This past weekend, I held a workshop with ELTA Rhine on customizing training and materials lights lessons. During and after the session, it was clear that sourcing materials was an issue for trainers looking to focus on relevance. Let's dive a little deeper into the topic of materials and examine what we need, why we need them and where we can find them.
Assumption 1 - There is a difference between "talking about business" and "talking to do business".
This is Evan Frendo's concise and clear statement about not only materials, but also about the tasks we ask our learners to accomplish. It is great for the learners to 'teach us their business', but this falls into the first category and will not accomplish all the training needs. We have to balance both types of activities.
The problem for trainers is that materials "about" business are much easier to find. The internet is full of them. Let's take a simple example.
You are training a group in production and one of your can-do statements is that they can explain the production process. You decide to use a YouTube video about how Lego blocks are made, mine the video for key language and have the participants give talks describing their production process (maybe even on the shop floor). It's likely that this is a useful skill, but it does not fully simulate a meeting to discuss changes to refine the production process. We are a step short of achieving full relevance. Wouldn't it be nice to have an example of the real meeting?
Assumption 2 - Getting the "real thing" is nearly impossible.
We can hypothesize all we want about recording real meetings and presentations. The simple fact is that we will probably never get the approval to do it. Non-disclosure agreements are key part of doing business, but they are only a baseline for trust. There is still a 'need-to-know' level of integration.
The main reason why recording real meetings is a no-go is because the learners are not lab rats. They are trying to do business in these situations. Politics, reputations and personal relationships all come into play in meetings. It is generally best if we don't ask to record them for 'research purposes'.
Assumption 3 - Real meetings are much different than the recorded models in the course book.
Meetings are messy affairs. I'm convinced that meetings are the most difficult skill. Topics appear out of blue, there is so much interference (semantic, cultural, pronunciation, technical, etc.) that its a wonder they work at all. But for the trainer, the most difficult part is that meetings contain highly detailed information exchange. For an outsider, it is very difficult to 'script' a meeting and practice it.
Additionally, meetings can be very boring. There are many books and websites about effective meetings for good reason. Employees are often justified for hating them. Even if I did have a recording, I probably wouldn't play it because everyone would be asleep. Most participants and chairpersons will acknowledge that their meetings could be better, but they probably can't say exactly how they should improve.
Example dialog with a participant:
Me: How could the meeting be better?
Them: Some people are giving too much information about their topic and it is not interesting for the group.
Me: Okay, where is the line? How much information is too much?
Them: Well, they should only talk about what has an impact on the others.
Me: I agree, let's try it... in your area, where is the 'information line'? What level of information is valuable for the others (including the manager), and what is too much?
Them: Hmm... good question. That's difficult to say.
Okay, so what can we do?
1. Gather artifacts. Emails and PowerPoint slides are relatively easy to get. One main constraint is the group setting. If you have learners from different companies and/or departments, the materials cannot usually be used in class verbatim. They typically need to be altered to conceal the information. I will often use emails and slides to create my own 'similar' materials - using the same language, but with different content. Even if you can't get them digitally, just looking at them is helpful.
I call them artifacts because like a researcher, these are any item which reveals something about communication. Artifacts fall into two categories - communication itself, and evidence of communication.
Communication itself:
- Emails
- Presentations (the written communication)
- How-to's
- Forms (e.g. change request forms)
- Reports
- Handbooks
- Contracts and other formal documents
Evidence of communication:
- Meeting minutes and agendas
- Presentations (evidence of the verbal part)
- Descriptions of meeting (like for a communicative event needs analysis)
- Diagrams and charts
- Excel spreadsheets
- Workflows and flow charts
While these artifacts cannot always be used to re-enact the exact situation, they will often get you much closer.
2. Research English in use. I generally use several sources for this.
First, if you haven't read Almut Koester's books on workplace discourse, now is the time. I also recommend Patrick Lencioni's Death by Meeting and Five Dysfunctions of a Team because they are narratives with great dialog from meetings.
Second, I have used transcripts from meetings to identify some key language. If you enter "meeting transcripts" into Google, you will find many transcribed sessions from government meetings, hearings, presentations, etc. I don't use them in class because they are horribly boring, but there are some great phrases. The problem with these is that they are too organized. Real meetings are generally more chaotic. For emails, Evan Frendo has recommended the Enron corpus and it looks promising. Sadly, I haven't had the chance to go through it.
Third, I use my own life. I have meetings, write emails, make telephone calls, etc. I have used my inbox several times in training as the basis for language work. I collect phrases and vocabulary from meetings I have with other trainers, clients, etc (even if the meeting is in German).
A note about Listening: Collins English for Business by Ian Badger. This book made quite a splash a few years ago for its recording of real people. I use it and I like it. Sadly, there are too few examples of dialog.
3. Refine role-plays and simulations.
It is a good idea to ask the participants how the rehearsed situation differs from the real thing. Inevitably, they will give you a list of things you can't really change, such as accent. However, they may also give you ideas for your next role-play. For example, if I get the feedback that some people in the meeting speak too quickly with higher vocabulary, then I might participate in the next meeting and try to fulfill that role.
So, I admit that sourcing materials/resources for customized training is not easy. But I guess that is the nature of the beast. If sourcing materials were easy, it wouldn't be customized training, would it?
One final note - observing real meetings is really the best we can do. I am lucky enough to have a project in which that is possible. But I understand that this project is different. It has strong management and participant support is limited to a specific team with in a department. I have offered to observe meetings in other projects to no avail (after all, you have to get the buy-in from all the participants). If you find the opportunity... take it.
Tuesday, August 26, 2014
Sunday, August 17, 2014
BE Potpourri - Answers to miscellaneous issues
As I mentioned in the previous post, I have asked the attendees to my workshop at ELTA Rhine to participate in a short survey to help define the issues for the session. Unfortunately, I won't be able to deal with everything in the time, so I've decided to address a few of the issues here.
Responses to the question, "What do you like/dislike about teaching Business English?"
"I don't like the irregular attendance and sometimes the lack of motivation."
"If the company pays for it, participants don´t work hard enough."
We've all been there and I think we can all sympathize with trying to force feed a group of learners who are either not there... or aren't interested. I distinguish between motivation and dedication - motivation being the will, and dedication being the effort. Let's deal with motivation first.
There are many articles and studies on motivation, but I try to keep it simple. Motivation generally followed expected utility - the amount of value they will gain from learning the language. Highly motivated learners generally have a clear picture of how the language will help their jobs, lives, etc. Lower motivated learners cannot usually describe how or why English will help them. This is typically aligned with their goals.
I can help, but I cannot give them motivation. I
Responses to the question, "What do you like/dislike about teaching Business English?"
"I don't like the irregular attendance and sometimes the lack of motivation."
"If the company pays for it, participants don´t work hard enough."
We've all been there and I think we can all sympathize with trying to force feed a group of learners who are either not there... or aren't interested. I distinguish between motivation and dedication - motivation being the will, and dedication being the effort. Let's deal with motivation first.
There are many articles and studies on motivation, but I try to keep it simple. Motivation generally followed expected utility - the amount of value they will gain from learning the language. Highly motivated learners generally have a clear picture of how the language will help their jobs, lives, etc. Lower motivated learners cannot usually describe how or why English will help them. This is typically aligned with their goals.
