ianfraserconsulting - Learning and Development Consultants

Teaching Methods in Information Technology Training

Written by Ian Fraser

In this article:
How learners learn versus how trainers train.  Learn why most training companies impose unrealistic and restricting training practices and styles on the trainers they employ and how to get around these constraints to deliver an enjoyable, relevant and beneficial training session.

There are many different teaching methods which can have a profound effect on the way in which teachers conduct their learning sessions.  Not all of these methods can be utilized in all teaching situations.

Some are not effective with certain topics due to technical issues.  A hands on approach may be required but not used due to health and safety factors prohibiting hands on experience.  There may be a necessity to demonstrate but no means to do so as the student numbers may be too high.

Student and teachers may feel uncomfortable with certain teaching methods due to cultural differences, inexperience or self-conscious related concerns.  This may lead both the students and/or teacher to bypass certain teaching methods in favour of more traditional methods which stay within their own personal comfort zone.

Others may be impracticable because of constraints such as time, cost, student numbers, relevance and resource issues.

There are many constraints imposed on teaching which may dictate which methods can and can not  be used.  These constraints may be detrimental to the students learning.  Let’s look at several different teaching methods and evaluate which ones can best be suited to the training of computer software and explore which methods work best based on my own personal experience and explain why some recognised methods will not work effectively.  For these methods I will strive to explain the factors and issues which limit or exclude their use in the computer training  and what strategies could be used to bypass these factors and present a more rounded, enjoyable and varied training experience.

When searching for a theory or method of teaching it is necessary to remember that not one method is applicable to all situations and therefore a variety of methods should be adopted to get the best possible results.

The most common and possibly effective method of teaching software skills is the method of demonstration.  A demonstration allows learners to listen and observe the actual process of an exercise.  There are many alternative ways to give a demonstration including the use of whiteboards, overhead slides, videos and computer data shows.  Obviously, when teaching learners about computer software a computer data show is the ideal method of demonstration.  Videos could also be beneficial, but they are expensive and inflexible to the different learning objectives of each learner or group.  The other methods mentioned all stimulate the demonstration rather than actually showing it as it would be undertaken by the learner.

Of all the different teaching methods I will be discussing, the demonstration method is probably regarded as the most common and acceptable method by many of my peers and the software training industry in general.  Many organisations and training centres are now equipped with data shows.  However there are many situations where there will be no data show.  Therefore to rely on this as a method of teaching would be problematic where large numbers of learners are involved.  Far too many trainers use only this method to teach computer software.  Using the same method all the time can lead to barriers in learning.1  Kroehnert (1990, p48) also suggests that demonstrations should follow four stages. 

The preparation process is the first stage.  Learners abilities are obtained, the demonstration developed and lesson objectives discovered.  Burns argues that “adults need to know why they are required to learn something before being motivated to learn it.” 2 If a trainer giving a demonstration skips this stage the learners will not see the relevance and the transfer of knowledge will be handicapped.

The second stage, that of the demonstration itself, also has several aspects including the speed of the demonstration, how many times it is demonstrated and instruction techniques.3

The third stage is where the learners get to practice the skill demonstrated and the fourth and final stage is the assessment of the demonstration to evaluate the learning.

I agree that these four stages should be adhered to in any demonstration and endeavour to do so.  It is not always possible to follow all four stages in detail.  In many cases there is simply not enough allocated time to give adequate attention to the first and fourth stage.  Even the third stage of allowing the learners to practice the demonstrated skill sometimes has to be curtailed where time is a consideration.  Most courses offered tend to be packed full of subject matter to give the illusion of content to prospective purchasers of the training. 

Although this works well in marketing, it inevitably leads the trainer to abandon certain topics or conversely, rushing through all topics included in the course outline to satisfy the expectations of the people who booked the course based on its subject content. 

I find that the first and fourth stage can be achieved with simple question and answer tactics.  Asking learners about their previous experiences and skills can give a valuable insight into the level the demonstration should be targeted at.  Assessment of the demonstration and the level of success of it can also be achieved through questions post the first three stages.  This can be in an informal style or a more formal test scenario.  Informal questions do not take up much time and add to the effectiveness of the demonstration.  Without completing the first and fourth stage the demonstration will be lacking in direction and meaning.

In many instances it may be necessary to adapt or modify the demonstration after the learners abilities are established and the lesson objectives are understood (stage one).  Each group of learners will have different ideas and skills and it is therefore impossible to have a rigid and rehearsed demonstration.  A demonstration which can be quickly adapted to suit all situations is ideal.  This may require major changes only moments before commencement.  For this reason I seldom have a pre-prepared demonstration, I approach demonstrations with ideas and a strong understanding of the subject matter and how it can be related to various situations.

