Teaching Thinking Through Debate

man at podium

Remember the debate club in high school? It was an excellent tool to help young people think critically about various issues and honing their communication skills to be able to intelligently articulate issues. With debate season upon us in the United States, this is an excellent time to point out the thinking skills that are developed through using debate.

Debate requires someone to construct an argument. That argument can be pro or against, but it must incorporate research, analysis, reasoning, and sometimes synthesis and evaluation in order to establish and substantiate one's position. Debate also requires the debater to master their content, to practice both listening and speaking skills in order to counter the opposing side, and to not only be able to verbalize but also to speak persuasively about their position.

These skills are known on Bloom's Taxonomy (here is a quick and easy definition) as higher order thinking skills. Debate takes one beyond the ability to research and "know" information to the ability to construct something and do something with that information.

An additional benefit of using debate in a learning curriculum is that it helps people to understand how to deal with conflict in a constructive and measured way. Countering an opposing argument does not mean name calling, introducing distracting or off-topic issues, or simply blustering louder than one's opponent.

In a previous blog post, we discussed the importance of using questions to help think. In the context of debate however, questioning skills are more musings: What is my position on this topic? What do others say? How do they substantiate their positions? Am I in agreement or disagreement with others? If I am in disagreement with others, how can I substantiate my own position? These types of questions require the skills of research, analysis, synthesis, reasoning, clarifying ... in other words, thinking skills!

Debate as a thinking skill can be used with any topic and in any industry and is best taught in teams (at least 2 individuals) which helps to expand one's thinking as well. Working with one or more teammates requires collaboration skills in order to create a premise, rationale, and presentation.

All in all, debate is one of the best learning strategies you can employ, in order to boost your employee's thinking skills.

Interview with Will Thalheimer, PhD

Thalheimer (1)

What motivated you to write this book?

I've worried about my own smile sheets (aka response forms, reaction forms, level 1's) for years! I know they're not completely worthless because I got useful feedback when I was a mediocre leadership trainer-feedback that helped me get better.

But I've also seen the research (two meta-analyses covering over 150 scientific studies) showing that smile sheets are NOT correlated with learning results-that is, smile sheets don't tell us anything about learning! I also saw clients-chief learning officers and other learning executives-completely paralyzed by their organizations' smile-sheet results. They knew their training was largely ineffective, but they couldn't get any impetus for change because the smile-sheet results seemed fine. 

So I asked myself, should we throw out our smile sheets or is it possible to improve them? I concluded that organizations would use smile sheets anyway, so we had to try to improve them. I wrote the book after figuring out how smile sheets could be improved.

If you could distill your message down to just one - what would it be?

Smile sheets should (1) draw from the wisdom distilled from the science-of-learning findings, and (2) smile-sheet questions ought to be designed to (2a) support learners in making more precise smile-sheet decisions and (2b) should produce results that are clear and actionable. Too often we use smile sheets to produce a singular score for our courses. "My course is a 4.1!" But these sorts of numerical averages leave everyone wondering what to do. 

How can trainers use this book to assist them in the work that they do?

Organizations, and learning-and-development professionals in particular, can use my book to gain wisdom about the limitations of their current evaluation approaches. They can review almost 30 candidate questions to consider utilizing in their own smile sheets. They can learn how to persuade others in using this radical new approach to smile-sheet design. Finally, they can use the book to give them the confidence and impetus to finally make improvements in their smile-sheet designs-improvements that will enable them to create a virtuous cycle of continuous improvement in terms of their learning designs.

Getting valid feedback is the key to any improvement. My book is designed to help organizations get better feedback on their learning results. 

Do you have a personal motto that you live by?

Be open to improvement. Look for the best sources of information-look to scientific research in particular to enable practical improvements. Be careful. Don't take the research at face value. Instead, understand it in relation to other research sources and, most importantly, utilize the research from a practical perspective. 

Will Thalheimer, PhD, PresidentWork-Learning Research, Inc.

