WEEK 129
“Designing”.
Any error committed while designing the time table/curriculum for any part of the training program , adversely affects the expected outcome from the training.
Designing should be preceded by proper and meticulous home work regarding: i)Need assessment (ii) Objective behind the training (iii) Available logistics (iv) Background/potential of the trainees (v)Number of trainees (vi) Number of trainers/resource persons available (vii) Available time (viii) Choice of appropriate topics and sub topics .
Designer should always keep in mind that no uniform designing will be workable in all circumstances.
At the planning stage, following factors may be considered:
- Need assessment: What is the need ?
Why should the training be given ?
What is the actual need of the trainees – that needs to be satisfied through the training?Objective: What does the trainer want to achieve through the training?
However these cannot be part of training , but should precede the training.
Following Example of an imaginary designing may be considered for the purpose of learning :-
Time table for refresher course reflected allocation of time between 10 am an 1 pm for ‘one on one discussion’ with the mediators.
The identified meaningful objective was to give the trained mediators an opportunity to discuss with the trainer on the 10 topics reflected in the checklist, like, opening statement, techniques to break impasse, etc.., based on which the trainer to have a reasonable picture of potential of the trainees and take the training forward on the next day, keeping in mind the areas in which the trainees need further strengthening.
Each meeting was suggested to go on for 15 minutes.
Considering the fact that there were two identified trainers, it was suggested in the time table that while one trainer would go on with ‘one on one discussion’ for fifteen minutes each with each of the trainees, the other trainer would take session for others on related subjects/topics. This part was well thought of , to keep all the trainees engaged.
Shortfall:-
The designer had not taken into consideration the number of trainees and the availability of time. There were sixty trainees, and the time allotted was 180 minutes. 180 /15 would be = 12 . Hence by no stretch of imagination all the 60 trainees could have had one on one meeting with the trainer .
Another error:-
What was part of need assessment cannot be part of time table for refresher course.
The above “one on one discussion session/s” could not have been part of the refresher course. This concept was a wonderful concept to understand the need of the trainees. This could have been part of assessment of need of the trainees. The trainers could have had one on one discussion well in advance, with each of the trainees, over phone or otherwise, making use of the technology , understand their level of comprehension, understand their potential, and based on that , could have chosen the topics/sub topics for refresher course, and proceeded with the designing of the time table accordingly.
Even though “on the spot designing” or “restructuring the designed time table depending on the ground reality/s “ is suggested in some rare circumstances , the designed time table should not look faulty at the very sight of it. The designed time table should be a workable and functional time table. The designer should think twice before circulating it.
Assuming that such time table was only a base model and every trainer was free to design the training as per individual choice, then that note should have been there. Such a time table can be circulated only to trainers , and they may be requested to prepare a neatly designed workable time table and circulate to the trainees. However if the refresher course is conducted by any organization /authority throughout the State then it would be ideal to have a workable time table which can be uniformly used in refresher course in all places during a given period.
II.Example:
For practical mediation /Live mediation , time between 2.30 p.m and 4-30 pm was reflected in the time table.
This part of the time table could not be functional because:-
There were 60 trainees.
3 live mediations were referred by the Court.
There were only two rooms available where the training was organized.
The participants in the mediation refused to participate in the presence of any one other than the mediator and another co-mediator.
What was lost sight of:-
Ideally speaking before circulating the designed time table logistics must have been taken into consideration.
For 60 trainees , there should have been at least 12 live mediations and 12 separate rooms available. With this, amongst trainees, one could have been mediator, one could have been co -mediator the other three could have been assigned the role of observers. Even then two trainers could only have had a glimpse of each of the 12 mediations , and could not have contributed much as was required to be done in a refresher course.
Error:
Objective behind ( strengthening the practical knowledge of the trainees) did not match with the ground realities.
Negative impact:
Even if a trainer redesigns the whole time table on the spot, the fact that the schedule as reflected in the circulated time table is not followed would speak on the lack of professionalism on the part of the organizers.
Suggestions:
“Visualize whether the designed time table is going to be workable/functional.
Visualize the probable hurdles.
Foresee the negative impacts.
Discuss with others .
Have a base model leaving the scope to make small changes based on ground realities.
Avoid circulating the time table where there are doubts about implementation.
Circulate the workable functional time table.
“Measure the most you can and show the least you can”.
Danique Roefs-Online Marketeer
(All copy rights reserved by the author S.Susheela)
Training of Trainers in Mediation 