Training Approaches and a Cornucopia of Learning Activities

Chapter highlights:

Four major types of training Twenty-five learning activities Templates for creating active training A simple formula for effective training: teach-prompt-release Online resources for learning activities.

 

This chapter has two main themes. The first deals with the various ways we train in the workplace. We present four types of training that cover most approaches employed in formal workplace learning settings, describing each of them for you with examples and suggesting how you might use them alone or in combination. This will broaden your vision of how to approach your training missions and assist you to decide consciously what you should do and why you should do it.

The second part of the chapter focuses on a wide variety of activity templates you can use to spice up learning, integrate cognitive strategies in a natural way, and maximize learner involvement. Keep in mind that the more the learners do— especially if it is meaningful to them—the more the learners learn. Active learners, engaged in meaningful and stimulating activities that are clearly tied to desired performance objectives, learn the best and retain the longest.

Four Major Types of Training

We’ve often heard the expression, “different strokes for different folks.” In a broad sense, the four major types of training we describe here are for different types of learners. Let us caution you right away. The same learner may be an excellent candidate for all the types of training, but at different stages of her or his learning with respect to a specific skill or knowledge area. We’ll examine each of the types and determine how you can use them appropriately.

The four types of training are receptive, directive, guided discovery, and exploratory. Various learning researchers and professionals use other classification systems and names. We find these four, which Ruth Clark, in her book on Building Expertise (2008) employs, to be convenient and useful.¹

Receptive Training

This type of training falls into the “telling” mode. Essentially, the view of the learner is that of a vessel into which good, wholesome, nutritional information is poured. The danger in using this type of training lies in the expectation that learners will be able to convert what they hear and see into usable skills and knowledge.

The receptive mode does, however, have some limited value. Basically, it makes learners “aware.” Well done and presented in an interesting manner, it can demonstrate value to the learners and build their motivation to accept, learn, support, and desire to discover more. For highly knowledgeable learners, it may be sufficient for them to make connections with and adapt prior knowledge to new circumstances. The training content is frequently transmitted in one direction. Learners have little or no control, except to tune out, turn off, or daydream.

Sadly, much of what is called training in the workplace is of a receptive nature. Here is a true case we experienced in a progressive, worldrenowned hightech company:

A team of highly qualified software engineers (PhDs) had just completed a major overhaul of an operating system (O/S). They were tasked with going out to train the worldwide group of engineers who would support and troubleshoot the new, improved O/S. Their approach to the training was to bring the support/troubleshooting engineers together for five days; hand them each a manual (approximately 1,200 pages); and tell them about the new and upgraded O/S, how it was developed, how it differed from its forerunner, what their challenges had been, how they had overcome them, what they had had to leave out, and so forth. When we asked if they were going to have participants engage in troubleshooting practice, they were taken aback. They hadn’t planned on it.

 

Given their target audience of system troubleshooters, is that how you would have gone about the training? The receptive type of training can have a limited role in introducing something new, adding additional nuances to content that is already well known to the learners, presenting fascinating anecdotes, and building awareness and enthusiasm, but it soon wears thin with any audience. Our bottomline advice with respect to receptivetype learning is to use it sparingly. Always seek an alternative, except in the case of short, consciousnessraising sessions.

Here is a note on awareness, consciousnessraising, or socalled training sessions. Our bias, based on experience and what research indicates works (or does not work) to build longterm learning and retention, is to avoid these. Awareness or consciousness is an initial stage in the learning process. Unless consequences are dramatic (knowing that there is a 10foot drop ahead), awareness does little to change behavior. Are smokers aware of the dangers of smoking? Does that strongly influence their smoking choices? Are we aware of world hunger? If so, what behaviors have we altered? Awareness, without a specific behavior change, generally goes nowhere. Our concern is that having conducted an awareness session, an organization may conclude that it has achieved something of value. Little evidence supports the idea that being aware that a crossroad is a dangerous spot for accidents reduces risky behaviors and accident rates. Awareness of safety hazards is insufficient to eliminate safety violations. These sessions generally fall within the category of receptive training and provide little to no value other than creating an illusory sense of having done something worthwhile.²

Directive Training

This approach to training is akin to the U.S. Army infantry slogan: “Follow me.” As its name suggests, this method directs. In this approach, you analyze the knowledge and skills required to lead learners from where they are to where you want them to be. You create clear performance objectives and matching test items (more on this in chapter 9). Then you organize and sequence learning blocks or units that direct the learners from their starting positions to defined intermediate and final finishing lines. There’s little learner control, but, unlike in the receptive type of training, learners are actively and meaningfully engaged as they progress along predetermined paths.

The directive approach is particularly well suited for learners who have little experience with the learning content, require support to build competence and confidence, and will later perform on the job in ways that are identical or similar to what they learn in the training. Here is a list of tasks to be mastered by a group of learners. The learners are relative novices with respect to the implied content.

Put a checkmark in the boxes before those tasks you feel qualify for the directive approach to training.

1. Start up a piece of new equipment.

2. Troubleshoot a piece of complex equipment.

3. Perform an accounting calculation.

4. Audit a small business.

5. Determine if a customer meets predetermined criteria for a loan.

6. Based on customer characteristics, suggest a type of account.

7. Counter a variety of customer objections.

8. Create a basic webpage in HTML.

 

Before we provide our responses, one can make arguments for and against directive training for each of those tasks, depending on the nature of the learners and the depth of the learning. Assuming the learners are relative novices, we chose tasks 1, 3, 5, 6, and 8 as possible candidates for a directive approach, especially for initial learning. Our rationale: Narrow range of options in performing the task; close to onthejob requirements with little variation; and relatively straightforward content. We decided that tasks 2 and 4 require broader vision and greater depth than a directive type of training might provide (except for some initial steps, perhaps). For task 7, we felt that answers would be too mechanical for dealing with the spectrum of possible customer objections. We believe that other options are available. Let’s turn to these.