Just In Time Training Has Run Out of Time

Many organizations today are facing a skills shortage. They simply cannot find people with the appropriate skills to run their businesses. As a result, they are forced to hire those that they can and then apply skills-training to make them a worthwhile hire for the organization.

This process can be thought of as a just-in-time skills training program in which the training isn't applied until it is needed (although in 2015 / 2016, skills training is in constant demand).The future-cast for this lack of prepared workers is that in another 10-15 years, the crisis will be a lack of prepared leaders.

In order to prevent businesses (all of society, really!) from bouncing from crisis to crisis like a ball in a pin-ball machine, it's time to address the root cause. It's not that younger generations have suddenly lost entry-level skills - it's a result of never having learned those skills to begin with. You cannot be expected to perform something you never learned to do.

What training professionals can do today to mitigate the current skills deficiency, as well as to thwart the void of leadership in 2025 and beyond, is to rethink the idea of just-in-time training. Rather than applying skills-only-training at the time of need, develop a broader approach to preparing all individuals in the organization by teaching thinking skills.

Is it possible the mortgage meltdown could have been avoided if thoughtful people had contemplated "what could go wrong with giving people 100% financing?" in addition to knowing how to fill out a mortgage application? We think so.

Is it possible that the automobile manufacturers would not have needed a bail out if some thought had been given to the "downside" of leases (massive churning of new cars) rather than simply teaching selling skills? We think so.

It's relatively easy to overlay thinking skills on top of job-specific training. For instance, when teaching how to prepare financial reports, a discussion can be had around the topics of ethics and erroneous reporting (intentional or not), and the ramifications to the organization of inaccurate financial reports (underestimating income, miscalculating forecast, personnel balancing). When teaching business writing, there might be a research project associated with the implications of having a paper-trail or the importance of choosing words that are unambiguous.

It is important to teach not only "how to," but "what if." Asking learners to think deeper and wider about the skills they are learning will help them to contribute more to the organization now and in the future.

Visuals Enhance Learning

"Pictures are understood on many levels. The most literal level is what the picture depicts. When you see a line drawing of an airplane, you recognize the shape and features of the object and identify it as an airplane.

“On another level, the context of the picture provides meaning. The same picture of an airplane on a freeway sign means that an upcoming exit will take you to the airport. This is a different context than a photograph of an airplane you may see in an airline advertisement, which suggests that is is persuasive rather than an informational purpose.

“Understanding the meaning of the picture depends on the context of where the picture exists. Another level of meaning is based on the style of the graphic. This is expressed in many ways, such as through symbols, spatial layout, and accepted conventions. For example, certain attributes of an illustration indicate when a drawing is an architectural blueprint and when it is a scientific illustration.

“There are also metaphoric meanings in some graphic. Metaphors convey meaning beyond a simple depiction and provide another layer of meaning."

Excerpted from Connie Malamed's Visual Design Solutions - a fantastic text for understanding the power of using visuals in learning.

Could they do *it* in the past?

Here are two questions that should be asked during a needs assessments to help ensure that you are not designing and developing training unnecessarily, and also to ensure that the training you ARE creating is appropriate for the "gap" that needs to be augmented.

Question #1: Have the learners been able to do ____ in the past?

Question #2: Have the learners had training on ____ in the past?

Let's look at why each of these questions is important to ask. 

Have they been able to do ________ in the past?

Typically, if an individual or group has been able to successfully complete a task in the past, and suddenly are not able to, it is not because they forgot how to do it. It's more likely that conditions within the work environment have changed. Look at factors such as:

• Have new metrics been put in to place? (causing people to do their work in a less thorough manner?)

• Has a new process been added which conflicts with the standard operating procedure?

• Are people incentivized to do the job differently / poorly?

For instance: In a call center environment, CSRs can be incentivized to solve a consumer's problem on the first call or they can be incentivized to complete as many calls per hours as possible. Typically, those are two competing end goals. So, if you have workers who have been able to do a process or task in the past, and suddenly they are not - the last thing you should assume is that the fault lies with the workers. 

Have they had training on this topic in the past?

If the answer to this is "yes," then the next question is: Why didn't that training stick? Or... did the company forget they had a training program already in place?