I can help, but I cannot give them motivation. I
Friday, August 8, 2014
Let's Talk About Money
The value of money depends on your values. If you view material items as value then the money to buy them is important. Consequently, you will will think about money during negotiations.
Perhaps it is a good time to talk about money in Business English.
To start, I always write my ideas without advertising. I do not view readers as a source of revenue. There will never be advertising on my blog and I will never ghostwrite for a blog which advertises my ideas. Also, I will not lend my name to an organization for revenue. I will not create materials or resources for the benefit of a company for resale. I will also continue to monitor the industry and push the field forward free-of-charge. In short, I will provide ideas for free.
My goal is simple: I would like eliminate the market for experienced learner coursebooks. This is a relatively simple goal. Publishers already understand that experienced learners have specific needs which they cannot profitably fulfill. This places me in conflict with certain organizations and individuals which seek to make money from this part of the value chain. Perhaps I can explain why I seek to eliminate this revenue stream.
First, I believe that hourly rates are too low for the value we deliver. In some cases that is due to inexperienced trainers, but mostly it is due to poor communication by the institution. Even when the institution does it right, they keep the margin and the trainer is employed below value. I recommend by-passing the institution if your situation allows it and taking on customers at a higher rate. However, you should also consider the value of the contracts for long-term value and professional development. Be careful before you burn your bridges, but have the torch in hand.
Second, if you think there is money in Business English publishing, you are wrong. There is no market for specialized English course books.
Second, if you think there is money in Business English publishing, you are wrong. There is no market for specialized English course books.
ELTA Rhine Workshop - Solving Challenges
On Saturday, August 23rd, I will be leading a workshop with ELTA Rhine in Cologne to talk about some of the difficult aspects of teaching/training Business English.
When I completed my CELTA I was always uncomfortable with the idea that the method was hidden from the students. I had the feeling that we should work as wizards behind the curtain, leading participants through a series of pedagogically sound activities. Over the years, I have become more and more comfortable with transparency in the classroom. I feel it helps me build a better relationship with the participants, provides space for feedback, gives them more control over their learning and may even help them become more autonomous learners outside the class.
The same is true for workshops like the ELTA Rhine event in a few weeks. I want the event to reflect how I train and I want the participants be involved in developing the content.
So, with two weeks to go before the event, let me outline what is going on behind the scenes.
Step 1 - Gather Information
This step is currently under way. I am using several resources. Questions I have sought to answer:
What topics and speakers has ELTA Rhine covered in the past or will cover in the future?
Resource: ELTA Rhine Website
Unquestionably, the answer to this question makes me a bit nervous. The list of speakers reads like a who's who list of ELT authors. These are the people at conferences I am trying to introduce myself to with the hope that they might remember my name. As for the topics, I see that the events have covered a wide range of topics but that there is room for discussion where the rubber meets the road of Business English. There is also a mix between the novel and the classic.
Decision: I don't want to cover areas which have already been discussed. I also don't want to cover something which someone else can do better.
What does the audience look like?
Resource: ELTA Rhine Events Coordinator and Participant Survey
Everyone knows that the key step in preparing a talk/workshop is to understand the audience. To achieve relevance, we need to understand the audience's situation and expectations. First, I spoke with the events coordinator to get an idea of attendees. Are they mostly freelancers working in companies? Do they work in schools or universities with prescribed curricula?
I decided to augment this information with a participant survey to get critical information about the audience. The first question of the survey is designed to get 'demographic' information. The second question is designed to gauge the emotional response to Business English. The third question is set up as open response to get an idea of teaching styles and ideas for how they view Business English.
Decision: I am speaking to an experienced group and we have much in common. I will share the results of the survey in the workshop (they are anonymous). A workshop in its true form (creating value/intellectual property) is the best fit because the collective knowledge is greater than mine alone.
What topics are most important to the participants?
Resource: Participant Survey and Social Media Monitoring
A common pitfall is assuming that certain topics are important simply based on the audience profile. For example, it may be tempting to think that if the audience is made up of freelancers then administration skills and tips are interesting. Likewise, if the audience uses a coursebook, then maximizing published materials would be the best topic. But when dealing with experts, they have probably already found the answers to these questions. The same is true in my classes. In a group of marketing people, talking about presentations for the 10,000th time is not really that helpful.
The same is true for workshops like the ELTA Rhine event in a few weeks. I want the event to reflect how I train and I want the participants be involved in developing the content.
So, with two weeks to go before the event, let me outline what is going on behind the scenes.
Step 1 - Gather Information
This step is currently under way. I am using several resources. Questions I have sought to answer:
What topics and speakers has ELTA Rhine covered in the past or will cover in the future?
Resource: ELTA Rhine Website
Unquestionably, the answer to this question makes me a bit nervous. The list of speakers reads like a who's who list of ELT authors. These are the people at conferences I am trying to introduce myself to with the hope that they might remember my name. As for the topics, I see that the events have covered a wide range of topics but that there is room for discussion where the rubber meets the road of Business English. There is also a mix between the novel and the classic.
Decision: I don't want to cover areas which have already been discussed. I also don't want to cover something which someone else can do better.
What does the audience look like?
Resource: ELTA Rhine Events Coordinator and Participant Survey
Everyone knows that the key step in preparing a talk/workshop is to understand the audience. To achieve relevance, we need to understand the audience's situation and expectations. First, I spoke with the events coordinator to get an idea of attendees. Are they mostly freelancers working in companies? Do they work in schools or universities with prescribed curricula?
I decided to augment this information with a participant survey to get critical information about the audience. The first question of the survey is designed to get 'demographic' information. The second question is designed to gauge the emotional response to Business English. The third question is set up as open response to get an idea of teaching styles and ideas for how they view Business English.
Decision: I am speaking to an experienced group and we have much in common. I will share the results of the survey in the workshop (they are anonymous). A workshop in its true form (creating value/intellectual property) is the best fit because the collective knowledge is greater than mine alone.
What topics are most important to the participants?
Resource: Participant Survey and Social Media Monitoring
A common pitfall is assuming that certain topics are important simply based on the audience profile. For example, it may be tempting to think that if the audience is made up of freelancers then administration skills and tips are interesting. Likewise, if the audience uses a coursebook, then maximizing published materials would be the best topic. But when dealing with experts, they have probably already found the answers to these questions. The same is true in my classes. In a group of marketing people, talking about presentations for the 10,000th time is not really that helpful.
So, I wanted to do a mini 'needs analysis' to find out what topics are important to the audience. What do they need/want? For the survey, I created a ranking question for the participants to order which topics are most important. The topics were a mix of topics I feel comfortable speaking about in front of experts and listening to social media/blogs.
Decision: The results have been eye-opening for sure. As of now, "Designing Customized Courses" is well in front, with "Leading Materials Light Lessons" in second place. "Handling ESP Needs" and "Needs Analysis" are bringing up the rear. This is not what I expected. I'm very happy that I didn't choose a topic I wanted to talk about... I probably would have wasted everyone's time. I won't divulge which topic it was. :)
What are the constraints?
