We talk and talk of designing the perfect training material - one that is engaging, interactive, useful for learners, and so on and so forth. But that's all about it - just talk. Let's face it, any training we design is pointless, cuz universally - training is only training; in a regular organization where training is mandatory or where there's a specific policy that employees should undergo some form of training per year - it remains just that - some policy that is adhered to. (I hate this sentence - too long - 52 words!) Means there's no real motivation. None for the learners anyway. Strange thing is, we are wired to learn. Even against our will. By ‘learning’, I mean the stuff that we remember. Cuz the aim of most training/ learning/ education is to remember stuff so that we can apply that knowledge at a later date.
How do we remember irrelevant stuff, for example, that Hotel California was released in 1974, or that gravity was 'discovered' when some rotten apple fell on someone's head (and since that head happened to Newton's, we got to study that extra lesson in Physics - if it fell on some average IQd bloke, we might have just gotten a few more swear words in Websters). What earth-shattering difference would it make to me or to you that force = mass X acceleration? I don't believe that the principles of momentum, centre of gravity, acceleration has had any impact on the quality of Agassi's serve or Mohammed Ali's punch. But ok, this information does make a difference, or it gets stuck in my head if : a) I were a tennis player at the point of time when I was taught this fact. b) if this was taught to me while I was getting coached on my serve. c) if I wanted to show off this info trivia and wanted others to think 'Man, she knows stuff.' (Okay, I've gone too far).
So, anyway, information gets stuck in the head and becomes learning only in the right context. Just like I could understand frequencies and octaves in my physics class since I was studying music. (It didn't make a difference in my playing, but yeah I did well in those physics tests without much effort) And that’s the point – passing exams and tests. How else would we get from here to there? And what motivates anyone to learn (other than getting thru tests)?
Everything that was ever made were made for the lazy (I believe that). We all would like to spend less effort but get the most out of it. In short, I'd learn something if I think it will help me get a raise, write mails faster, knock someone out, whatever. So what should be the aim of training material we instructional designers should create, that is the burning question. Here’s what most people (90%) think about learning/ training and the courses and exams that come with the package:
I hate training programs, I think it’s a waste of my time, but it’s something that's got to be done. A do or be damned kind of thing. (zilch motivation) – 70%
Well, guess if I attend this training session, I’ll get a certificate. So when I apply for my next job, I can negotiate my pay hike. (money) – 10%
I can frame this certificate on my bathroom wall. (ego) – 5%
I do this training; I’ll get promoted next quarter. (money, ego) – 5%
And what the rest 10% (?!) think:
I need to know this thing. (ego)
I need this training, then I can do my job better than the rest. (ego again, the money is immaterial, if it comes along with the package, great!)
So all motivation (for adult learners atleast) boils down to money and ego / self-esteem. But hey, 70% of your learners are really not bothered. Now how do we tackle this?
Since the majority are not interested in the training, and just want to get over with it, the challenge is how to design a program to (not necessarily in the given order):
1. get them interested
2. teach them exactly what it is they have to know in the shortest possible time
3. keep them interested
Getting people interested is easy. Keeping them interested is not. If you can achieve point 3, then point 2 can be ignored – your learners will want to be there hanging on to every word you say, even waiting with bated breath…ok that’s again goin a bit too far…but ok, you get it? Now for the work:
Note: All examples are a reflection of what I've seen at work in the elearning/content development industry. And just my opinions. This is my blog, for god's sake.
Getting ‘em interested
Most designers think ‘icebreaker activities’ – asking learners (and the instructor) to introduce themselves, present the agenda, housekeeping rules and so on. As an instructor, I don’t think I need to know the names of 10 people to be able to teach them, but I do need to get them interested in the training material I’m about to present. So what would I do to break the ice? Break ice? And drop it on someone’s foot. That sure will grab their attention, don’t you think?
Ok, but seriously.
Let’s take an example:
Subject: Sales Training
Audience/ Learners: Call centre guys (and gals), 20somethings
So how would you, as an instructor, get their attention?
Option 1: Instead of having a slide showing – How to Make a Successful Call, change the title to ‘You Had me at Hello’ and an audio clip of Kenney Chesney singing that…
Option 2: Show a movie clip of…lets say… Jerry Maguire… oh ‘you had me at hello’ again (maybe a clip of Tom Cruise trying to pitch for a client is more relevant – by the way, you, or rather Mr.Cruise, have gotten all the ladies' attention)
Option 3: Show 2 video clips – one of a chirpy Call Centre rep, and a disinterested one. (How boring, but I guess the organization would okay that strategy than options 1 and 2)
Option 4: Ask a colleague to give you a call and pretend to be the customer (Do this when the learners have just settled down). Respond to the call as if it were the real thing. Alternatively, respond to the call real rudely and ask the learners their opinion. This way, you get the agenda of your session.
Option 5: Just before the learners enter the classroom, write a controversial statement (related to the subject) on the board, for example: Customers suck so I can reply any way I want, it makes no difference… This way too you can ask the learners to create the agenda of the session.
Option 6: Why have PPTs and movie clips and all that jazz in the first place?? Can't you just talk? (alright, I'm ranting. Not everyone can talk interesting).
Ok. That’s enough of a start. Please note: All options work only if you are a good trainer/ instructor and can carry it off.
Teach them exactly what it is they have to know in the shortest possible time
Well, this is not for instructors who like the sound of their own voice. The problem with getting the learners attention with a wonderful start is that most instructors can’t sustain that interest. They just go on and on and on…rather like starting a song on a high note and then going flat cuz you can't keep the pitch or raise your octave level.
So keep it short. It helps if you are an expert and know exactly what they need. Like Atticus Finch said ‘Stand in a persons shoes and walk two miles in ‘em’…If you’ve been a student who’s been bored to death (and remember it), I guess you’ll be kind. (you better be, else you’d get huge yawns, or worse, never be asked to train again).
Keeping ‘em interested
Well, activity, activity, activity. But why? As a learner/ participant in an Instructor-Led session, I positively hate it when the trainer asks me a question. This is more like an easy way out – instructors think they keep a class awake by asking them questions.
The key is not to keep the learners awake by asking them to do something, but to involve their minds. Why not ask them to think, reflect (as Poirot would say, and get the grey cells working furiously)? Easier said than done? Maybe. All depends on you, the instructor. How can you convince them that what you’re teaching, or about to teach is the only thing they ought to be living for?
Take a few lessons from Mark Anthony (or Shakespeare if you will) – A paragraph of Friends, Romans, countrymen blah blah, and he caused a war. He got their minds working, he spurred them to action by telling them exactly the opposite – yeah, but Brutus is an honourable man, yeah sure. Take Iago, for example – he caused the Moor to murder - how? The art of effective sentence construction. By not telling everything, but just enough. The decision to kill or not to kill, to commit suicide or not to, was entirely up to Othello, not Iago’s fault.
So - get your learners to think, and make their own inferences. The golden rule is this: Do not provide all information to the learners. People learn more from searching for the correct answer and not finding it than from learning the answer itself. Think Iago. You just provide the seed crystal (whatever that means).
Let learning be a discovery, an experience for the learners. You as the instructor, is only a facilitator, not the storehouse or dispenser of knowledge.
In the end, the key to a successful training is – know when to shut up and make an exit. Fast.