Guided Discovery

In this type of training, control is shared between the learner and the trainer or training program. Guided discovery is generally case based. Learners immediately plunge into cases, scenarios, or problems. They may require some initial input, but mostly they take the initiative. The learners may reach out to a variety of information sources or support tools, either physically material or electronic, to deal with the situation. The learners themselves have to discover what to do and when to do it. They seek and identify appropriate information and tools to proceed. The instructor or instructional program offers assistance in the forms of cues, prompts, suggestions, and corrective feedback along the way or redirection, consulting services, and debriefings.

The amount of guidance or support and its nature depend on the skill and knowledge level of the learners. For less knowledgeable, less independent, or less confident learners, the training may include a great deal of guidance. The more capable and knowledgeable (or skilled) the learner is, the more independently he or she can function. In that case, the role of the trainer or training is to confirm, debrief, add editorial nuances, proffer variations, and, of course, reward. When learners achieve high degrees of competence and confidence, they are ready for the next type of training.

Exploratory Learning

Here we build and organize a rich learning and informational environment for the learners and then truly get out of the way. The learners are in control. They know what is required and set out to search for whatever exists to resolve the issue and help them progress to the next level. Usually, only general goals are set (often by the learners). Large databases of information integrated into a knowledge management system provide an ideal environment for exploratory learning. At a less sophisticated level, a workshop with all the tools, materials, and manuals does the same thing. Learning is usually individualized. The trainer can monitor and provide feedback or support and debrief as required. In exploratory learning, the trainer is essentially a resource for the learners.

With what the Internet offers today, independent, wellinformed learners can generally engage in remarkable exploratory learning. As an example, we encourage you to select something you would like to learn (for example, how to play cricket, soapstone carving, or how to make a soufflé) and explore the web. Note how quickly you discover learning resources that actually help you acquire new skills and knowledge. We selected these topics at random and were overwhelmed with the rich resources available, from stepbystep instructions, videos, and coaching tips to people all over the world ready to help out and chat with you. This is both extraordinary and exciting for trainers who access these resources to create a variety of training session types.³

Pulling the Four Types of Training Together

There is a natural progression among the four types of training with respect to learner control and sophistication. Table 81 summarizes some key points about the training approaches.

To conclude the discussion of these types of training, here are some sum mary points:

 

• All of the types are different ways of approaching training.
• All of the types have a place in training, but the receptive approach is the most frequently used method—and it should be the least often employed. Essentially, it’s just telling, and telling ain’t training.
• Directive learning provides the trainer and the organization with the greatest control. The side effect is decreased learner initiative and more narrow, nearer transferoflearning potential.
• Guided discovery is an excellent, balanced training approach to encouraging learner initiative under safe conditions. Learning results are usually stronger and more fluid (for example, transfer to a broader range of situations). Learning results are less predictable, and learning time may increase.
• Exploratory learning is powerful for sophisticated, capable learners. It allows for greater individualization and personalization of learning. However, it requires sufficient resources, decreases trainer control, and is unpredictable in terms of specific outcomes.

Our recommendation is to use the receptive type very seldom. Focus on the other three. Mix and match your approaches to fit the needs of both the learners and learning. Above all, keep the training active.

In support of that last note, the next section of this chapter presents a plethora of traininglearning activities that can be built into all courses, modules, or instructional units and lessons. They are particularly suited to replacing receptive training, but they can be integrated into all four approaches.

25 Training Activities You Can Use

This part of the chapter requires a little stage setting. So far we have explored how learners process information to learn, what to consider when training adults, how to structure training sessions (the fivestep model), the mental skills and cognitive strategies required for effective and efficient learning, and four major types of training. All of that information helps us better understand our learners and guides us in planning and organizing our training, whether live and facetoface or not, but we are still lacking concrete training activities that can be immediately applied—today—to make the content of this book spring to life. We believe that you can use some downtoearth, practical activities that engage learners and dramatically transform telling into training.

What follows in alphabetical order are 25 training activities that you can use in a variety of learning contexts with a nearly limitless menu of content. We provide descriptions and examples. Your job is to supply the imagination. After we describe each activity and exemplify its application, there is a block of space for you to suggest some way you or a colleague might use the activity. At the end of the chapter you’ll find a summary table (table 82) indicating the training circumstances for which each activity is particularly well suited.

Table 8-1. Four Approaches to Training

 

Type of Training	Main Uses	Amount of Learner Control	Assumed Learner Characteristics	Dangers
Receptive	• Build awareness • Inform • Motivate	• Practically none, except forquestions and answers if permitted • Learner can choose to tunein or out	• Learner is self-motivated • If content is new, complex, or abstract, assumeslearner has sufficient prior knowledge • Telling is enough for transmitted information to stick	• With no control, learnersfeel like targets • If not self-motivated or if content is not perceived as important, learners tune out • Little sticks to the learner’s brain Belief that telling is training
Directive	• Provide a strong, rational path and sufficient feedback for effective initial learning • Quickly build basicrequired skills andknowledge Create initial competenceand confidence • Predict learning outcomes	• Little; learning path is prescribed, although alternative paths based on learner progress may be offered	Learner is not necessarily self-motivated Little prior knowledge • Perhaps has weaknesses in metacognitive skills • Lack of initiative or confidence to assume control • Learners know they will apply learned skills and knowledge in ways that are similar to training	• May turn off more independent learners • May imply one way (ora narrow range) of doing things Does not encourage exploration or creativity • Limits more advanced learners
Guided discovery	• Encourage learner initiative in a safe learning environment • Case-based to involve learner in analysis and problem solving of increasingly realistic issues • Build wider transfer of learned skills and knowledge Build independence in learning while providing a safety net • Next steps after directive training	• Moderate to relatively high,depending on degree of guidance	• Confidence to engage in discovery • Some prior knowledge in the content • Good metacognitive skills • Self-motivated to learn, but appreciates guidance and feedback	• For the less confident learner, possible stress or confusion • For the independent learner, still too much outside control—too limiting • Learner can require moretime to learn than from receptive or directive training • Outcomes are less predictable than with directive training
Exploratory	• Create an environment for self-initiated learning • Provide maximum free domfor learner to take control of learning • Respond to variety of learning needs that are highly individualized	• The learning goal, there sources, and the paths to explore are at a maximum	• Highly self-motivated to learn • Strong prior knowledge in content and/or self-initiated learning • Well-developed metacognitive skills • Knows what is needed and knows how to find it	• Learner can get lost • Learner may waste time • Not suited to learnerslacking the appropriate characteristics • Learner may not learn whatis necessary or may draw in appropriate conclusions • Low control and predictability of results