Resource: ELTA Rhine Events Coordinator
There are constraints in every situation. In particular I am looking at audience size, time and training aids. First, we have 2.5 hours to discuss content. The workshop is 3 hours but I will have to factor in a break and socializing. Second, it appears that the event will be fairly intimate (less than 50 attendees). This means that going into more detail will be possible. Third, I am thinking about whiteboards, technology, table set up, etc. I am still thinking about how to augment the training aids to reach the goal.
Step 2 - Creating 'Prepared Flexibility'
Once I have the information, it is time to starting creating a framework for the event. I wrote a blog post a while back that "I Only Have One Lesson Plan" and that still holds true (I delete or revise my blog to reflect changes.). I want to find the right balance between control and chaos.
So first, I am outlining the goal of the workshop. In this case, the goal is to create a product which collects and organizes the collective knowledge of me and the audience. I am still not sure what form this product should take. Perhaps it is a handbook (Word document), perhaps it is a slide deck... maybe a video. I am not sure yet. But my goal is to hand ELTA Rhine a prepared product to deliver value to their members, first and foremost to the participants.
To do this, I am working on several things. First, I am dissecting the needs/wants to figure out what I want to say. Can I break this down into "Three Steps" or "5 Tips"? For example, if customizing courses remains the main focus, I analyze the process into several topics areas:
- Recognizing decision points in class (where are the opportunities to improvise and customize?)
- Performance-based training (relating to test-teach-test for skills)
- Identifying language gaps and skills gaps in participant performance
- Avoiding the "hard Business English" trap and driving our students away (e.g. writing reports) - The making them eat their broccoli problem.
- Assessing resources for customization, taking far away content and adapting it to a customized need
This step includes creating slides, thinking about vignettes and documenting activities from the past.
Another step is to plan for contingencies. Because I am giving up control to the audience, I want to be prepared for unexpected events. I will start with known issues. Some people have dominant personalities. They might wish to dominate the session or a group. What will I say to that person? Someone will ask a fundamental question which brings my entire approach into question. How will I deal with that? Perhaps a participant will contribute the "TED Tip". This is the activity, tip or resource which everyone already knows. What will I say to help them save face but also move the discussion further? Finally, how will I handle external issues like dry markers, a hot room, late attendees, etc.?
Finally, which activities will support the goal, deliver my message and promote productive discussion during the workshop? This is where is all comes together. I will devise a list of workshop activities. I will think about what materials I need to reach the goal. For example, right now I am designing an "Activity Description Sheet" for participants to fill out as the discussion evolves. The sheet will be a simple form which documents successful activities. This form will help me create the final product.
Step 3 - Refine and Rehearse
A common mistake is to take the list of activities and create a final plan. I will not sit down and prescribe which activities will go where. I will keep the entire list in mind and select the most appropriate during the workshop. However, I will create a framework within the constraints.
So far, I have divided the session into various time blocks. (Grammar note for teachers: I originally wrote that sentence in the past simple, but I changed to the present perfect for British sensitivity.) I have a general idea of how I will organize the participants. I also have a pretty clear idea about how I will collect knowledge and transform it into useful information. I am creating the slides to express my message. I have a plan for topics which are not covered due to constraints. I have a list of 'challenge questions' to push the audience.
Next, I will rehearse the workshop. I will stand in my office and give the workshop... in real time (I will actually rehearse what I am doing during group work for the 3 hours). I will rehearse the contingencies and I will make sure that the various possible activities are time neutral - meaning they can be replaced without affecting the constraint. I will rehearse collecting ideas. I will assess the rehearsal based on the audience profile and survey responses. Additionally, I will focus on the instructions. I will rehearse giving the instructions for each task.
This rehearsal will continue all the way up to the event... on the train to Cologne... in the taxi from the train station... in the few minutes before the event. The goal of the rehearsal is to be completely comfortable with the chaos of giving up control. Inevitably, the participants will surprise me... but hopefully I can rehearse 90% of the contingencies.
Yes, this is the same as my training.
Back to revealing the wizard behind the curtain... I have recently pulled it back even further in the context of socializing. My participants often say they need small talk and socializing (I distinguish the two). They are also amazed at how easy it is for me to conduct socializing and assume it is a native speaker thing. I now deal with the fact that the language is not the constraint for socializing, it is cultural and personal.
I recently said to participants (in a group).
We have talked before that trust is built on competence and character. We also know that building personal relationships is important for making communication work. The same is true for us. I want you to trust me and I think a personal relationship will make learning easier.
When I came here today, I thought about you. I thought about your daughter because you said she was preparing for her A-Levels. I thought about the small talk. I said to myself, "I should ask about her daughter." I thought of sentences to ask like "So, how did the A-Levels go?"
Joachim, you told me last time that you were planning your honeymoon. I came prepared with questions about your honeymoon.
How did that feel for someone to remember what you told them and ask about it?
So, in the spirit of the workshop... how can you make this an activity? Would you like to write a comment?
Planned flexibility... the method of the workshop and perhaps a few tips for trainers. If you haven't registered and you'll be in the best city in Germany on August 23rd, please come. I can't promise excellence, but I'll do my best.
Decision: The results have been eye-opening for sure. As of now, "Designing Customized Courses" is well in front, with "Leading Materials Light Lessons" in second place. "Handling ESP Needs" and "Needs Analysis" are bringing up the rear. This is not what I expected. I'm very happy that I didn't choose a topic I wanted to talk about... I probably would have wasted everyone's time. I won't divulge which topic it was. :)
What are the constraints?
Resource: ELTA Rhine Events Coordinator
There are constraints in every situation. In particular I am looking at audience size, time and training aids. First, we have 2.5 hours to discuss content. The workshop is 3 hours but I will have to factor in a break and socializing. Second, it appears that the event will be fairly intimate (less than 50 attendees). This means that going into more detail will be possible. Third, I am thinking about whiteboards, technology, table set up, etc. I am still thinking about how to augment the training aids to reach the goal.
Step 2 - Creating 'Prepared Flexibility'
Once I have the information, it is time to starting creating a framework for the event. I wrote a blog post a while back that "I Only Have One Lesson Plan" and that still holds true (I delete or revise my blog to reflect changes.). I want to find the right balance between control and chaos.
So first, I am outlining the goal of the workshop. In this case, the goal is to create a product which collects and organizes the collective knowledge of me and the audience. I am still not sure what form this product should take. Perhaps it is a handbook (Word document), perhaps it is a slide deck... maybe a video. I am not sure yet. But my goal is to hand ELTA Rhine a prepared product to deliver value to their members, first and foremost to the participants.
To do this, I am working on several things. First, I am dissecting the needs/wants to figure out what I want to say. Can I break this down into "Three Steps" or "5 Tips"? For example, if customizing courses remains the main focus, I analyze the process into several topics areas:
- Recognizing decision points in class (where are the opportunities to improvise and customize?)
- Performance-based training (relating to test-teach-test for skills)
- Identifying language gaps and skills gaps in participant performance
- Avoiding the "hard Business English" trap and driving our students away (e.g. writing reports) - The making them eat their broccoli problem.
- Assessing resources for customization, taking far away content and adapting it to a customized need
This step includes creating slides, thinking about vignettes and documenting activities from the past.
