As per Peace, Terrell M.; Mayo, Karen; Watkins, Regina in “Becoming Consumers of Our Own Research: What Really Makes a Difference in Improving Learning” there are 3 Domains which directly impact learning effectiveness: learning environment, teaching methodologies and learner experiences, assessment & evaluation.
At Larks Learning (a training and psychometric assessment company), we use brain based learning in training workshops that we conduct. My observation is that many trainers do adopt these practices but without fully comprehending why they do so. This results in an inability to tailor the method to the learning community and or learning objectives.
1. Learning environment: We as corporate trainers deal with adults who already have a significant work experience. The learning environment that we create is a rich one which uses their different experiences and that is accepting of various differing perspectives. This in my view supports learning as a threatening environment leads to “downshift” of thinking. (Pool, 1997) We have no impact on how their brains are ‘hard-wired’, but we do help in “sculpting” their brains as in sessions that we facilitate we help reflect on experiences.
2. Teaching methodologies and learner experiences: We conduct a lot of the activities in small group or large group settings. Since Kolb’s learning styles are dependent on the hemisphericity of the brain they account for differences amongst learners. We therefore use a mix of methodologies.
- Using power point presentation with relevant visuals, flip charts, video clipping etc. for visual learners.
- Using lecture by the facilitator and discussions for auditory learners. (In India we have traditionally considered auditory learners as intelligent probably because of a long history of oral learning through rote.)
- Using a lot of manipulatives such as play-dough and Lego for kinesthetic learners.
- We use the theory of Multiple intelligences in planning instruction by giving activities where each type can excel.
- We use mnemonics, songs, similes, metaphors, and graphic organizers.
- We try and pace the instruction to be 20 min’s followed by a change in activity (pacing & brain break).
- We use energizers to keep the audience interested.
3. Assessment and evaluation: We define session objectives (predetermined learning targets) before any learning session. Relevant questioning is our preferred method of assessment. The critical thing is the response to the answers. We are careful not to create a situation that there is only 1 right answer. We try and comprehend if the person can correlate the concepts learnt in real world situation (Authentic assessment).
Contributed by: Lovely Kumar Chief Projects: Larks Learning
Contact: lovely@larkslearning.com
Sometimes we get carried away with trendy educational ideas. Most are valid, but we have to be extremely careful to match educational methodologies to what we are trying to get students to master. So in other words, avoid throwing lots of educational activities at learners just because they are cool and fun. They can be fun but must be tools for taking the student from where they are to where you want them to be in terms of mastering new learning.
One of my favorite resources for both adult and child education planning is Understanding by Design by Wiggins and McTigue. It really helps both trainers and teachers focus in on the essential teaching points and keeps bringing educators back to that focus as they build curriculum and plan educational activities to meet and master learning goals. Please see the videos below for explanation of Backwards Design Lesson Planning:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsDgfC3SjhM&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8zIgMADmJg&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGaVSaTaf14&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xk_YFgwR6pE&feature=related
Hi Carole,
Thanks for sharing. Very useful video’s.
I will include this in setting learning objectives.
Why don’t you reflect on them and we can then share your reflections also.
Lovely
I enjoyed this post and am looking forward to reviewing the videos. As relates to the use of activities/exercises…. I often work with Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) whose learning occurred mainly in college and who experienced the “data dump / lecture / few or no activities/exercises” model. Unfortunately, many of them – without instructional design assistance – want use this same methodology in the corporate environment. This model may work in college where, as in grades K-12, students are captive audiences; however, this model doesn’t work as well – if at all – in the corporate environment. Instead, training needs to be “just-in-time”, “just what I (participant) need”, and “just enough”. The participants need to buy in by recognizing how the learning will help them in their jobs. Course design should be based on desired outcomes, content should primarily be based on “need-to-know” vs. “nice-to-know” information, and activities and exercises that “cement” and reinforce learning must be included. My designs often reflect a 60% / 40% lecture to activity/exercise ratio. In the situation in which I have been working the last couple of years in which I am designing highly technical courses taught in English to students whose primary language is Arabic, lecture can be less effective than when teaching primarily English speakers. Therefore, use of activities and exercises is essential. When working with SMEs, whose tendency often is to suggest a potpourri of activities/exercises – many of which are poorly designed and/or don’t support learning – but who initially are insistent that I incorporate their activities – I am usually successful in convincing them to eliminate the poor exercises and work with me to design new ones by continually referring back to the course outcomes.