Any new skill will fritter away if it is not used. Often people go through training but then get back on the job and have to catch up on a backlog of work. In order to catch up quickly, they will resort to their "old way" of doing things. This aligns with the bullet points above - are trainees incentivized to "keep up the pace," or to do things in the "new and improved" way? If the latter, they will need time to practice and become proficient.

In other instances the newly trained individual simply isn't given the opportunity to put in to practice what they have learned. Example: One of our clients put learners through a 12-week, job-specific training program but then assigned them to a starter-job for 6 months before they were allowed to do the job they were just trained to do. It was "efficient" for the company to give people the 12-weeks of training right after they were newly hired, rather than take them off the job later on. But the newly trained individuals weren't allowed to actually put their skills in to practice until they had "paid their dues" by being on the job for 6 months or more.

It's tempting to jump right in and solve the problem - but first step back and ask "why does this problem exist?"

*Credit to Bob Mager for the basis of these questions.

Learn about the trainee's typical day

Before you design any training program, ask the requestor to tell you about the audience's typical day and overall job responsibilities. Ideally, you would like to observe the future-trainees in their day-to-day routine so that you can get the "big picture" of the work that they do and the environment in which they do it. If that is not possible, then ask for a thorough description of the future-trainee's typical work day and job responsibilities.

Very often, with this information, you can spot work-process breakdowns that are contributing to the symptoms which precipitated the request for training. Also, you are able to redirect the training or include elements which would not have been addressed had you not had the big picture of work responsibilities.

For example: A manufacturing organization was seeking to cross-train shop-floor workers in order to offset the downtime associated with machine breakdown. Because the organization had only one maintenance person, when a machine would break down, it could take a few hours for the technician to turn his attention to that machine. The intent of the request for cross-training was to be better able to utilize the machine operators during their idle time, while they were waiting for their primary machine to be repaired.

Gaining a better understanding of their overall job responsibilities, however, highlighted the fact that most machine operators refused to complete preventative maintenance and did not follow the start-up protocol which included oiling and gauge adjustments, etc., and simply switched their equipment on.

A more strict enforcement of start-up procedures, or having the maintenance technician come in an hour earlier each day to start the machines properly, was the primary solution to the machine breakdown dilemma. Without this understanding of the worker's typical day the company may have spent tens of thousands of dollars cross training their workers in order to compensate for the down-time created by the machine breakdowns.

The ultimate solution was to minimize the downtime by following company protocol, NOT providing training.

Case Study: Bite-sized Instructor Led Training

telephone

When we think of bite-sized learning, we often think of something that is self-paced, just-in-time, mobile or e-Learning.

We recently visited with a client that is providing bite-sized learning (10 minutes or less) delivered by live instructors. Picture this: a room of 40 trainers who sit in cubicles wearing headsets, at desks with two computer monitors. The trainees call the trainers when they are ready for their lesson. The trainees go in to a queue and any trainer can pick up the call and teach any topic thanks to a script that pops up on one screen. On the other screen they document the learner, the lesson, and the advice / next steps prescribed for that learner.

In a 10-minute-or-so conversation, the trainer and trainee discuss how the last lesson has been working for the learner, practice a read-through of the new lesson, role-play the new lesson, audio-record the new lesson and listen-back for a self-critique as well as a trainer critique.

Lessons are meted out, one-per-week, for a period of weeks depending on the topic. The learner is expected to practice one minute technique during the week and then the next technique is introduced, the following week.

Bite-sized learning? More like crumb-sized learning! And SUPER effective. Just ask their 850 clients!

What's Your Problem?

What is the problem you are experiencing?

Very often you'll get a request from a business unit for a specific type of training, for instance "My sales team needs team-building training."