Another step is to plan for contingencies. Because I am giving up control to the audience, I want to be prepared for unexpected events. I will start with known issues. Some people have dominant personalities. They might wish to dominate the session or a group. What will I say to that person? Someone will ask a fundamental question which brings my entire approach into question. How will I deal with that? Perhaps a participant will contribute the "TED Tip". This is the activity, tip or resource which everyone already knows. What will I say to help them save face but also move the discussion further? Finally, how will I handle external issues like dry markers, a hot room, late attendees, etc.?
Finally, which activities will support the goal, deliver my message and promote productive discussion during the workshop? This is where is all comes together. I will devise a list of workshop activities. I will think about what materials I need to reach the goal. For example, right now I am designing an "Activity Description Sheet" for participants to fill out as the discussion evolves. The sheet will be a simple form which documents successful activities. This form will help me create the final product.
Step 3 - Refine and Rehearse
A common mistake is to take the list of activities and create a final plan. I will not sit down and prescribe which activities will go where. I will keep the entire list in mind and select the most appropriate during the workshop. However, I will create a framework within the constraints.
So far, I have divided the session into various time blocks. (Grammar note for teachers: I originally wrote that sentence in the past simple, but I changed to the present perfect for British sensitivity.) I have a general idea of how I will organize the participants. I also have a pretty clear idea about how I will collect knowledge and transform it into useful information. I am creating the slides to express my message. I have a plan for topics which are not covered due to constraints. I have a list of 'challenge questions' to push the audience.
Next, I will rehearse the workshop. I will stand in my office and give the workshop... in real time (I will actually rehearse what I am doing during group work for the 3 hours). I will rehearse the contingencies and I will make sure that the various possible activities are time neutral - meaning they can be replaced without affecting the constraint. I will rehearse collecting ideas. I will assess the rehearsal based on the audience profile and survey responses. Additionally, I will focus on the instructions. I will rehearse giving the instructions for each task.
This rehearsal will continue all the way up to the event... on the train to Cologne... in the taxi from the train station... in the few minutes before the event. The goal of the rehearsal is to be completely comfortable with the chaos of giving up control. Inevitably, the participants will surprise me... but hopefully I can rehearse 90% of the contingencies.
Yes, this is the same as my training.
Back to revealing the wizard behind the curtain... I have recently pulled it back even further in the context of socializing. My participants often say they need small talk and socializing (I distinguish the two). They are also amazed at how easy it is for me to conduct socializing and assume it is a native speaker thing. I now deal with the fact that the language is not the constraint for socializing, it is cultural and personal.
I recently said to participants (in a group).
We have talked before that trust is built on competence and character. We also know that building personal relationships is important for making communication work. The same is true for us. I want you to trust me and I think a personal relationship will make learning easier.
When I came here today, I thought about you. I thought about your daughter because you said she was preparing for her A-Levels. I thought about the small talk. I said to myself, "I should ask about her daughter." I thought of sentences to ask like "So, how did the A-Levels go?"
Joachim, you told me last time that you were planning your honeymoon. I came prepared with questions about your honeymoon.
How did that feel for someone to remember what you told them and ask about it?
So, in the spirit of the workshop... how can you make this an activity? Would you like to write a comment?
Planned flexibility... the method of the workshop and perhaps a few tips for trainers. If you haven't registered and you'll be in the best city in Germany on August 23rd, please come. I can't promise excellence, but I'll do my best.
Wednesday, June 25, 2014
Why Business English Training is like a Smart Phone
I had a discussion recently with a fellow trainer about drafting and using performance objectives (can do statements). In the discussion, I used the simile of a smart phone, but I did not really have my thoughts in order. So here is a clearer discussion.
Anyone who works in marketing these days will tell you that we have moved from the era of mass production to the age of mass customization. Product managers and marketers are continually trying to find ways to create products which support the individual needs or wishes of consumers while at the same time retain the benefits of serial production.
Few products demonstrate the power to mass customization more than the smart phone. A smart phone by itself has relatively limited value and does not really differ functionally than its dumb phone ancestors. It makes phone calls, it saves phone numbers, it can transmit and receive data (i.e. internet) and it hosts a range of utility functions like a calculator and alarm. Perhaps the only significant addition is a GPS antenna.
Instead, the true power of the smart phone is ability to customize the functionality with apps. "There's probably an app for that," is no small statement about the power of the device. The apps on my phone are probably very different than yours and our phones likely reflect our priorities, lifestyles and needs. We may have the same model phone, but we have completely unique products.
So let's take a closer look at smart phones and how they relate to training. I tend to think of the CEF levels as the model of phone - the processor speed, the connectivity rate, the memory, the basic operating system, etc. A lower performance phone will not run as many apps or runs them very slowly much like a level learner has very limited flexibility in communication. By comparison, the latest iPhone will run pretty much anything on the market and perform multiple functions simultaneously, much like an advanced learner.
Naturally, there are some basic functions every learner must be able to perform in English just like a phone must have a calculator, an alarm, a calendar, an SMS function and so on. These are universal utilities which come with the operating system. There is no customization and they are standard. I generally think of A1 and A2 as the operating system levels in which I try to install simple functions like introductions, writing a simple email, using basic vocabulary and grammar, etc. But once we have installed the OS, we can start inserting contacts and appointments, as well downloading some apps.
There are now over 1 million apps on Google Play and even more on iTunes, so the possibilities are endless. I see three levels of apps. First are the mainstream apps like Facebook, Skype and Adobe Reader. These reach a large audience and typically perform routine functions. In business English there are similar language items which nearly all learners will need. For example, writing emails for request, giving opinions in a meeting and some general business vocabulary are fairly standard. These areas are typically covered in course book, but sometimes the books go too far.
The second group of apps contains 'conditional apps'. These are only useful for people who meet certain criteria but they may also be very popular. For example, the Sparkasse (a consumer bank) app has over 1 million downloads, but only by Sparkasse customers. In business English, these 'conditional apps' are the industry or job field skills. Sales representatives tend to need more socializing, greeting visitors, talking about products and making persuasive presentations. Accountants need more finance vocabulary and reporting financial results. Customer service reps need more troubleshooting, telephoning and giving instructions.
Finally, there are the highly individual apps which reflect your lifestyle, personality and priorities. The Lady Pill Reminder app is probably only for women using birth control (I wonder how many boyfriends/husbands have it as well). On my phone, I have the baby phone app so that I can still visit the hotel bar with my wife while on vacation. I am one of only a few thousand with the 1.FC Nürnberg app for my favorite football team. I have the pronunciation app for work and a time keeper app to record my hours per client. Although they may not be among the top 1000 in downloads, these are extremely useful. The same is true for business English, working on language to fit a very specific situation is often the most useful for the learners.
I draw a few lessons from this metaphor. The key lesson for me is refining the role of the trainer. First, a trainer needs to know the 'app store' inside and out. They need to know what is available and what the different functions are. The trainer not only helps install and run the software, they also serve as the "Recommended for you" function.
The second lesson is in course design. The farther the developer is from the end-user, the more general the course should be. Imagine buying a smart phone with a bunch of apps you do not want, do not need and cannot use. The same is true for selling 'packaged can do statements'. Minecraft may have more than 5 million downloads, but that does not mean I want it. While packaging course objectives is easy, it is not mass customization. Also, if the course is stuffed with required functions, the trainer will find that the student's memory is full and they can't install the truly useful stuff.
