Wednesday, June 25, 2008

Tip #227: Debunking Myths About More Practice

According to Dr. David A Sousa, "the old adage that 'practice makes perfect' is rarely true. It is very possible to practice the same skill repeatedly with no increase in achievement or accuracy of application."

Dr. Sousa notes in his book How the Brain Learns that "practice refers to learners repeating a skill over time... The quality of the practice and the learner's knowledge base will largely determine the outcome of each practice session."

In her book, Mastery Teaching, Dr. Madeline Hunter identifies four conditions that must be met for practice to improve performance:

  1. The learner must be sufficiently motivated to want to improve performance.

  2. The learner must have all the knowledge necessary to understand the different ways that the new knowledge or skill can be applied.

  3. The learner must understand how to apply the knowledge to deal with a particular situation.

  4. The learner must be able to analyze the results of that application and know what needs to be changed to improve performance in the future.

For these reasons, Dr. Hunter suggests that trainers should answer four questions in order to design effective practice:

Question #1: "How much material should be practiced at one time?"
Answer: A short meaningful amount.

Question #2: "How long in time should a practice period be?"
Answer: A short time so the learner exerts intense effort and has an intent to learn.

Question #3: "How often should learners practice?"
Answer: New learning should get a lot of intensive practice at one time. Older learning should be refreshed occasionally in practice sessions that occur over a period of time, gradually increasing the time between each session.

For example, when you teach a new skill, the learners should get a chance to practice performing it until they develop a sense of personal competence. This might be done by first watching the trainer perform the skill, working with others in a group, and then performing the skill independently.

In order to keep the new learning fresh in their minds, you can review it or schedule a practice every day for the first few days, and then every other day, or every third day, for a few weeks.

Question #4: "How will learners know how well they have done?"
Answer: Give specific knowledge of results.

In summary, it is the quality of the practice, rather than its quantity, that will make a beneficial difference in a learner's performance.

Thursday, June 19, 2008

Tip #226: Debunking Myths About Trainer Being Expert

Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000167 EndHTML:0000002521 StartFragment:0000000457 EndFragment:0000002505

A trainer who is a subject matter expert naturally has instant credibility with participants. However, it is not necessary for the trainer to be a content expert.

In addition, just because someone is a subject matter expert, it does not mean that person is a good trainer. Having expertise and effectively transferring that expertise to another person does not happen automatically. Training design and learning facilitation are skills in their own right that require significant expertise.

A good training designer can work with a subject matter expert to create a training program full of credible content that is also structured to increase the probability of learning. In this collaborative design process, the subject matter expert provides the content and the training designer develops the learning structure and activities to ensure that the learners attain the desired level of learning in the content. The involvement of the subject matter expert in the design of the program provides the necessary credibility.

Yes, there certainly may be some highly technical and complex content that would benefit from the presence of a subject matter expert in the classroom- not necessarily to conduct the training, but instead to be available to answer questions. However, if a subject matter expert cannot be present, participants will be satisfied as long as the trainer is honest about what he or she doesn't know, is willing to follow up with the expert, and gets the desired information back to the learners.

It is ultimately not important what the trainer knows. The key is to create a credible context in which the learners can discover the content (originally provided by a subject matter expert) and create meaning for themselves.

Friday, June 13, 2008

Tip #225: Debunking Myths About Resistant Participants

lthough it would be nice if all participants entered every class with a sincere and enthusiastic desire to learn, we know that is not always going to be the case. Ultimately, it doesn't matter how participants feel about the class when they first arrive. Our job is to make them want to come back after the break.

How do we accomplish this?

First, we treat them with respect. They have a right to their feelings.

We don't talk down to them or tell them that they should feel what they are feeling. We welcome them and make them feel comfortable with as positive a learning environment as we can create. We focus on practical application of necessary skills and we ensure that all participants are set up for success by chunking new learning into manageable amounts and using a variety of learning activities that meet the needs of different learning styles.

Second, we accept them where they are, emotionally. Their concerns may be very valid.

For example, they may feel that the content of the training is unnecessary. If that is the case, giving them an activity in which they can vent their frustrations in a controlled and time-limited fashion may be necessary. We can use an oral relay, in which one half of the group takes turns identifying a positive aspect (to a change, for example) and the other half takes turns identifying a negative aspect. Just make sure you have them end on a positive note!

Another option is to have small groups post pros and cons on a flipchart and then report them out. A third option is to use a questionnaire that begins with a negative statement. For example, "This change is a royal waste of time."Agree or disagree? Then lead a discussion of answers on both sides.

The point is to get the participants' concerns out in the open, so they don't create an invisible barrier to the learning that needs to occur.

Another reason they may resist the training is that they feel that they already know what is going to be covered in the class. In this case, have participants self identify in terms of their years on the job. Then ask those who have been there the longest to serve as co-facilitators. This means that they will provide examples of real on-the-job situations when necessary- or help to coach less experienced participants at their tables to the correct answers. This recognition and validation of their expertise can go a long way in making them feel valued and important, and ultimately want to be there to share their expertise.