Do not accept the requester's interpretation of the skills that are needed because they usually:

1 - have a myopic view of the situation (a sales manager will only see problems related to sales), and

2 - they usually do not have an understanding of how poor-performance can be manifested in different ways and that an entirely different approach might solve the presenting problem

For instance, we worked with a financial firm with salespeople throughout the United States and a sales-support staff that was centrally located. One of the problems the salesforce was experiencing, according to a regional vice president, was a lack of teamwork. His interpretation was that the support staff was not sufficiently invested in the success of their assigned salesperson(s).After a brief period of investigation, two factors came to light: 1 - the salespeople and their support person had never met, and 2 - the support staff didn't have a clear picture of the sales cycle and when they could expect requests for support (at the proposal stage, during negotiation, making presentations, etc.).

The salespeople had attended numerous training programs and the support people had attended none. So only one-half of the team had an idea of the process and expectations. The reason team training was requested was because the regional vice president of sales believed the two groups were at odds based on numerous complaints from the sales staff lamenting a lack of timely support.

So while training was indeed one of the solutions, what was delivered to this group was not what was originally requested. Why? Team building would have addressed the first problem (the "teams" didn't know one another) but would not have addressed the second (the support staff didn't understand the sales cycle and their role in it).

Always ask questions before agreeing to design, deliver or procure training. It will save time, money and your reputation!

Next month we'll look at a different question to ask.

Interview with Author Yael Hellman - Learning for Leadership

Yael

What motivated you to write this book?

In my years of teaching leadership, I noticed a huge gap between leadership theory and how my students, from all walks of life, actually turn into leaders. I saw that by respecting their varied life experiences, abilities, and learning preferences, I inspired them to value those qualities in themselves AND in those they would lead.

I also saw that traditional lecturing and assignments didn't produce the self-reflection and emotional intelligence leaders need. So I created a participant-centered group environment safe enough to contain and ignite individuals' unique energies and openness to experience. Turned out, this facilitative approach (which decades of research on leadership teaching supports) actually cultivates deep, lasting leadership skills through immediate, hands-on practice. I wanted to share what I learned training leaders in business, public service, and academic settings.

So Learning for Leadership; A Facilitative Approach for Training Leaders culls my best techniques, resources, and lesson plans. Perhaps most important, it presents real-life accounts of the pitfalls and potentials of facilitative leadership teaching to inform and encourage other instructors.

If you could distill your message down to just one - what would it be?

Leadership teaching-like leadership itself--is not for the faint of heart. You must be a lifelong learner to know yourself, your triggers, and your dynamic, and then to recognize those in others in order to reach and to motivate them.

How can trainers use this book to assist them in the work that they do?

Learning for Leadership; A Facilitative Approach for Training Leaders briefly outlines how adults learn so trainers can approach them appropriately and effectively. The book offers on-the-ground activities and projects that let participants experience-and so truly learn--the instructor's points. Its concrete tips facilitate the learning AND the teaching of leadership by helping trainers meet the intellectual and emotional demands of an experiential, participant-centered group. Its clear theory and tried-and-true practices let instructors in business or any context develop profound, practical executive wisdom in their trainees.

Do you have a personal motto that you live by?

Know yourself, and know your trainees. Only then will you see when to lead and when to follow, and be able to transform learners into leaders." (Hellman, p. xii) 

Big Data - Little Data

little data 2

Google "employee training" and "data analytics" and you'll find a wealth of articles and resources to assist you in analyzing the "big data" associated with managing a workforce of individuals.

This month The Training Doctor had an interesting experience with "little data." Rather than having thousands of data points and crunching the numbers in oh, so many ways, we analyzed a finite period of time (one week), across three organizations, for one specific job-task in under 4 hours, to determine:

• There was a training need for the population

• That need was NOT what we thought it originally to be

• Management needed to be aware that the lack-of-skills in this area / population was rippling throughout the organization and causing "poor performance" in other areas

With this very specific look at the data we were able to pinpoint a problem - and solution - in a matter of hours.

Another interesting "ah-ha" moment was that analyzing the data was NOT the original approach (nor even the second approach) we attempted to conduct the analysis. This is when you need to be chummy with your IT department. Ask them - what kind of information do we collect in X area? How can we access it? What does it show us?