The third lesson is that general to specific is not always the best way. Smart phone users often download highly specific apps before the general ones because of their priorities. Do not be afraid to train communication and language non-linearly.
The final lesson is from programming. App developers write code in functional blocks. Each bit of code performs a specific function like initializing the data receiver. When they write apps, they will often copy, paste and modify these blocks for compatibility. The same is true for activity types and exercises. Two very different lessons and courses can include copy and paste parts (with slight adjustments). A good programmer always documents their functional blocks (nothing is more frustrating to a programmer than undocumented code), so a trainer should keep their activities neatly documented and organized. But, they should also keep in mind that using the activity verbatim almost always results in a compatibility bug.
So, I will leave it to you to design your own software. It is not an easy task. But as I sit at this cafe watching everyone tapping away on their phones, I can see that customization is not only possible, but the new expectation.
Anyone who works in marketing these days will tell you that we have moved from the era of mass production to the age of mass customization. Product managers and marketers are continually trying to find ways to create products which support the individual needs or wishes of consumers while at the same time retain the benefits of serial production.
Few products demonstrate the power to mass customization more than the smart phone. A smart phone by itself has relatively limited value and does not really differ functionally than its dumb phone ancestors. It makes phone calls, it saves phone numbers, it can transmit and receive data (i.e. internet) and it hosts a range of utility functions like a calculator and alarm. Perhaps the only significant addition is a GPS antenna.
Instead, the true power of the smart phone is ability to customize the functionality with apps. "There's probably an app for that," is no small statement about the power of the device. The apps on my phone are probably very different than yours and our phones likely reflect our priorities, lifestyles and needs. We may have the same model phone, but we have completely unique products.
 |
| What can you tell about me from my suggestion list? |
Naturally, there are some basic functions every learner must be able to perform in English just like a phone must have a calculator, an alarm, a calendar, an SMS function and so on. These are universal utilities which come with the operating system. There is no customization and they are standard. I generally think of A1 and A2 as the operating system levels in which I try to install simple functions like introductions, writing a simple email, using basic vocabulary and grammar, etc. But once we have installed the OS, we can start inserting contacts and appointments, as well downloading some apps.
There are now over 1 million apps on Google Play and even more on iTunes, so the possibilities are endless. I see three levels of apps. First are the mainstream apps like Facebook, Skype and Adobe Reader. These reach a large audience and typically perform routine functions. In business English there are similar language items which nearly all learners will need. For example, writing emails for request, giving opinions in a meeting and some general business vocabulary are fairly standard. These areas are typically covered in course book, but sometimes the books go too far.
The second group of apps contains 'conditional apps'. These are only useful for people who meet certain criteria but they may also be very popular. For example, the Sparkasse (a consumer bank) app has over 1 million downloads, but only by Sparkasse customers. In business English, these 'conditional apps' are the industry or job field skills. Sales representatives tend to need more socializing, greeting visitors, talking about products and making persuasive presentations. Accountants need more finance vocabulary and reporting financial results. Customer service reps need more troubleshooting, telephoning and giving instructions.
Finally, there are the highly individual apps which reflect your lifestyle, personality and priorities. The Lady Pill Reminder app is probably only for women using birth control (I wonder how many boyfriends/husbands have it as well). On my phone, I have the baby phone app so that I can still visit the hotel bar with my wife while on vacation. I am one of only a few thousand with the 1.FC Nürnberg app for my favorite football team. I have the pronunciation app for work and a time keeper app to record my hours per client. Although they may not be among the top 1000 in downloads, these are extremely useful. The same is true for business English, working on language to fit a very specific situation is often the most useful for the learners.
 |
| Useful for freelancers? |
The second lesson is in course design. The farther the developer is from the end-user, the more general the course should be. Imagine buying a smart phone with a bunch of apps you do not want, do not need and cannot use. The same is true for selling 'packaged can do statements'. Minecraft may have more than 5 million downloads, but that does not mean I want it. While packaging course objectives is easy, it is not mass customization. Also, if the course is stuffed with required functions, the trainer will find that the student's memory is full and they can't install the truly useful stuff.
The third lesson is that general to specific is not always the best way. Smart phone users often download highly specific apps before the general ones because of their priorities. Do not be afraid to train communication and language non-linearly.
The final lesson is from programming. App developers write code in functional blocks. Each bit of code performs a specific function like initializing the data receiver. When they write apps, they will often copy, paste and modify these blocks for compatibility. The same is true for activity types and exercises. Two very different lessons and courses can include copy and paste parts (with slight adjustments). A good programmer always documents their functional blocks (nothing is more frustrating to a programmer than undocumented code), so a trainer should keep their activities neatly documented and organized. But, they should also keep in mind that using the activity verbatim almost always results in a compatibility bug.
So, I will leave it to you to design your own software. It is not an easy task. But as I sit at this cafe watching everyone tapping away on their phones, I can see that customization is not only possible, but the new expectation.
Sunday, June 15, 2014
Pre-experienced and Experienced Learners - Thoughts from Graz
I have been giving presentations and writing blog posts about in-company training for the last several years. Especially with the presentations, I often have problems trying to fit the content to the audience. The problem is that I am facing two separate market segments... in-company trainers (often freelancers) who typically have much greater scope in determining needs, selecting/creating materials and delivering training. But also in the audience are the Business English teachers and lecturers who have less control over the learning objectives, resources and methods. Additionally, they face drastically different challenges concerning learner motivation, class size and assessment/reporting. Not having experience operating in such a formal structure, I'd like to pass on some thoughts on what I see as those students enter the workforce and perhaps reflect on where I could see changes in institutional teaching.
Despite being in-company, I actually receive many pre-experienced learners. My training is often aligned with the company's on-boarding program and the majority of new participants are in their first days or weeks at the company. It is also normal for me to get participants who do not use English in their jobs yet, but it is coming. In these cases, I feel I can relate somewhat to the challenges teachers face with pre-experienced learners.
I can draw several conclusions from what I see as these participants enter my training.
1. Learners who had an English course which was aligned with their field of study had great advantages over those who only had a general Business English class.
2. Motivation was much higher for learners who clearly understood that a) English would certainly be a integral part of their job and b) being able to conduct their job in English would be a competitive advantage for career progression. Those who lacked this awareness were surprised by the reality of a bilingual working environment and suffered lower self-confidence. They often had negative feelings toward improving their language.
3. If an institution taught English as a practical skill, their graduates were much better prepared. If the school treated English as a theoretical concept, the graduates were largely unable to adequately perform their tasks in L2. This mindset was often reflected by the teaching methods and content. Practical teaching focused heavily on production activities throughout the teaching, not just at assessment. Unsurprisingly, those who emerged from a more theoretical approach were often overwhelmed by the apparent complexity of the language.
Let me give you examples of things going wrong. You might be surprised at how often I am faced with entry-level accountants who cannot recognize the basic vocabulary from a balance sheet (almost zero new graduates). Likewise, I routinely meet fresh-faced employees in the mechanical engineering field who cannot understand even the simplest terms like bearing, dimensions, or bolt. I see this across fields with the exception of software. I suspect that is because software terms have been developed in conjunction with the spread of English, they have an advantage because they often do not have L1 equivalent words. However, you can see how wholly unprepared some of these learners are for performing their job in English.