Better Me

This simple activity works well for onthejob learning. A job tutor or peer tutor has explained how to perform a task or apply a procedure (for example, light and adjust a welding torch flame, access a file in a customer database, or fill in a form based on a work order). After initial guided practice, the tutor offers a challenge: Better me! This means given the same information or task, both novice and tutor race to complete the procedural task. The race can be between tutor and novice (with some form of handicap for the tutor) against the clock or some other standard (for example, accuracy or completeness). By adding a challenge, the learning takes on a gaming dimension and builds motivation. Novices can even compete against their own previous records.

Example: On the job, José was learning about hazardous materials and how to handle them. Shirley showed José how to use the Handbook of Hazardous Goods. After explaining how to find information in the handbook and having José practice identifying two items with it, she set the challenge: “Here are five materials. When I say ‘Go,’ you find the right page that tells you what to do with them. I want all five pages perfect. I’ll do it, too, with my handbook. Let’s see if I can do it in half your time. You win if I can’t do it. Ready? Go.”

 

Concentration

Based on the classic game of “Concentration,” a term or picture is placed on one card and its definition or name on another. A deck generally consists of 15 to 25 card pairs. Cards are shuffled and distributed face down in columns and rows. Players, in pairs, take turns turning over two cards hunting for pairs. If a matching pair (term definition or picture name) is turned face up, the player collects the pair and plays again. If not a pair, the turn is passed to the next player. The game ends when no more cards remain on the table. The winner is the player with the most cards. This is a great peer learning activity.

Example: Fred and Alphonse are taking a meteorology course for their navigation qualifications as part of their job. They have to learn all the different cloud formations (12) and be able to name them accurately. They’ve been given two decks of cards, one with 24 pictures of clouds, and the other 24 containing cloud formation names. Using the rules of “Concentration” they may have learned as children, they are now playing the “Bring in the Clouds” game, memorizing the shape of clouds and their card positions and the cloud names. Because all the cards have numbers, they can check a master sheet to verify if each pair they pick up is correct. They lose points for making errors.

 

Confrontation

This is a roleplay activity that is conducted in rounds. The group is divided into teams of three. Players each receive a card that describes a confrontational situation and are assigned roles (for example, sales consultant, client, and observer). Two players are in a confrontational situation, and the third acts as an observer. Adversary players choose one of five positions they are given to resolve the issue. They compare their choices and then attempt to come to an agreement before time runs out. The sales consultant, for example, works with the customer to achieve common ground. After each timed round, the observer provides feedback. Roles rotate each round. At the end of several rounds, the instructor draws from the group the lessons learned.

Example: The class of supervisors has been learning about mediating disputes in work groups. Now the trainer, Elisa, introduces the participants to the Confrontation activity so that they can put the theory they have been discussing into practice. She creates six teams of three participants each. She distributes a first set of Confrontation cards to the teams. All teams have the same scenario: An experienced worker and a relative newcomer are in a confrontation. The experienced worker wants the “newbie” to keep her fingers off his manuals and reference guides. She complains that he’s hoarding them so that she can’t do her job properly. Each chooses from five possible choices how he or she wishes the issue to be resolved. They compare their selections. The supervisor has to mediate. An observer with an observation checklist watches and notes what the supervisor does to bring about agreement. There are six scenarios. Each lasts five minutes and is followed by a structured debriefing. Roles rotate.

 

Critical List

Following instruction on a large amount of content, the instructor divides the group into four or five teams and asks each team to create a list of the five most important points that have been covered. After five to seven minutes, the instructor asks each team to report its list. As these are announced, the instructor creates a common list on a flipchart. After merging redundancies, the common list should contain 10 to 15 items. The instructor asks each team to select the “most important” item. He or she also explains that teams will receive one point for their choice plus one point for each other team that selects the same item. If there is a tie, all tied items become number one. The instructor has teams play two more rounds to identify the next most important items. The scores are based on how many teams make the same choices they do. This encourages consensus thinking. After three rounds, scores are totaled. The instructor debriefs the activity highlighting the top choices and drawing from other key points on the common list.

Example: In a class on customer service, bus driver participants have spent three hours on facts, problems, opportunities, policies, and other content matters that have an impact on ridership, public support, and job security. These issues also affect image and other critical factors. Now the trainer asks participants to create a list of actions that bus drivers can take to improve customer service. After breaking into five teams, each team generates five actions. These are brought together in a common list of 10 to 12. Through consensus scoring and three rounds of activity, participants select three top items and commit to implementing them at the start of the next shift.

 

Crypto Cluster

The instructor presents a puzzle to the class with encrypted items that are related to a specific theme (for example, benefits of a particular car model, features of automotive technology, and common misconceptions about specific technologies). The items are encrypted using a simple letter substitution system: Some other letter of the alphabet consistently replaces each letter in the item (for example, every “e” in the item may be replaced with a “j” and every “t” may be replaced with an “n”). The challenge for the participants is to decipher the items in the list by using a combination of general cryptographic principles and knowledge of the subjectmatter area. This activity can be performed individually or in teams.

Example: The plant is readying itself for installation of new automated equipment. All affected plant personnel have been taking an online set of courses on the new generation of machinery and technology. To help learners attend closely to the new features, benefits, and misconceptions related to the $200 million revamping, the training designers have created a computer-based industrial espionage scenario with encoded information. The learner has to decipher, memorize, and get back to company headquarters after destroying the encoded document. By doing this and answering company questions, the learner saves the company and defeats the competition.

 

Domino Effect

This game consists of a stack of 20 to 30 dominotype cards. The instructor creates cards that have a term on one end and the definition for another term on the other end. The game is played using rules for “Dominos,” except that a player must lay a term against its definition or vice versa.