The data WE analyzed showed us things we weren't even looking for or expecting to find; but seeing the repetitive nature of the data made it quite apparent where the process breakdown was occurring. It was also helpful to see that same data across three organizations to "prove" that it wasn't an anomoly at one organization. The data gave us the 30,000-foot view we needed to see the "big picture" (not the big data).

Great Work Everyone! Here's an Avocado for your Efforts!

Do you regularly give out candy as a reward during your F2F training sessions? Well, you're not doing your learners any favors. Instead put out piles of beans, eggs, fish, berries and, ok, dark chocolate.

In this fascinating article (and quick read) by Jeremy Teitelbaum, he challenges us to think about our "tried and true" methods of delivering training and learning, using what we know from 25 years of brain research. Suggestions include:

Stop forcing people to multitask.

He cites research by Stanford University which determined that even when people claim they are multi-tasking, they really are not processing more than one piece of information at once.

Feed the mind to teach the mind.

The author makes an interesting point: In recent years physical fitness training has included the mind and the way it thinks about fitness, body image, health, eating habits and the like; but the opposite hasn't proven true. Nobody training the mind thinks about what the body needs to enable the mind to be successful. Hmmmm

You are unique - just like everyone else.

Brain research focuses on generalizations based on small samples of "brains." This might cause us to categorize people, types of learning, or personality factors.

Hard and Soft Skills Aren't as Important as Emotion

All learning has an emotional component - something most of us in training simply ignore as we 'get down to business.'

Resources for Graphics to Enhance Your Instructional Design Efforts

Well-designed instruction is quite reliant on well-designed visual representation (in our humble opinion). Given that premise, here are some excellent resources for you to check out:

123rd.com - royalty free photos and music/sound effects. You must pay, but very affordable. (This is our preferred site).

Morguefile.com - completely free photos. Lots of great nature scenes; not business oriented but great for backgrounds or accents.

Pixabay.com - photos, illustrations and vector graphics. You are able to browse by category such as Business or Industry. Completely free.

eLearningArt.com - is very unique for two reasons: 1 - you can download  "character packs" which are anywhere from 50 - 75 photos of one individual in many poses. Super helpful when you want a consistent character in your learning, and 2 - "cut out people" which provides thousands of photos of just people - no backgrounds.

Training Design Basics, by Saul Carlinger - Interview with the author

cover--training-design-basics

An interview with our friend and colleague Saul Carlinger, on the publishing of the 2nd edition of his book  Training Design Basics (ATD) 

What motivated you to write this book?

The motivations behind the two editions differed a lot. ATD (then ASTD) asked me to write the first edition. Although I was flattered, I had my concerns. First, I had just finished Designing e-Learning and was concerned about too much overlap between the books: both were about instructional design. But the distinction between the two was clear: one focused solely on e-learning and the other focused on more traditional forms of training-classroom and workbook-based programs, both of which were still dominant at the time.

My second concern was more fundamental; with so many books on the market about instructional design, what could I add? But as I looked at most textbooks, I realized that most focused on analysis, writing objectives, and evaluation. Those are all important, but I remember from my own time as an instructional designer that the majority of the work is focused on design and development. I covered analysis, objectives, and evaluation, but decided to emphasize the daily reality of most instructional designers: design and development.

Fast forward to 2011. Designing e-Learning was increasingly out of date, so I contacted ASTD to see if they would be interested in a revision. At the time, they had not made a long-term decision about that particular series of books on e-learning, but said they were looking for someone to write a book on informal learning. That interested me because I had explored that topic for my dissertation. Within 90 minutes, I had an outline for the book that would eventually become Informal Learning Basics: not the book I had planned to write when I called my editor but one I was delighted to write.

When that book was published, I suggested revising Training Design Basics and expanding its scope to include all training media, including e-learning. So the second edition of Training Design Basics is essentially a single book that updates both Training Design Basics and Designing e-Learning.

Part of the motivation was practical. The only way to integrate e-learning into the mainstream is to treat its design along the design of other types of programs. I also wanted to update Training Design Basics to address issues that arose when I used it in the classroom.