Of course, I do not want to lump all educational institutions together. There are many very good programs which are producing excellent international employees. But the results appear to be hit or miss. The one area in Germany which seems to be particularly poor is the apprenticeship path. And this leads to a few observations about the content-need mismatch.
First, students and apprentices need English at a tactical level. If course books reflect the nature of educational teaching, the content is far too managerial and strategic. Even university graduates are entering the work force at a low level in the organization structure. Most English communication at this level is problem oriented. Companies have automatic processes/workflows and IT systems to handle routine tasks. If everything runs as it should, very little communication is needed. However, when the system breaks down, communication is needed to get back on track. For example, missed deliveries, higher costs, missing files, incomplete reports, etc. are at the heart of communication. New employees are not generally making business plans, discussing how to foster entrepreneurship in the company, devising a market campaign, or discussing who to promote and why. Even among high-flyers, the company will not hand this much responsibility to a new employee from day one. They typically have a separate development path in the company, but still deal with tactical matters at the beginning.
Second, far more English communication occurs internally or semi-internally than with customers. Evan Frendo is right on the money with this observation and I cannot stress this point enough. Most companies have strict communication filters between themselves and the customer. In many cases, all external communication must go through a very small team in the corporate communications, marketing or sales departments. There are a few exceptions to this, but they are all highly specialized. For example, the customer service department speaks with customers, as will the accounting department in case of wrong invoices. By and large however, entry-level employees are kept at arms length from the customer. More English communication occurs semi-internally. In this case, the employee needs to work with long-term suppliers or distributors. While the communication is often between two companies, they work together so often and so deeply that they could almost be regarded as colleagues. But by far, the most communication is internal - from department to department. It is generally the consequence of off-shoring and outsourcing which are also the main reasons why English is needed so badly at lower echelons in the company. A typical situation might be an email between the quality auditor in the home country and the factory in Romania. Another example is the software developer in India and the tester in Germany.
Third, communication is highly transactional, but... it is far more complex that "Could you please...?" I hear all the time from new participants that they want to improve "small talk". When I scratch beneath the surface however, I find that what they really want is the ability to build relationships with their international contacts to ease the transactional nature of business. They want to build trust with their global colleagues and suppliers. The second aspect of communicating in companies is that students enter a high-context culture. Office discourse is so difficult because of the body of shared knowledge, differing objectives and the hierarchical structure of decision-making and information flow. While the email may be a simple request for clarification on the surface, the context can quickly land the employee in hot water. I'm not sure this second aspect can be dealt with in education, but the teacher may want to keep it in mind.
So, what do I recommend?
1. Create a balanced English program - one-third general English, one-third general Business English, one-third field specific "ESP Lite". General English is important and under represented in the secondary schools (at least in Germany). From the ages of 12-16, English is taught resembling CLIL. Looking through the state school books, there is a chapter on Australia, the Big Apple, and reading about Obama's election. I can distinctly remember helping a friend's child try to learn the words, abolition, underground railroad, whip, and quilt. Can you imagine the topic? I don't want to exaggerate, nor do I wish to insult school teachers at all. I merely want to point out that some of the content prior to entering university is of marginal value in business socializing. Also, by the time they enter the workforce years later, they often lack the simplest vocabulary to discuss their weekend. I think ongoing general English learning would be very helpful. I also think that general Business English is helpful as a foundation up to the intermediate level. The problem with higher levels is the content of the course book. Course books are generally organized by field: one chapter on HR, one on projects, one on marketing, etc. This works up to B1-B2 but then they become overly specific in the fields. I think "ESP Lite" would be extremely helpful. This will help the students prepare for the next steps.
2. Take a step back from standardization. I understand that a certain level of standardization is needed in an institutional environment. However, I also observe that university level Business English teachers are an incredibly talented and professional group. When I present at BESIG conferences, this is the group which makes me the most nervous because of their knowledge, expertise and experience. I periodically lead standardized training with larger classes, but I always work under a very general set of can do statements. Within the statement is enough room for me to maneuver. I am able to conduct a modified needs analysis to refine the training. The more detailed the can do statement, the more we rely on the institution's needs analysis. In others words, the can do statement (and thus the assessment) had better be relevant or else we are wasting everyone's time. I'm just thinking out load, but do these expert university teachers really need a step-by-step lesson plan with page numbers and activity types?
3. Fortify the feedback loop from practice to content. I currently have the suspicion from my pre-experience learners that many need analysis are conducted in Oxford, Cambridge or in the halls of Pearson Education. Instead, I recommend shortening the feedback loop by drawing on a few resources. Most institutions have a career placement program to help students transition to careers. Where are graduates going? What are they doing? If a job is unfamiliar, read example job descriptions or visit the US Department of Labor Occupational Handbook for more. Another idea is to build a relationship with HR groups and/or in-company Business English trainers in the area to get feedback. For example, did you know that presentations are often much different in technical fields? First, PowerPoint slides need more text because they must be clear without a verbal presentation. The slide decks can travel far in the company without any meeting or spoken communication at all. Second, verbal presentations are typically less than 5 minutes long and the most common visual aid is an Excel spreadsheet. A presentation given in 'ELT format' is completely irrelevant.
In conclusion, I want to be very clear that my observations about the challenges in Business English teaching cannot possibly reflect every institution and every teacher. However, I have questions based on the number of participants I see entering the workforce without the ability to conduct even the most routine tasks in their field. Their brains are full of valuable knowledge and ideas, but they are locked behind the bars of language and skills. I hope that my thoughts add something to the pre-experienced vs. experience learner discussion and I look forward to hearing your feedback.
Despite being in-company, I actually receive many pre-experienced learners. My training is often aligned with the company's on-boarding program and the majority of new participants are in their first days or weeks at the company. It is also normal for me to get participants who do not use English in their jobs yet, but it is coming. In these cases, I feel I can relate somewhat to the challenges teachers face with pre-experienced learners.
I can draw several conclusions from what I see as these participants enter my training.
1. Learners who had an English course which was aligned with their field of study had great advantages over those who only had a general Business English class.
2. Motivation was much higher for learners who clearly understood that a) English would certainly be a integral part of their job and b) being able to conduct their job in English would be a competitive advantage for career progression. Those who lacked this awareness were surprised by the reality of a bilingual working environment and suffered lower self-confidence. They often had negative feelings toward improving their language.
3. If an institution taught English as a practical skill, their graduates were much better prepared. If the school treated English as a theoretical concept, the graduates were largely unable to adequately perform their tasks in L2. This mindset was often reflected by the teaching methods and content. Practical teaching focused heavily on production activities throughout the teaching, not just at assessment. Unsurprisingly, those who emerged from a more theoretical approach were often overwhelmed by the apparent complexity of the language.
Let me give you examples of things going wrong. You might be surprised at how often I am faced with entry-level accountants who cannot recognize the basic vocabulary from a balance sheet (almost zero new graduates). Likewise, I routinely meet fresh-faced employees in the mechanical engineering field who cannot understand even the simplest terms like bearing, dimensions, or bolt. I see this across fields with the exception of software. I suspect that is because software terms have been developed in conjunction with the spread of English, they have an advantage because they often do not have L1 equivalent words. However, you can see how wholly unprepared some of these learners are for performing their job in English.