Example: The auto plant workers have been going through a series of training sessions aimed at upgrading their technical knowledge and skills in electronics, pneumatics, hydraulics, and robotics. What makes the learning difficult is all the new vocabulary. Fortunately, the training group has created some attractive and fun domino games for each of these areas. One half of the card has a term, the other a definition. Playing in teams and pairs, the workers are finding it easier to learn the large number of novel terms and their meanings. And, hey, it’s also fun! Incidentally, the training team has just released a computer-based version with which you can play against the computer or another person.

 

Exam Cram

The instructor divides the class into study groups or pairs and distributes a test to each team. The instructor tells participants that they will be tested on the content. Participants have 20 minutes to cram for the exam, using any resources they have available. The instructor then administers the test or not, his or her choice since the purpose is to get participants to review the content.

Example: The class of sales representatives has spent most of the morning being updated on the new auto technologies for the models they will be selling. Chassis, drive train, electronics, hydraulics, braking, suspension, aerodynamics…. There has been a lot to learn and remember. There’s also the stress of the final test. The trainer now surprises everyone. She hands out the 10-question exam and announces that the class can divide up into the teams they had formed earlier and take 30 minutes to cram for the exam using any materials and methods they choose. At the end of 30 minutes, she will remove all training materials, hand out the same exam, and give them 20 minutes to complete it individually. Their scores will be recorded.

 

Facts-in-Five

Participants receive a card with a fivebyfive matrix that has different categories along the columns and different letters of the alphabet along the rows. Players fill each cell of the matrix with a key word beginning with the specified letter that fits the appropriate category. Players’ words score extra points for originality. The activity is typically used with a specific content area (for example, computer technology, sales terminology) that limits the types of key words that may be used.

Example: Store management trainees have been learning a great deal about the products the retail hardware chain sells. It’s been an amazing eye-opener for many of these fresh-from-college recruits. More than half the names of the products have been new to most trainees. Now the trainer divides the class into four teams and distributes a Facts-in-Five matrix. Along the vertical axis are five letters. Along the top horizontal axis are the names of five store departments. Trainees have five minutes to complete the matrix, placing a product name starting with the assigned row letter under the store department column. Trainees get one point for a product that more than one other person names, two points if only one other names it, five points for every unique product named, and 10 points if no one else is able to put any product in that cell. Teams circulate the cards clockwise after each round of activity. There is a prize for each of the top three overall scores. There are also some self-challenge matrixes in their self-study materials.

 

Great Debate

The instructor selects from a general topic area (for example, automotive technology or car models) and subtopics that are rich with debatable issues (for example, the efficacy of frontwheel drive and price as the key selling factor). Depending on the size of the class, she or he divides participants into six or eight teams. If there are six teams, the instructor distributes three issues as follows: Three teams each receive one of the issues with a “plus” sign; three teams each receive one of the issues with a “minus” sign. The “plus” teams each take 10 minutes to prepare two minutes of debating arguments on the positive side of the issue (for example, why frontwheel drive is not only desirable, but the best way to go). The “minus” teams prepare two minutes of arguments on the negative side of the issue during the 10minute preparation period. The instructor randomly selects an issue and a plus or minus to determine which team starts. After two minutes of argument, the opposing team gets to argue its points. Each team receives an additional minute for rebuttals. The instructor continues selecting topics until all have been debated and then debriefs the group on how to use the arguments raised to support a sale.

Example: A group of 12 executive-level senior managers have been on a long-weekend retreat discussing numerous issues. This is the afternoon of the third day. The facilitator introduces the Great Debate activity. Six teams are formed randomly. Each team randomly draws a hot topic it has been discussing with either a plus or minus on it. The topics are flexible standards of business ethics in international dealings, the public right to know about corporate interests, and business unit competition. Each team prepares either pro or con arguments, as indicated, for its assigned topic and then formally debates these. The facilitator, the CEO, and the president observe and assign points. The facilitator debriefs the activity, occasionally soliciting comments from the CEO and the president. The facilitator helps the group draw conclusions on key hot issues.

 

Hit-or-Myth

Participants receive a list of 10 topicrelated statements that are either true (hit) or false (myth). After participants decide individually if each one is true or false, the instructor reviews each statement and discusses it. Statements generally include commonly accepted myths that are false. Participants receive one point for a correct answer plus a onepoint bonus for each participant that got it wrong. This scoring system rewards participants who respond correctly to tougher statements.

Example: Because of negative ratings on the ferry corporation’s review by government inspectors, all personnel aboard ferries have been ordered to go through intensive training on policies, procedures, and actions for emergency situations. The trainer has created a 20-item hit-or-myth challenge and has distributed it to the participants at the start of the training session. Each participant makes his or her hit/myth (true/false) choices. The trainer records, through a show of hands, the choices of the participants. Then he begins the session using the 20 items as a structuring device. At the end of the session, participants redo the challenge to see if they have “learned.” The trainer again reviews the items rapidly and debriefs.

 

Jeopardy

Just as in the television game, learners are presented with answers, solutions, or even output (both good and bad), and they have to come up with the appropriate questions. This activity can be timed, can have increasing levels of difficulty, or can be scored.

Example: For their peer-assisted learning (PAL) program, Bytecom has created a set of “Jeopardy”-type questions (answers, actually) to use on the job with newly hired technicians. Peer-tutors receive a sheet in their PAL kits that contains these items. The new-hire technician, who has received training and is now going through on-the-job coaching from his PAL peer-tutor, has to make up a question to match the output or breakdown that the PAL peer-tutor selects (for example, PAL peer-tutor: “The keyboard makes a noticeable clicking sound when you type, but there’s no output.” New hire question: “What are ‘sticky keys?’”). The peer-tutor uses this activity as a wrap-up after going through a series of related work activities or intermittently as appropriate.

 

Jigsaw

The instructor divides the class into teams and assigns team leaders. He or she provides teams with documentation, each dealing with one part of a topic, and asks the teams to prepare presentations about their specific parts. Each team decides on the presentation style and the means for making its assigned content interesting to the group. Team leaders chain the brief presentations into a complete “lecture.” The instructor administers a brief quiz at the end and debriefs the group.

