Hi,
I am reading right now a book by an Italian coach called Daniele Mattoni on "Learning to Learn" - he is talking about "learning coaches"; which is in itself not so interesting. But he has really interesting exercises in the book to support adult learners to gain a better awareness about their characteristics as learners - what blocks them, what helps them on all kind of dimensions (emotional, cognitive, physical). I will make a summary of some of them - this could really helo us for the next ToT to strengthen the part "Me as a learner".
By the way - his approach is based a lot on NLP stuff; for a long time I had the prejudice that NLP is basically only good enough to train politicians to talk convincingly about anything ... but there is as so often in life many sides to it.
Anyway, getting more and more excited about all around L2L and SDL.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Also we have a blog!
Yes we thought that if every team has a blog we should have one too! So here we are: The ToT team!! And we will try to keep you updated about what is going on in our team.
So....this is immediately going to be a long blog because it is the report of our team meeting we had on the end of seminar 2.... our evaluation meeting. Maybe not very exciting.... reading a report...but still.
So...here it is:
Training of Trainers2008/9, Seminar 2 (Turkey)
Evaluation of the team of trainers
1. General remarks
Evaluation comments:
• Seems that for some participants it remains difficult to grasp how all the elements of ToT connect.
• We lack a document for participants which explains well the methodology as well as the structure of ToT including its position within the European landscape of training.
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• For the next edition we shall create such a core document to explain ToT- using stronger the metaphor of the journey as well as graphic visualisations. It shall make it fairly easily understandable what is the methodology, the core content and how it all connects together.
• Additionally we shall identify key-documents for the course which we strongly advise participants to study before coming to the first seminar.
2. Achievement of objectives
Objectives Score from 1-6
(1 “poor” to 6 “fully”)
1 Participants further develop their capacity to act as self-directed learners 5/3/4
2 Participants increase their understanding and ability of developing training methodologies in the context of NFE and the Youth in Action programme. 3/4/4
3 Participants enlarge their capacity to design training programmes according to the methodology identified. 3/4/3
4 Participants further develop their competencies necessary to act in international teams. 5/4/4
5 Participants become more competent to deal constructively with ambiguous situations. 2/3/3
6 Participants become well-prepared, confident and motivated to implement their training projects at high quality level 3/3/4
Ad objective 1
Comments:
• We need to improve our capacities to on the one hand challenge participants not wanting (or having difficulties) to leave their comfort zone (in other words avoid self-questioning) and on the other hand supporting participants to overcome obstacles in their learning path; some participants need more guiding in designing their challenge.
• There was little confrontation with the approach of SDL in the group.
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• We have to study more the stages of SDL to be able to respond better to different needs of participants especially in the mentoring. Paul will write a background paper on this.
• We shall make more conscious efforts to promote a group culture where supporting each other in the learning processes has high value.
• We shall use more the SPI also as an input in designing the mentoring relationship and supporting the participants in designing their learning plan.
Ad objective 2
Comments:
• More understanding YES, ability to develop NO.
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• The session on training design needs more space/time to allow for more challenge.
Ad objective 3
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• We need to confront the teams a little bit more to enhance the learning from the design process.
• Perhaps we shall foresee one planned meeting between the support person and the project teams at the beginning of seminar 2.
• More time for the training design session – 2 times a confrontation between two teams;
Ad objective 4
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• Perhaps it would support the team development to have a planned feedback session also at the end of seminar 2.
Ad objective 5
Comments:
• The focus of the session was not very clear; we have reflect more in the team what we exactly would like to address with this part.
• They were confronted with it but we missed the chance to link what is happening in the course with the session.
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• We shall see “Dealing with ambiguity” more as a horizontal theme and use examples of what is happening in the course; eg. the co-operation and relation with the NAs.
Ad objective 6
Comments:
• The insecurity about the changes in the teams as well as the unclear funding situation of some projects has a disturbing impact on the confidence of some teams.
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• We have to be even clearer in seminar 1 about the focus of this training project as an important field for learning about training and not the possibility to realise the long desired and dreamed of training course.
3. Programme Flow
Evaluation comments:
• The creativity exercise at the beginning did not work – perhaps it was the wrong choice with respect to the needs within the group at that stage; probably there was too much anxiety to embark wholeheartedly on an exercise like this in small groups.
• We clearly missed staged mentor talks with all participants at the beginning. We gave the wrong message and it seemed for many they shall only contact the mentor when they really have difficulties or problems.
• The explanation of the programme on day 1 did not achieve to get across what seminar 2 is about, what we intend with the programme.
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• One project team meeting with the support person in the first days of seminar 2.