Of course, I do not want to lump all educational institutions together. There are many very good programs which are producing excellent international employees. But the results appear to be hit or miss. The one area in Germany which seems to be particularly poor is the apprenticeship path. And this leads to a few observations about the content-need mismatch.
First, students and apprentices need English at a tactical level. If course books reflect the nature of educational teaching, the content is far too managerial and strategic. Even university graduates are entering the work force at a low level in the organization structure. Most English communication at this level is problem oriented. Companies have automatic processes/workflows and IT systems to handle routine tasks. If everything runs as it should, very little communication is needed. However, when the system breaks down, communication is needed to get back on track. For example, missed deliveries, higher costs, missing files, incomplete reports, etc. are at the heart of communication. New employees are not generally making business plans, discussing how to foster entrepreneurship in the company, devising a market campaign, or discussing who to promote and why. Even among high-flyers, the company will not hand this much responsibility to a new employee from day one. They typically have a separate development path in the company, but still deal with tactical matters at the beginning.
Second, far more English communication occurs internally or semi-internally than with customers. Evan Frendo is right on the money with this observation and I cannot stress this point enough. Most companies have strict communication filters between themselves and the customer. In many cases, all external communication must go through a very small team in the corporate communications, marketing or sales departments. There are a few exceptions to this, but they are all highly specialized. For example, the customer service department speaks with customers, as will the accounting department in case of wrong invoices. By and large however, entry-level employees are kept at arms length from the customer. More English communication occurs semi-internally. In this case, the employee needs to work with long-term suppliers or distributors. While the communication is often between two companies, they work together so often and so deeply that they could almost be regarded as colleagues. But by far, the most communication is internal - from department to department. It is generally the consequence of off-shoring and outsourcing which are also the main reasons why English is needed so badly at lower echelons in the company. A typical situation might be an email between the quality auditor in the home country and the factory in Romania. Another example is the software developer in India and the tester in Germany.
Third, communication is highly transactional, but... it is far more complex that "Could you please...?" I hear all the time from new participants that they want to improve "small talk". When I scratch beneath the surface however, I find that what they really want is the ability to build relationships with their international contacts to ease the transactional nature of business. They want to build trust with their global colleagues and suppliers. The second aspect of communicating in companies is that students enter a high-context culture. Office discourse is so difficult because of the body of shared knowledge, differing objectives and the hierarchical structure of decision-making and information flow. While the email may be a simple request for clarification on the surface, the context can quickly land the employee in hot water. I'm not sure this second aspect can be dealt with in education, but the teacher may want to keep it in mind.
So, what do I recommend?
1. Create a balanced English program - one-third general English, one-third general Business English, one-third field specific "ESP Lite". General English is important and under represented in the secondary schools (at least in Germany). From the ages of 12-16, English is taught resembling CLIL. Looking through the state school books, there is a chapter on Australia, the Big Apple, and reading about Obama's election. I can distinctly remember helping a friend's child try to learn the words, abolition, underground railroad, whip, and quilt. Can you imagine the topic? I don't want to exaggerate, nor do I wish to insult school teachers at all. I merely want to point out that some of the content prior to entering university is of marginal value in business socializing. Also, by the time they enter the workforce years later, they often lack the simplest vocabulary to discuss their weekend. I think ongoing general English learning would be very helpful. I also think that general Business English is helpful as a foundation up to the intermediate level. The problem with higher levels is the content of the course book. Course books are generally organized by field: one chapter on HR, one on projects, one on marketing, etc. This works up to B1-B2 but then they become overly specific in the fields. I think "ESP Lite" would be extremely helpful. This will help the students prepare for the next steps.
2. Take a step back from standardization. I understand that a certain level of standardization is needed in an institutional environment. However, I also observe that university level Business English teachers are an incredibly talented and professional group. When I present at BESIG conferences, this is the group which makes me the most nervous because of their knowledge, expertise and experience. I periodically lead standardized training with larger classes, but I always work under a very general set of can do statements. Within the statement is enough room for me to maneuver. I am able to conduct a modified needs analysis to refine the training. The more detailed the can do statement, the more we rely on the institution's needs analysis. In others words, the can do statement (and thus the assessment) had better be relevant or else we are wasting everyone's time. I'm just thinking out load, but do these expert university teachers really need a step-by-step lesson plan with page numbers and activity types?
3. Fortify the feedback loop from practice to content. I currently have the suspicion from my pre-experience learners that many need analysis are conducted in Oxford, Cambridge or in the halls of Pearson Education. Instead, I recommend shortening the feedback loop by drawing on a few resources. Most institutions have a career placement program to help students transition to careers. Where are graduates going? What are they doing? If a job is unfamiliar, read example job descriptions or visit the US Department of Labor Occupational Handbook for more. Another idea is to build a relationship with HR groups and/or in-company Business English trainers in the area to get feedback. For example, did you know that presentations are often much different in technical fields? First, PowerPoint slides need more text because they must be clear without a verbal presentation. The slide decks can travel far in the company without any meeting or spoken communication at all. Second, verbal presentations are typically less than 5 minutes long and the most common visual aid is an Excel spreadsheet. A presentation given in 'ELT format' is completely irrelevant.
In conclusion, I want to be very clear that my observations about the challenges in Business English teaching cannot possibly reflect every institution and every teacher. However, I have questions based on the number of participants I see entering the workforce without the ability to conduct even the most routine tasks in their field. Their brains are full of valuable knowledge and ideas, but they are locked behind the bars of language and skills. I hope that my thoughts add something to the pre-experienced vs. experience learner discussion and I look forward to hearing your feedback.
Friday, June 6, 2014
Three steps for improving ESP training
I've always been proud of my customer satisfaction figures. Naturally, when I conduct my appraisals of Kirkpatrick's 4 Levels, I continue to see a slight decrease in results from response to results. But, what has recently impressed me was how the whole satisfaction curve is starting to shift higher. Greater engagement, faster application, higher results across the board. On the emotional side, it is great to feel the customer mindset change from, "It's great training," to "It's absolutely vital training." On the business side, referrals are up and sustainable success appears within reach. It's inappropriate to boast, but I am genuinely proud that changes I made in training style and course design are starting to make a difference. I'd like to describe a few of those changes.
Anyone who has read this blog or met me will know how passionate I am about relevance in training and using performance-based training methods. In practice, this often means using framework materials. Taken to the next step, it means using only pens, paper, whiteboards and the internet. The trouble with approaching training with such limited resources is that you are restricted to the collective memory of the learning team (me + the participants) and what we can immediately resource using the internet. This poses a distinct challenge for handling ESP situations in which I am not an expert. Google only handles ESP at a general level, and the participants doubt the ability of the trainer to understand the complexity of the topic. So here are the simplified steps to ESP.
Step 1 - Get the critical mass of knowledge
Yes, that is right... research. I know you have heard this before, but it actually takes less effort than you realize. Here are few ideas for researching an ESP topic.
1. The standard - have them present it to you in class. No articles, no handouts, just a whiteboard and a marker. "Explain this to me." Check Evan Frendo's blog for an idea on how to do this. Or simply draw this on the board.
Step 2 - Demonstrate your knowledge constantly
Okay, so you have some research and knowledge. You know some key words, a few acronyms and you have a general idea of how theory works. Now it's time for the next step, use your knowledge.