Third, we give them an opportunity to discover the value of the training for themselves.

We might do this by posing a focus question: "How will this change-be helpful to you? Or øenable you to better meet the needs of your customers?"Let them come up with the answers and talk themselves and their co-participants into the idea.

Have them do markups, where they highlight two or three of the learning objectives for the class that they consider most important for themselves.

Fourth, sometimes we have to remind them not to "kill"the messenger, because we may not have initiated the change to which they object. Point out that our job is to help them navigate that change as effectively as possible.

Quite honestly, it is a cop out for a trainer to ever say: "I couldn't teach them anything, because they didn't want to be there."

If we treat them with respect, create a positive learning environment, recognize their concerns, enable them to discover the value of the training from their own perspective, validate their expertise, and set them up for success, it is much more likely that they will want to come back after the break!

Saturday, June 7, 2008

Tip #224: Debunking Myths About Serious Topics

ome trainers believe that programs about serious topics ( you fill in the blank: safety, discrimination, trust, employee benefits, organizational change, a new computer program, employee discipline, etc.) have to be presented in a serious manner. For these folks, even a smile can undermine the seriousness of the issue and destroy the perceived credibility and commitment of the presenter.

However, unrelieved seriousness can be overwhelming and exhausting. Worse yet, it can pound people into a sense of powerlessness and defeat. Sometimes, a presenter's mere smile can be reassuring that all is not lost and that there are still options available.

Humor or a light touch on a topic can frequently provide needed relief or perspective. As a matter of fact, humor and seriousness are not mutually exclusive- they can co-exist at the very same time.

Many of us have experienced situations where we have laughed through our tears (bereaved family and friends remembering funny incidents in the life of a loved one) or laughed at the humor in a situation while simultaneously feeling the pain of recognition (almost any cartoon or story about work or family).

There is another difficulty with trainers who take themselves too seriously. When a presenter falls into that trap, it is a short step to self-righteousness, rigidity, and closed thinking. A "serious"presenter is going to proclaim and declaim from the lectern. From a transactional analysis standpoint, this immediately places the lecturer in the role of parent and the listening audience in the role of a (naughty) child.

This is not conducive to a positive learning environment, because few of us enjoy being talked down to. We also object to the implication that we are, in some way, at fault. When this happens, we often distance themselves from the issue, denying any involvement or responsibility. Our minds and our curiosity about the subject shut down.

However, our response is very different if the presenter takes a lighter touch, such as telling a story or showing a cartoon that places the serious topic in a human and humorous context. Laughter relaxes us and creates a sense of community. Appropriate humor can also open the door to real soul-searching and sharing.

For example, a funny cartoon about a smaller child's inability to stand up to a larger school yard bully can tap into the emotional memory of how it feels to be victimized. We may then be more willing to recognize instances where we ourselves have inadvertently turned into a bully, and feel real sympathy for our victims. Rather than foisting guilt and blame, this approach leads us to self discovery and a sincere interest in changing our behavior.

Now, I am absolutely NOT suggesting that it is a good idea to joke throughout a serious presentation. Some jokes are never appropriate (i.e.,racial, ethnic, or sexual slurs, or jokes that have nothing to do with the topic under discussion). There may also be some times when any humor would be entirely inappropriate (for example, while presenting a plan to layoff the employees seated in the audience).

But just because a topic is serious does NOT mean that it must be presented and treated seriously all the time. Without humor, we cannot be creative. Laughter also puts more oxygen into the bloodstream, so the brain is better fueled. We can see the humor in a situation and still be serious about resolving it.

When it comes to effectively dealing with difficult and serious issues, we need all the bright creative problem solving we can spark.

How do you feel about this?

Monday, June 2, 2008

Tip #223: Debunking Myths About Learning While Seated

This week, our Tip refers to information drawn from a magnificent book: How the Brain Learns, by David A. Sousa (Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2006).

Dr. Sousa discusses recent findings by neuroscientists about how the brain learns and what that means to us as trainers. He begins with a wonderful statement: Ă“Teachers try to change the human brain every day. The more they know about how it learns, the more successful they can be."[p.5]

Neuroscience has proven that standing up and moving around increases our ability to think and learn. I have emphasized the portions of the following quotes that I found most compelling:

According to Dr. Sousa, "Although (the brain) represents only about 2 percent of our body weight, it consumes nearly 20 percent of our calories! The more we think, the more calories we burn."[page 15]

"Brain cells consume oxygen and glucose (a form of sugar) for fuel. The more challenging the brain's task, the more fuel it consumes. Therefore, it is important to have adequate amounts of these substances in the brain for optimum functioning."[p.23]

"When we sit for more than twenty minutes, our blood pools in our seat and in our feet. By getting up and moving, we recirculate that blood. Within a minute, there is about 15 percent more blood in our brain. We do think better on our feet than on our seat!"[p.34]

Clearly, it is important to make sure that participants get a chance to move as often as possible, to keep their brains sufficiently oxygenated so they function well. Isn't it nice to have brain research support what we have figured out for ourselves, either intuitively or through our own experience?