Example: The medical workers are at a weekend training session as part of their regular recertification requirements. Recently, the laws affecting their work have undergone a large number of changes. Those changes mostly affect disclosure of patient information, prescription of certain medications and treatments, malpractice, and financial records. Because of the active nature of this group and to create greater involvement, the instructor has broken the participants into four teams. He has handed each team a variety of prepared materials on one of the four topics and assigned them the task of preparing 20-minute presentations to be given to the entire group. Teams have 90 minutes to prepare their individual parts for “Legal Changes Affecting Your Practice.” The participants are warned there they will be tested on all parts at the end. Using notes, newspaper articles, prepared overhead transparencies, and their specific materials, each team crafts its 20-minute presentation. Teams deliver their information to the group. The instructor adds editorial comments to each presentation and hands out a test on all the parts to verify learning, provide feedback and additional details, and clear up any misconceptions.

 

Lecture Team Quiz

The instructor divides the class into four teams and announces that she or he will lecture for 10 minutes on a content area. After 10 minutes, each team must create one question based on the content and be prepared to answer a question on the same content. Teams have five minutes to create a question and prepare potential responses. Team One poses its question to Team Two. Members of Team Two who believe they have the answer raise their hands. Team One’s team leader picks a respondent. If the answer is correct, Team Two gains five points. If not, Team Three members consult and provide a team answer. If correct, they receive two points. If incorrect, no points are awarded. Team Two then questions Team One. Once the round is complete, the instructor continues with the lecture and team quizzes through two more rounds. Teams total their scores to determine how well they have retained the lecture information.

Example: Company policy requires that maintenance personnel (those who maintain the track) must attend monthly training sessions. This session is on railway safety. Attention spans can be short, but consequences for unsafe practices can be deadly. The trainer decides to break his session into five-minute clips of information with illustrations and examples. He divides the group into four teams. Each team listens for five minutes, creates one related question, and then poses the question to the team on its right. If a member of that team knows the answer, he or she raises a hand. The questioning team’s leader selects the respondent and verifies the answer. If the answer is wrong, the next team to the right is queried. After each five-minute training clip, another team makes up the question. During this question prep time, the other teams share what they learned among their own participants and prepare for the question. Scores are recorded and the top team is rewarded.

 

Letter Game

The group is divided into four or five teams. Each team receives an envelope with a problem to solve written on it. Each team also receives one fewer index card than there are envelopes. Each team creates a secret team logo or symbol and draws it on each index card. Teams have two to three minutes to read the problem, decide on a solution, write it on one of the index cards, and slip the card into the envelope. Envelopes are passed clockwise to the neighboring team. Once again, the team reads the new problem, creates a solution, and slips it into the envelope. This procedure is repeated until each team receives an envelope but has no more index cards (for example, if there are five teams, each team completes four solution index cards. On the fifth round, there are no more cards). The teams then individually open the envelopes, read and evaluate the solutions, and rankorder them. If there are four solutions, the topranked one gets four points, the second gets three, the third gets two, and the fourthranked solution gets one. Each team reads its problem and the topranked solution and gives an explanation for its choice. Finally, all solution cards are collected and distributed to the teams by logo or symbol. Teams add up their points to determine how well they solved the problems.

Example: A group of systems engineers are in a training session focused on troubleshooting. The instructor hands out an envelope containing four index cards to each of the five teams. Each team creates a team symbol, removes the cards, and draws the symbol on each card. Team A chooses the symbol for an atom, B selects the dollar sign, C writes 777, D draws a tulip on each card, and Team E writes the Greek letter chi on its index cards. Team A passes its empty envelope to Team B, B to C, C to D, D to E, and E passes its envelope to Team A. Each team reads the system problem case written on the front of the envelope, comes up with its solution, writes it on one of its cards, and slips it into the envelope. Teams shift envelopes to their right and repeat the sequence: read, analyze, solve the case on the envelope, write the answer on an index card, and slip it into the envelope. (No peeking at the other cards inside.) This continues until teams receive their original envelope. They pull out the troubleshooting solutions, evaluate them, rank order them from best = 4 points to least worthy = 1 point, and write the rank on the back of the card. Each team reviews its case for the group and provides a rationale for its best solution selection. At the end, the cards are tossed in a pile. Each team finds its cards by symbol and totals its score.

 

Listening Teams

The instructor divides the group into four or five teams and makes each team responsible for listening and recording key information on a specific topic. The instructor then asks the teams to report the key information in sequence to the whole group in the form of summaries.

Example: The company has mandated that all operations personnel will participate in a one-hour training/information session on modifications to a series of procedures that will come into effect next month. The modifications are a result of new reporting requirements. There are fines for companies that don’t comply. The trainer breaks up each group into four listening teams as she presents the changes, and she has participants apply the changes to examples. After each of the four major changes, she turns to the designated listening team for a summary of key points. At the end of the session, she gives the listening team five minutes to present what they consider to be the three key takeaways for their parts. She summarizes and adds any important takeaway points that teams have missed.

 

Mismatch

This is a simple, fun exercise to verify whether participants have absorbed information about a variety of topics or products presented within a short space of time. The instructor describes four to eight brief scenarios in which someone asks a question and receives an answer. Although they appear reasonable, the questions and answers are mismatched. Participants have to match up the correct questionandanswer pairs.

Example: To conclude the session on handling customer objections, Francine distributes to the participants 10 brief conversation scenarios; in eight of them, the objection and response are mismatched. The group is given five minutes to straighten out the mess. At the end of the five minutes, Francine randomly calls on the 10 participants to read each scenario correctly. The group discusses each response. Francine gives feedback. If the group is a more confident assemblage, she includes a scoring system. She has participants give themselves one point for each right answer and one more point for each other participant who missed the answer to that item. This method rewards getting the answer to the more difficult scenarios.

 

Ours Versus Theirs

This is a fun, quick, and interactive exercise that focuses on “our” products versus those of the competition. Participants read each of the series (10 to 15) statements (for example, has 10 percent greater fuel efficiency) and select the product to which it applies. Generally, the statements are arranged in a vertical column with our product and one or two competitor’s products listed side by side, like this:

Has 10 percent greater fuel efficiency than the other two.