• The mentor talk in the first days shall have the clear objective to design the learning challenge for the seminar. (30 minutes on day 2)
• Perhaps a team-cooperation exercise on day 1 serves better the needs of participants at this stage.
• Perhaps we shall include preparation time for the BPH session in the programme.
• For the flow of the BPH and the overall programme it seems better to have 2 full BPH days instead of 4 half days (day 4 and 6).
• The first three days shall have the overall aim to prepare for the quality of what happens afterwards and to be able to make better use of the content session and the team work afterwards (through sessions on observation, feedback, team, mentoring etc.).
4. BackpackersHostel
Evaluation comments by participants:
• It was positive to see different styles, to be able to observe colleagues.
• It was good that the choice of sessions was very much connected to learning needs of the individuals as well as the group as a whole.
• It was a good opportunity to practice.
• Some found it challenging to deal with the fact that some participants opted out of participating at moments. They felt it almost as a “betrayal” of the group, or at least the participants running sessions; question of responsibility. It was mentioned that this behaviour was especially not respecting the efforts of the wardens (Note: which was not shared by the wardens themselves)
• The group’s potential was not exploited completely. Some session did not go very deep.
• The staged closing of the BPH felt almost like an end of the seminar before the real closing – took out energy of the group.
• After the first check of ‘how many would choose which session’ there was no recheck which made it unclear for the ones offering how many people would come.
• The name Backpackers Hostel irritated some since they could not make sense of it.
Proposals, recommendations, ideas by the team:
• It needs to be explained and introduced already in seminar 1.
• The link of the name to the metaphor of the journey has to be clearer.
• 2 one-day blocks instead of 4 half days.
• Question of responsibility and SDL needs to be more addressed and discussed in the group – team has to help surfacing these obvious dilemmas.
5. Topic sessions
Dealing with ambiguity
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• We shall introduce and open the theme (as one of the central ones in ToT) already in Seminar 1.
• In Seminar 2 and 3 we shall come back to it using concrete examples from the course.
• The outcomes shall focus on the competencies involved when dealing competently with ambiguity.
Training Programme Design
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• In the first days a planned meeting between the teams and the support persons.
• On day 7 one whole day on training design.
European landscape
• Good!
Methodology
• Good, but perhaps earlier in the programme.
Learning Team
• Better later in the seminar and then connected to a feedback session.
Observation and feedback
• Good
6. Mentorship
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• It needs staged mentoring at the beginning of the seminar to support participants designing their learning challenge for the seminar.
• The input about mentoring would be better staged at the end of seminar 1.
• Perhaps already in seminar 1 two rounds of 30 min each.
• We have to plan better the mentor talks with concrete tasks and questions.
Well that's it!
So....this is immediately going to be a long blog because it is the report of our team meeting we had on the end of seminar 2.... our evaluation meeting. Maybe not very exciting.... reading a report...but still.
So...here it is:
Training of Trainers2008/9, Seminar 2 (Turkey)
Evaluation of the team of trainers
1. General remarks
Evaluation comments:
• Seems that for some participants it remains difficult to grasp how all the elements of ToT connect.
• We lack a document for participants which explains well the methodology as well as the structure of ToT including its position within the European landscape of training.
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• For the next edition we shall create such a core document to explain ToT- using stronger the metaphor of the journey as well as graphic visualisations. It shall make it fairly easily understandable what is the methodology, the core content and how it all connects together.
• Additionally we shall identify key-documents for the course which we strongly advise participants to study before coming to the first seminar.
2. Achievement of objectives
Objectives Score from 1-6
(1 “poor” to 6 “fully”)
1 Participants further develop their capacity to act as self-directed learners 5/3/4
2 Participants increase their understanding and ability of developing training methodologies in the context of NFE and the Youth in Action programme. 3/4/4
3 Participants enlarge their capacity to design training programmes according to the methodology identified. 3/4/3
4 Participants further develop their competencies necessary to act in international teams. 5/4/4
5 Participants become more competent to deal constructively with ambiguous situations. 2/3/3
6 Participants become well-prepared, confident and motivated to implement their training projects at high quality level 3/3/4
Ad objective 1
Comments:
• We need to improve our capacities to on the one hand challenge participants not wanting (or having difficulties) to leave their comfort zone (in other words avoid self-questioning) and on the other hand supporting participants to overcome obstacles in their learning path; some participants need more guiding in designing their challenge.
• There was little confrontation with the approach of SDL in the group.
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• We have to study more the stages of SDL to be able to respond better to different needs of participants especially in the mentoring. Paul will write a background paper on this.
