it is still possible for the trainee to get help from classmates, but atleast it becomes more difficult.
2) Have multiple sets of questions for evaluation, so that trainees get different questions with respect to their colleagues. Again, this will not prevent trainees from helping out each other on exams, but atleast it makes it more difficult to cheat.
3) Have a viva-voce exam with the trainer interviewing the student on a 1:1 basis. But the downside is this is very time-consuming for the trainer, and scheduling the oral exams can be a nightmare. One workaround is to have a local resource person in the same office as the trainee who can administer the oral exam and evaluate.
4) Wherever possible make the evaluation something like a case-study or an individual project, with completely different topics for individual trainees.
If you have any thoughts on this, please leave a comment.
How does the trainer know whether the student has really understood the material or ot ? It is easier to evaluate in a direct instructor-led class - by asking questions and by the trainees' responses and body language.
But in a remote training session, the trainees are thousands of miles away. Often they do not have a microphone or webcam and prefer to type their questions/responses in a chat window (atleast in my experience). And often, the trainees are sitting next to each other in an office at a faraway location. Even if they are not sitting next to each other, they probably know each others' email address and can easily communicate behind the trainer's back.
How does the trainer know if the trainees are giving individual answers or getting answers from their classmates ?
How does the trainer make sure trainees are not collaborating on the exam questions ?
Are the homework answers from one student simply copied from another student, with some cosmetic changes (font size, drawings etc) ?
It is a very convenient thing to believe in the honour system - to claim that, in a multinational company, employees are too professional to indulge in such malpractices. While this logic is politically correct, it is not foolproof.
When real business results depend on training, it is simply not practical to depend on the honour system. Let's face it - everyone has plenty of demands on their time today and the temptation to take a colleague's exam answer and pass it off as one's own could be too big to resist.
Without a foolproof method to evaluate trainees and qualify them, training is a waste of resources.
So how can students be evaluated in remote training ?
My thoughts:
1) Make it mandatory for every trainee to have a microphone and webcam - and use it in the training session. It is much easier for the trainer to evaluate the trainee by asking questions real-time and forcing the trainee to answer verbally instead of typing answers. Also, this makes it difficult for the trainee to consult with classmates before answering. I certainly concede that it is still possible for the trainee to get help from classmates, but atleast it becomes more difficult.
2) Have multiple sets of questions for evaluation, so that trainees get different questions with respect to their colleagues. Again, this will not prevent trainees from helping out each other on exams, but atleast it makes it more difficult to cheat.
3) Have a viva-voce exam with the trainer interviewing the student on a 1:1 basis. But the downside is this is very time-consuming for the trainer, and scheduling the oral exams can be a nightmare. One workaround is to have a local resource person in the same office as the trainee who can administer the oral exam and evaluate.
4) Wherever possible make the evaluation something like a case-study or an individual project, with completely different topics for individual trainees.
If you have any thoughts on this, please leave a comment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)