Honda “X”

Toyota “Y”

Ford “Z”

 

The statements should create surprise and heighten interest to learn more. This activity is an excellent opener for a content area.

Example: With the company bringing out a new line of printers based on an innovative technology, it is essential that all national sales reps be up to speed on comparing these novel printers against the competition. Gerhard created a new activity called “Beatcha” for both classroom and self-study use. Its purpose is to demonstrate clearly how the Lightning printers beat the competition overall. However, it is critically important that the reps know along which dimensions Lightning products “beatcha” and where they don’t. For each of the five new products, he created a list of 10 to 15 statements comparing Lightning with the three top competitors. Participants in teams (class) or individually (self-paced) find the answer by searching specification sheets that have been provided. After all the statements are answered, participants receive feedback and additional information, complete with summary comparison sheets to use during a sales call.

 

Police Interrogation

The instructor informs the group of the topic to be mastered and announces that there will be a quiz at the end of a specific time period. Learners must question and probe to “force” content out of the instructor. The instructor only answers specific questions raised by participants. The instructor can open the session to individual interrogators or have groups create questions and then interrogate. Prior to the quiz, learners can summarize among themselves what they learned.

Example: Zeta had been training the new “high-potential” management trainees for more than a week. There is still another week to go before they are released for their management internships. She has been enjoying this bright group of ambitious, young people who constantly challenge her. Now it’s time to turn the tables. She walks in and announces that in one hour there will be a scored quiz. She announces the topic, Southeast Asian market characteristics and cultural idiosyncrasies, and says trainers can ask her questions to prepare for the test. She will respond honestly but not necessarily completely to all questions. She will give all information except the quiz questions. Trainees may grill her relentlessly on the topic.

 

At first, the trainees ask a few trial questions. Zeta responds to each one clearly and openly. After a few minutes, everyone is peppering her with probing questions. Some she answers at length, others evasively. For an hour, the interrogation on Southeast Asia runs at a furious pace. When the quiz is finally handed out, none of the trainees experience difficulties answering the questions. They have shown her that they can take charge and get what they need.

 

Press Conference

The instructor creates a press conference ambiance by organizing participants into teams of reporters charged with drawing out specific information from an “expert.” Once the instructor sets the stage and specifies the overall press conference themes (generally three or four), participants create specific questions related to each theme. They write their questions on different colored index cards, one question per card. Card colors are keyed to themes. The instructor collects the cards (into which she or he may seed additional questions). The instructor divides the group into investigativereporter teams, one team per theme. Teams spend 15 minutes sorting questions and preparing to grill the expert, pressconference style. Each team has seven minutes to question the expert aggressively while its members take notes. Once all teams have quizzed the expert on all the themes, they review their notes for five to seven minutes and list key points that would go into a press release. They report these out loud in turn, accompanied by comments from the instructor. The learners do most of the work and feel that they are controlling the situation; however, the instructor actually gets to present his or her content—plus much more.

Example: In a workshop on games for learning, Hal introduces the topic and the four press conference themes: identifying opportunities to use games, designing learning games, running games, and debriefing learning games. Participants prepare questions for each theme, one per index card (green, yellow, blue, and pink). Hal collects them after five minutes, secretly seeding a dozen questions he has prepared. In four teams, each with a pack of cards for one of the themes, participants sort and organize questions to ask as reporters. Hal then assumes the role of the visiting expert and gives each team seven minutes to ask questions, receive his answers, and make notes. Teams may cut him off and fire another question at will. After all four rounds, teams spend 20 minutes writing up press releases of one page. The teams read out loud their press releases one at a time. Hal editorializes on each. He then collects the four press releases, photocopies them, and hands copies of all four to each participant. The whole press conference activity has taken 90 minutes from start to finish.

 

Quiz Game

After a half day or full day of instruction, the trainer hands out slips of paper to participants and directs them to review all course notes and materials and individually to identify a single key point worth retaining. The point should be important and specific. This point is the “answer.” Each participant privately creates a question to elicit his or her answer and writes it on the slip of paper—question only; no answer and no name. The instructor collects all the questions, shuffles the stack, and passes them out. Participants read the questions on cards they receive and give their answers (open or closed book). Answers are discussed and commented on briefly. If an answer is incomplete or incorrect, the instructor draws the missing information from the group. Participants who miss an answer get a chance to reply or add information to others’ incorrect or incomplete answers. This review activity is then debriefed to ensure all key information has been summarized.

Example: To start the afternoon session on a lively note, Ahmed hands out slips of paper to all 12 participants. He asks each one to review all the product class notes he or she has taken in the morning and to find one key point that he or she believes people should remember. Using that point as a desired answer, each trainee should convert it to a question and write only the question, no answer or name, on an index card. As she turns the pages of her notes, Malika spots the following: the RX500 is the only high-speed duplex printer that is PC and Apple compatible with no hardware conversion required. She jots down on her quiz slip, “Which high-speed duplex printer is both PC and Apple compatible? Is any hardware conversion required?” All participants pass in their slips, which Ahmed promptly shuffles together and hands out, one to each person. The participants study the new questions and flip through their notes hunting for the answer. One at a time, Ahmed randomly selects participants to read their questions and give their answers. Ahmed adds details as necessary. All agree that it has been a great review. And although it was just after lunch, no one fell asleep.

 

Slap Jack

The instructor creates a deck of index cards for a knowledge domain with a term or image on each card. Participants are grouped in teams of three to five players, each with a complete deck. A dealer on each team shuffles and distributes the cards to all members of the team. Players place their cards face down in a single stack in front of them, without looking at them. The instructor calls out a content category within the knowledge domain (for example, mortgages), and each player, clockwise in turn, rapidly draws the top card from his or her stack and tosses it face up on the table. If the card has a term or image related to the selected topic, players slap the card. The first player to slap the card retrieves it and places it face up beside his or her facedown stack. The first player who slaps an incorrect card retrieves it and places it face down. The game proceeds rapidly until all dealt cards are used up. Players count one point for each correct card slapped and subtract one point for each error.