Situation: I need to teach my participants in the software department the difference in meaning between will, going to and the present continuous. For practice, I can:
a) bring in an illegal photocopy from Murphy with sentences like, "Mary ___________ (attend) the party on Friday."
b) bring in an illegal photocopy of a technical English coursebook with sentences like, "Hans ________ (investigate) the bearing failure next week."
c) write "I _________ (finish) installing the new compiler version." on the whiteboard.
d) create a two part controlled practice exercise in which participant A creates sentences, then a gap fill for participant B.
Which should I use?
You probably guessed it right, option C or D. The materials-light approach allows us to continuously create our own example sentences and relevant exercises. We picked up the key words from our text mining. We have a pretty clear idea of functions (i.e. grammar) from our needs analysis, diagnostic test and 'explain it to me' activity. The goal here is three-fold. We need to teach them the material so they can notice it, test it and use it. We need to provide them with clearly relevant language input. And finally, we need to demonstrate that we understand their discourse community for the next step.
Step 3 - Keep pushing them into more detail
In the past I stopped at step 2. That generated good results, but there was a limit. It wasn't enough. Then I accidentally learned that framework materials were the key. One of my favorite frameworks was the fish bone diagram which is used to analyze the possible root causes of a problem. In general, the head of the 'fish' is the resulting problem and then then you add possible causes and contributing factors (a term from text mining) into the diagram. I typically used this framework for could have, might have, etc. But, then I figured out that as we drove the diagram deeper, the participants lost the vocabulary. Even more troubling, it wasn't vocabulary which would appear in text mining.
This diagram led to all kind of activities...
1. Vocabulary, of course... you have internet right? Don't forget to check the professional association for the right term.
2. Functions... you can take the results and build them into whatever is relevant.
3. Skills... most problems are larger than one person and emails for request work perfectly here, meetings, too.
4. Materials development... check off the words they know from your key word list and make materials within their zone of proximal development.
So then I tried other types of diagrams, like mind maps. With a financial/tax/legal English client, we now have a working mind map over 10 levels deep as part of a PBL task. Just keep pushing them for more detail. As my Germans say, "Ach... die Wörter fehlen." (Oh... the words are missing.) But this is exactly my point. In their discourse community everything general is already understood. We need to get to the detailed tit-for-tat of their community. Without research and without demonstrating understanding, step 3 will never happen.
But pushing them into more detail is the difference between great training and training they can't work without.
Anyone who has read this blog or met me will know how passionate I am about relevance in training and using performance-based training methods. In practice, this often means using framework materials. Taken to the next step, it means using only pens, paper, whiteboards and the internet. The trouble with approaching training with such limited resources is that you are restricted to the collective memory of the learning team (me + the participants) and what we can immediately resource using the internet. This poses a distinct challenge for handling ESP situations in which I am not an expert. Google only handles ESP at a general level, and the participants doubt the ability of the trainer to understand the complexity of the topic. So here are the simplified steps to ESP.
Step 1 - Get the critical mass of knowledge
Yes, that is right... research. I know you have heard this before, but it actually takes less effort than you realize. Here are few ideas for researching an ESP topic.
1. The standard - have them present it to you in class. No articles, no handouts, just a whiteboard and a marker. "Explain this to me." Check Evan Frendo's blog for an idea on how to do this. Or simply draw this on the board.
2. Have sticky fingers - someone brings up a concept or process in class, ask them to send you a diagram of it. Visit them at their desk... collect artifacts posted around their cubical/office. Can't take copies or get the information? Contact your training coordinator to sign a non-disclosure agreement. I've never had a client refuse... they want this level of relevance. If a participant talks about a supplier/customer in class, bring it up on the internet and bookmark it.
3. Text mining - Your chances of piercing the discourse community without text mining and corpus analysis are close to zero. If you are relying on the ESL publishing industry for this, all I can say is good luck. My dual language dictionary for engineering is twice as thick as my Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. There isn't the time here to go into corpus analysis and finding key words or clusters, but it doesn't take that long. I recently encountered the need for vocabulary around air-cooled systems. It took me less than an hour to find 200 key words from 'fins' to 'obstruct'.
Where can you get texts for mining? Start general... wikipedia. Then move to specifics by visiting suppliers/providers. Copy and paste product descriptions into a concordancer for key terms (usually nouns) and scan the text for verbs. But remember, the goal here isn't to immediately create materials... that step will come.
4. Use professional associations - Nearly every specialty field has a professional association attached to it. Want finance? Go to IFRS. Want software service? Go to ITIL. Want project management? Go to PMI or search PRINCE2. Read a bit.
Remember, you don't need to be an expert, just have enough knowledge for the next step.
Step 2 - Demonstrate your knowledge constantly
Okay, so you have some research and knowledge. You know some key words, a few acronyms and you have a general idea of how theory works. Now it's time for the next step, use your knowledge.
Situation: I need to teach my participants in the software department the difference in meaning between will, going to and the present continuous. For practice, I can:
a) bring in an illegal photocopy from Murphy with sentences like, "Mary ___________ (attend) the party on Friday."
b) bring in an illegal photocopy of a technical English coursebook with sentences like, "Hans ________ (investigate) the bearing failure next week."
c) write "I _________ (finish) installing the new compiler version." on the whiteboard.
d) create a two part controlled practice exercise in which participant A creates sentences, then a gap fill for participant B.
Which should I use?
You probably guessed it right, option C or D. The materials-light approach allows us to continuously create our own example sentences and relevant exercises. We picked up the key words from our text mining. We have a pretty clear idea of functions (i.e. grammar) from our needs analysis, diagnostic test and 'explain it to me' activity. The goal here is three-fold. We need to teach them the material so they can notice it, test it and use it. We need to provide them with clearly relevant language input. And finally, we need to demonstrate that we understand their discourse community for the next step.
Step 3 - Keep pushing them into more detail
In the past I stopped at step 2. That generated good results, but there was a limit. It wasn't enough. Then I accidentally learned that framework materials were the key. One of my favorite frameworks was the fish bone diagram which is used to analyze the possible root causes of a problem. In general, the head of the 'fish' is the resulting problem and then then you add possible causes and contributing factors (a term from text mining) into the diagram. I typically used this framework for could have, might have, etc. But, then I figured out that as we drove the diagram deeper, the participants lost the vocabulary. Even more troubling, it wasn't vocabulary which would appear in text mining.
This diagram led to all kind of activities...
1. Vocabulary, of course... you have internet right? Don't forget to check the professional association for the right term.
2. Functions... you can take the results and build them into whatever is relevant.
3. Skills... most problems are larger than one person and emails for request work perfectly here, meetings, too.
4. Materials development... check off the words they know from your key word list and make materials within their zone of proximal development.
So then I tried other types of diagrams, like mind maps. With a financial/tax/legal English client, we now have a working mind map over 10 levels deep as part of a PBL task. Just keep pushing them for more detail. As my Germans say, "Ach... die Wörter fehlen." (Oh... the words are missing.) But this is exactly my point. In their discourse community everything general is already understood. We need to get to the detailed tit-for-tat of their community. Without research and without demonstrating understanding, step 3 will never happen.
But pushing them into more detail is the difference between great training and training they can't work without.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)