• We shall make more conscious efforts to promote a group culture where supporting each other in the learning processes has high value.
• We shall use more the SPI also as an input in designing the mentoring relationship and supporting the participants in designing their learning plan.
Ad objective 2
Comments:
• More understanding YES, ability to develop NO.
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• The session on training design needs more space/time to allow for more challenge.
Ad objective 3
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• We need to confront the teams a little bit more to enhance the learning from the design process.
• Perhaps we shall foresee one planned meeting between the support person and the project teams at the beginning of seminar 2.
• More time for the training design session – 2 times a confrontation between two teams;
Ad objective 4
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• Perhaps it would support the team development to have a planned feedback session also at the end of seminar 2.
Ad objective 5
Comments:
• The focus of the session was not very clear; we have reflect more in the team what we exactly would like to address with this part.
• They were confronted with it but we missed the chance to link what is happening in the course with the session.
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• We shall see “Dealing with ambiguity” more as a horizontal theme and use examples of what is happening in the course; eg. the co-operation and relation with the NAs.
Ad objective 6
Comments:
• The insecurity about the changes in the teams as well as the unclear funding situation of some projects has a disturbing impact on the confidence of some teams.
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• We have to be even clearer in seminar 1 about the focus of this training project as an important field for learning about training and not the possibility to realise the long desired and dreamed of training course.
3. Programme Flow
Evaluation comments:
• The creativity exercise at the beginning did not work – perhaps it was the wrong choice with respect to the needs within the group at that stage; probably there was too much anxiety to embark wholeheartedly on an exercise like this in small groups.
• We clearly missed staged mentor talks with all participants at the beginning. We gave the wrong message and it seemed for many they shall only contact the mentor when they really have difficulties or problems.
• The explanation of the programme on day 1 did not achieve to get across what seminar 2 is about, what we intend with the programme.
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• One project team meeting with the support person in the first days of seminar 2.
• The mentor talk in the first days shall have the clear objective to design the learning challenge for the seminar. (30 minutes on day 2)
• Perhaps a team-cooperation exercise on day 1 serves better the needs of participants at this stage.
• Perhaps we shall include preparation time for the BPH session in the programme.
• For the flow of the BPH and the overall programme it seems better to have 2 full BPH days instead of 4 half days (day 4 and 6).
• The first three days shall have the overall aim to prepare for the quality of what happens afterwards and to be able to make better use of the content session and the team work afterwards (through sessions on observation, feedback, team, mentoring etc.).
4. BackpackersHostel
Evaluation comments by participants:
• It was positive to see different styles, to be able to observe colleagues.
• It was good that the choice of sessions was very much connected to learning needs of the individuals as well as the group as a whole.
• It was a good opportunity to practice.
• Some found it challenging to deal with the fact that some participants opted out of participating at moments. They felt it almost as a “betrayal” of the group, or at least the participants running sessions; question of responsibility. It was mentioned that this behaviour was especially not respecting the efforts of the wardens (Note: which was not shared by the wardens themselves)
• The group’s potential was not exploited completely. Some session did not go very deep.
• The staged closing of the BPH felt almost like an end of the seminar before the real closing – took out energy of the group.
• After the first check of ‘how many would choose which session’ there was no recheck which made it unclear for the ones offering how many people would come.
• The name Backpackers Hostel irritated some since they could not make sense of it.
Proposals, recommendations, ideas by the team:
• It needs to be explained and introduced already in seminar 1.
• The link of the name to the metaphor of the journey has to be clearer.
• 2 one-day blocks instead of 4 half days.
• Question of responsibility and SDL needs to be more addressed and discussed in the group – team has to help surfacing these obvious dilemmas.
5. Topic sessions
Dealing with ambiguity
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• We shall introduce and open the theme (as one of the central ones in ToT) already in Seminar 1.
• In Seminar 2 and 3 we shall come back to it using concrete examples from the course.
• The outcomes shall focus on the competencies involved when dealing competently with ambiguity.
Training Programme Design
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• In the first days a planned meeting between the teams and the support persons.
• On day 7 one whole day on training design.
European landscape
• Good!
Methodology
• Good, but perhaps earlier in the programme.
Learning Team
• Better later in the seminar and then connected to a feedback session.
Observation and feedback
• Good
6. Mentorship
Proposals, recommendations, ideas:
• It needs staged mentoring at the beginning of the seminar to support participants designing their learning challenge for the seminar.
• The input about mentoring would be better staged at the end of seminar 1.
• Perhaps already in seminar 1 two rounds of 30 min each.
• We have to plan better the mentor talks with concrete tasks and questions.
Well that's it!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