Example: The new-hire employees are learning a lot during their orientation to the supermarket environment. There is so much to learn, but Shakil makes it fun. He pulls out a deck of cards, shuffles it, and deals each of the six trainees 15 cards. On each card is a product the supermarket sells: Granny Smith apple, Campbell’s soup, Wonder Bread sandwich loaf, Dannon yogurt, and so on. Shakil had just taught the trainees about the produce, health and beauty aids, dairy, meat, and deli departments. Now he explains the game: “I’ll call out a department, such as ‘Dairy.’ Starting with Isaac, you each toss a card face up in the center. If someone throws in a dairy product card with ‘butter’ or ‘2% milk’ on it, you all try to slap it. The first person to get it wins the card. Pick it up and place it face up in front of you. It’s worth one point. If you slap the wrong card, you also keep it but place it face down in front of you. You lose a point. I’ll keep switching categories of products on you with no warning, so be fast. Highest score wins.”

 

Techno Challenge

The instructor divides the class into twomember teams. Team members alternate between the role of the customer and the role of sales consultant. In timed rounds of 99 seconds, customers ask consultants questions about technology or products. Sales consultants answer as many questions about the technology or product as possible within the allotted timeframe. The customer notes answers on a question list. At the end of the round, players switch roles and repeat the process for different technologies or products. This activity is an excellent review for a content area.

Example: The inbound sales associates are back from training. As team lead, Doris wants to make sure they have learned well and can answer a variety of questions about catalog items, pricing, payments, handling, shipping, and service issues. She sits down beside Jeremy, a recent hire. Using a list of common questions asked by customers, she gives Jeremy 99 seconds to answer as many questions as he can. Then she switches roles and has him play the customer questioning her. They compare how many questions each has answered and which answers are better. Doris explains that speed and accuracy are key in a high-volume inbound sales environment. Doris then moves on to Erica.

 

Terminology Tussle

This activity is based on the “BINGO” framework. The instructor presents technical information that contains new terminology. At the end of the presentation, the instructor distributes to each trainee a “BINGO”like board with the terms randomly dispersed. Every board is different. The instructor draws definitions from a hat and reads them aloud. Participants place a coin or marker on the term corresponding to the definition. The first player to cover five terms in a row (horizontally, vertically, or diagonally) wins. If there are many terms, the winner is the one who covers the whole board first.

Example: Assembling boards for electronic equipment demands both precision and speed. Pham is now an instructor and realizes that for many of the new employees, the names of the different components can be extremely confusing. This is especially true for those whose first language isn’t English. So he has created on his computer a number of “BINGO” type cards each with a five-by-five matrix and pictures of each component (for example, CPU, SIMM, DIMM, BIOS, FAN) the trainees will encounter. By having the employees play the familiar game of “BINGO,” in which the leader draws a component name from a hat and players cover with a token the component’s picture on the printed card, he hopes to strengthen familiarity with the components and their names. In future sessions, Pham has decided he will draw out real components and ask participants to name them before covering the images on their cards.

 

They Say, We Say

The instructor organizes the class into teams of three or four members. Half the teams act as competitor sales consultants and the other half act as company consultants. The instructor randomly pairs off one competitor team with one company team. Before every round, the instructor provides a feature or function to each company team and notes that it has 15 seconds to describe its product’s strength over that of the competition. Competitors then have 30 seconds to respond to all competitive challenges.

Example: In one of the monthly training sessions for pharmaceutical sales representatives, Max, the marketing manager, divides his 12 reps into four teams of three. He pairs off two sets of two teams each and assigns the “competitor” role to one team and the “our product” role to the other team in each set. Selecting one set of two teams at a time, Max calls out a feature (for example, side effects). The “our product” team has to demonstrate the superiority of the company’s feature convincingly within 15 seconds. The competitor team has 30 seconds to respond. Observers from the other set of teams comment, as does Max. Play now switches to the second set of teams and a new feature.

 

True Grid

Two axes of a twodimensional grid represent two dimensions of a given subject (for example, stereo models along one axis; amplifier type, speakers, list price, and main competition along the other). Either individually, in teams, or as a group, participants place “titles” on the grid to fit the requirements of both dimensions. Participants compare their completed grids to the correct one.

Example: Dynamite Sound is a high-end chain of stereo stores that believes its professional sales staff should know all the products by heart. It has created web-based learning modules about each of the models it sells and requires sales consultants to work through these individually during quiet times. One of the activities at the end of each module is a Challenge Grid. A grid shows up onscreen with various products introduced in the e-learning module appearing along the vertical axis and specific feature categories along the horizontal axis. The sales consultant fills in all the spaces by clicking and dragging onscreen tiles to specific grid locations until the grid is filled. The computer issues a combined time and accuracy score. Top scorers are invited each month to compete online for valuable prizes.

 

Summarizing the Activities

You have just reviewed 25 activities for which you can use your imagination to adapt to almost any type of content. Already you may have identified how they can be used in your own environment. They all fit into the fivestep model and can be applied in whole or in part to achieve a performance objective. Please note that all activities demand a great deal of meaningful effort on the part of the learners. Almost all of them permit meaningful interaction among learners and trainer (or training) and other learners. You can mix and match them to build an active training session—one that avoids the receptive approach. Most of the activities can be incorporated into a directive, guided discovery, or even an exploratory framework. They are yours. You now own them. Use them and adapt them as you wish.

Table 82 provides a final summary of the activities detailed here, suggesting where they easily fit in training. Don’t feel constrained, however, by the Xs we have placed in the table. Go beyond the table. With creativity you’ll find many additional learning uses for these activities.

Closing the Door on This Active Chapter

Throughout the activity portion of this chapter we have tried to engage you by asking you to imagine how you might use each activity in your organization or help one of your colleagues adopt or adapt it. Keep this in mind as you explore other existing activities produced from various sources.