In addition, I wanted to address a general misunderstanding about ADDIE in this edition: that it is a linear one-size-fits-all process. Part of that is addressed in language about ADDIE (each part is described as an activity rather than a step in a process). Part of that is addressed by describing how the "full" approach is adjusted for revisions and lower-impact projects.

If you could distill your message down to just one - what would it be?

Given that my publisher always has to cut sizeable chunks of my original manuscripts to meet page limits, the real issue is whether I'm capable of distilling my message. (ATD's wonderful editors make this a learning experience more than anything else and the resulting versions are much tighter, stronger, and focused than the originals.)

But I'll try: Effective instructional design is problem solving. The better that trainers define the problem up-front and the tighter the alignment among the objectives, assessment of learning, and the course material, the more likely that designated learners will be able to develop the intended skills with the materials prepared for the learners.

How can business/ HR / training use this book to assist them in the work that they do?  

Use this book to guide a training project. For example, suppose someone is starting their first training project or trying to improve their design technique. Read the first three chapters before starting a needs assessment. Then use the book to complete an entire chapter, reading one chapter at a time and using the worksheets at the ends of the chapters to apply the content in their work.

Do you have a personal motto that you live by (related to your book)?

Focus!

You can learn more about the book at Saul's website: https://designingelearning.wordpress.com/

10 Challenges When Creating A Blend

More than 60 individuals responded to a survey regarding the challenges they experienced when implementing a blended learning curriculum in their organization. Being aware of theses common challenges will help you to manage them in your own design.

1. Ensuring participants can be successful using the technology.

2. Overcoming the idea that online learning cannot be as effective as classroom training (convincing stakeholders).

3. Keeping online offerings interactive rather than just "talking at" them (keeping the attention of the learners).

4. Ensuring participant commitment and follow-through during "non-live" elements (accountability).

5. Matching the best delivery medium to the objective(s)- arriving at the right blend.

6. Readjusting facilitator roles.

7. Looking at how to teach content- not what to teach.

8. Resisting the urge to use technology simply because it is available.

9. Ensuring all the elements of the blend are coordinated.

10. Managing and monitoring participant progress.

Adults need time for Observation and Reflection

How often do we allow trainees to contemplate what they have just learned and how it will affect them or how they might implement it on the job? Not often. Reflection takes time and these days we aren't  even offered enough time to do the teaching, much less allow for observation and reflection.  (Our usual requests sound something like this: Can you take this 6 hour class and cut it down to 3 hours? 

No one ever asks, once the teaching is done - how much additional time would be needed for the learners to reflect on what they've learned and how they can best implement it on the job?)

Here is a great case study of one company that "gets it”.

Background: New-hire orientation of a select 300 people per year.

Curriculum design: 12-week program which includes self-study, virtual classes, in-person sessions, group case study and individual assignment.

Time for observation and reflection: The entire final class meeting (2 hours) is dedicated to ensuring observation and reflection. The participants are reminded of each phase of the training and the intended learning outcomes. They are then asked reflective questions:- What did you learn most from this segment of the curriculum?- What are you already using on-the-job?- What do you intend to start doing, as a result of your learning?

They are also put in small groups to compare and contrast their responses, which helps to further their awareness of what they have learned (oh yeah! I forgot about that. How are you going to do it on the job?)

Next they are asked "What more would you like to learn?"  Once they have completed the "prescribed curriculum" they are often aware of what they don't know about the organization or their field.  By giving thought to what more they would like to learn, the organization is able to direct them to further professional development.

Finally, (and our favorite) they are asked: How can you take what you've learned and pay it forward? Since they are in a select group of 300 enrolled in the curriculum, they have become privy to information, approaches or perspectives that not everyone in the organization would have.  They are tasked with taking the initiative to coach others in the organization and share what they have learned in constructive ways.

This formal approach to observation and reflection ensures the learners have thought-through what they have learned, identified the value of the learning for themselves and how they will change their behaviors on-the-job as a result of their learning. It also makes them good "corporate citizens" by tasking them with sharing what they've learned with the rest of the organization.