Additional Resources The web offers a wealth of free resources for creating training games and game-like activities. Here are a few examples: * www.thiagi.com/games.html—more than 200 games that are easily adaptable to a variety of content. * www.businessballs.com/teambuilding.htm—lots of games and other activities, especially those related to free team-building games ideas and theory for employee motivation, training, and development. * www.businessballs.com/teambuilding.htm—lots of games and other activities, especially those related to free team-building games ideas and theory for employee motivation, training, and development. * www.wilderdom.com/games/OtherSites.html—listing of websites with descriptions of games to play with groups. * www.clubbing.com—enchanting, free online games.

* www.businessballs.com—games and other activities, tools, and templates on ethical work and life learning at no charge. * Sivasailam Thiagarajan’s and Tracy Tagliati’s book, Jolts, contains 50 terrific activities that are also linked to online resources. These “jolting,” highly interactive activities are stimulating and thought provoking. Best of all, they can be integrated into practically any type of course or training program.4 * www.traininggames.com—both free and for purchase electronic games. You can sign up on their website and download a host of icebreaker games at no charge and ones that are easily adaptable to a variety of content. Because websites come and go, we strongly encourage you to explore, online, the vast number of resources available in the area of games and related activities for learning. Also examine those that charge for their materials. If these fit with your objectives, they may be worthwhile purchasing for use in your organization. Make sure that you thoroughly investigate what you buy.

 

We conclude with a simple formula that ties all the learning activities together: teachpromptrelease. The purpose of all learning is to provide enough input to set the learner on the right path. That’s the teach phase. Then you encourage practice with support that you fade out. That’s the prompt phase. Finally, when the learner is sufficiently capable to try it alone, you have reached the release (but not abandon) phase. Some of the activities we have presented integrate into the teach phase readily (for example, Press Conference, Police Interrogation, and Listening Teams). Most help with prompting. Learners try, but receive guidance as required (for example, Confrontation, Concentration, and Terminology Tussle). A few are more adapted to release (for example, True Grid, Quiz Game, and Great Debate). Watch your learners as they gain competence and confidence. They will trigger for you the best types of activities to use. Let their transformation guide you in your training.

Table 8-2. Training Activities and Suggested Settings

 

Activity	Instructor-Led Large Group	Instructor-Led Small Group	Individual Learning	Peer Learning	On-the-Job Learning
Better Me
Concentration
Confrontation
Critical List
Crypto Cluster
Domino Effect
Exam Cram
Facts-in-Five
Great Debate
Hit-or-Myth
Jeopardy
Jigsaw
Lecture Team Quiz
Letter Game
Listening Teams
Mismatch
Ours Versus Theirs
Police Interrogation
Press Conference
Quiz Game
Slap Jack
Techno Challenge
Terminology Tussle
They Say, We Say
True Grid

 

Remember This

Ready for an activity of your own? Complete the following statements correctly by crossing out the inappropriate parenthesized word or phrase. Get them right without any prompting, and we’ll release you to the next chapter.

1. Receptive training is mostly (one-way telling / interactive).
2. Awareness training usually (does / does not) result in significant behavior changes in learners.
3. Directive training is based on the belief that the learners require (a planned learning path / room to explore and discover).
4. Guided discovery training provides (a totally free learning environment / cues, prompts, suggestions, and corrective feedback).
5. Exploratory training is particularly well suited to learners with (little prior knowledge and poorly developed metacognitive skills / considerable prior knowledge and well developed metacognitive skills).
6. The learning activities described in this chapter (can/cannot) be adapted to technology-based training delivery.
7. The learning activities described in this chapter (can/cannot) be used easily by relatively inexperienced trainers.
8. Most of the activities described in this chapter are suited to (practically any / very specific) types of content.
9. The web is a (good/poor) resource for training professionals to discover training-learning games for working adults.
10. A simple learning formula for any type of learner, any number of learners, and any type of learning is (say what you’re going to say, say it, and say what you’ve said / teach-prompt-release).

Here are our responses:

1. Receptive training is mostly oneway telling. We recommend avoiding this training architecture except for limited use to build some form of information base. It’s telling and not really training.
2. Awareness training usually does not result in significant behavior changes in learners. Awareness training is not aimed at specific, verifiable behavior outcomes. It can be a precursor to changes in the learner.
3. Directive training is based on the belief that the learners require a planned learning path. It is useful for initial training to build basic competence and confidence. It also supports learners who possess poorly developed metacognitive skills or who lack confidence with respect to what they must learn.
4. Guided discovery training provides cues, prompts, suggestions, and corrective feedback. It encourages independence while offering a supportive scaffolding as required by the learner.
5. Exploratory training is particularly well suited to learners with considerable prior knowledge and welldeveloped metacognitive skills. It offers a rich environment for individuals to find what they require for their performance improvement.
6. The learning activities described in this chapter can be adapted to technologybased training delivery. They can be integrated into interactive, synchronous, webbased sessions; virtual classrooms; and selfstudy, asynchronous programs. Imagination, design skills, and some technical savvy are required.
7. The learning activities described in this chapter can be used easily by relatively inexperienced trainers. As some of the examples and table 82 show, peer learners can apply these for learning as can onthejob coaches. In a workshop we ran for parents, the 20 participants created and tried out 60 learning activities to use with children. All were based on the activities in this chapter.
8. Most of the activities described in this chapter are suited to practically any content. We have adapted them to train veterinary students on bovine respiratory ailments, intellectually challenged teenagers to repair telephones, and even military personnel on passive sonar operation.
9. The web is a good resource for training professionals to discover traininglearning games for working adults. Many of the resources are free. There is a huge variety to explore and from which to choose.
10. A simple learning formula for any type of learner, any number of learners, and any type of learning is teachpromptrelease. “Say what you’re going to say, say it, and say what you’ve said” is a variation of “tell them what you’re going to tell them, tell them, and tell them what you’ve told them.” It’s the receptive model of training. It’s telling. It sure ain’t training.

Now, on to a key question. You trained them, but did they learn? Some organizations fear to verify learning. Understandably, they do not want to create anxiety and negative feelings toward training. However, does verifying whether or not learners acquired requisite skills and/or knowledge from what you taught them demand “testing” in the form of an exam? The next chapter examines this question.