Many times as a learning and development specialist, I am employed to give demonstrations of new software programs.  This would usually involve a pre-prepared set of topics presented by means of a data show and may run for up to 3 hours.  Of all four stages of a good demonstration, I am only permitted to do the second stage.  There is no room in the tightly packed presentation for questions or discussions.  No room for learners abilities to be obtained or lesson objectives discovered.  This should have all been done prior to the demonstration by the organisation.  What are the learning outcomes of such a presentation?  This form of presentation is seen by many companies as a cheap, effective and time saving method of training.  Taking the approach of: if it has to be done (training), do it quickly and cheaply.  I believe this form of teaching is a waste of time and money.  If employed as a subcontractor to a training company I would be ill advised to say anything to the client regarding my own feelings regarding the training.  In fact, Contract trainers are usually under strict instructions to promote the usefulness of the presentation style of training.  The best way for a contract trainer to overcome this approach to training is to finish the presentation early and let the audience ask questions.  This seems to work effectively.  Most organisations and participants find the question and answer sessions the most useful part of the demonstration.

It is necessary to expand presentations to involve other methods of teaching for it to have any meaningful use.  According to Kolb (1984) there are four major learning styles.4   (Concrete experience, Reflective observation, Abstract conceptualisation and Active experimentation)  If a trainer sticks to just demonstrations as a means of teaching then they risk only catering to learners who favour a reflective observation approach to learning.

With any presentation or training some form of lecture or expository style teaching is necessary.  The trainer should have factual information available and be able to present this information to the learners at a moments notice.  This can involve a form of lecture.  For a trainer to get through all the material in the allocated time, this would seem to be the best method available when teaching computer software skills.  Ignore the success of the training for a moment and concentrate on the delivery.  A lesson could be systematically planned and rehearsed before delivery.  Each course could be taught in exactly the same way.  This would certainly make the trainers job a lot easier and allow for all the content to be delivered on time thereby satisfying the training companies who have offered all the topics whilst selling the course.  It would also satisfy the companies who have purchased the training with an expectation of content delivery.  Many training companies offer this inflexible and ineffectual “Mc Donald’s” approach to training.

Alas, the poor learner is missing out here.  What about the different learning styles?  Has the training been beneficial to the learner and/or the organisation?  Can the skills be recalled and applied in the day to day operations of the learner?  Learners tend to gain greater understanding of a topic when the teaching style closely resembles there own preferred learning style.5   Using only expository style will therefore not cater to many learners who have difficulty following that particular teaching method.

If compelled to offer training in a lecture style only it is imperative that the trainer presents the lecture in a way that is relevant to the needs and experiences of the learners.  Kolb (1984) states that we learn most effectively when what we are being taught is personally relevant to us. 6

“Teachers and trainers must make a case for the value of the learning for improving the effectiveness of the learners’ performance and the quality of their lives."7

No more so is this true than in a lecture style delivery.

Organisations send their staff to computer training with clear objectives.  These may include increased productivity, greater understanding of work, increased awareness of solutions to computer related problems and, to a lesser extent, social and wellbeing factors.  By far the number one reason staff are sent to computer training is to save the company money in the long term by making the staff member more efficient and productive. 

It is surprising therefore that many organisations fail to evaluate the success of the training they have purchased.  Some even fail to evaluate the training outcomes.8  Organisations in Australia, even today, believe that training is a massive wasted expense.9   This can be proven incorrect with a simple mathematical equation I use in explaining the cost benefits to a company.

If an Excel user can save as little as 1 hour per week in their day to day workings with Excel, then this would mean a saving to the organisation of close to $1000 per year.  (Based on a $35,000 PA salary).

If the organisation fails to evaluate training then they may also fail to see the benefits as well.  In my training I always try to evaluate the training and its benefits to the company as a whole.  This can only be achieved through dialog with the learners (formal evaluation is not usually offered in the course price).  Teaching with a predominance of lecture style is a expository method which is not a good way of determining the success of the training.  Used sparingly it is a good way to impart useful factual information especially when combined with discussion.

Several methods of teaching involve the learners actively participating in discussions.  These may include large group discussions, smaller group discussions, brainstorming and report-back sessions.  I find that any form of discussion is useful.  It helps learners to reflect on their own and other peoples personal experiences, allows all learners to participate, pool ideas and allows the trainer to gain an appreciation for each learners level of knowledge.

Serious consideration needs to be given to learners ethnic and cultural backgrounds as this may have an influence in their participation or lack of participation in any forms of group discussions.  Creating groups as small as pairs can often overcome some learners reluctance to contribute to discussions.  Asking direct questions of individuals can also be beneficial in encouraging some learners to contribute their own ideas.  However, this should only be done once a safe learning environment has been established as this can put people on the spot and make them uncomfortable.

Teaching by discussions is almost impossible to implement when giving a presentation style lecture.  The size of the audience and structure of the presentation make it to difficult to implement any form of discussion unless it is directed through the teacher.  Questions can be asked of the teacher and responses relayed to the audience for more questions to arise.  This in turn creates a form of organised discussion which is extremely useful for group interest and relevance.

Discussions can very easily get out of hand.  Topics can easily go off track causing time to drag on without any real progress being made, personal criticism may deter some learners and negative comments can prohibit any gains being made.  Wheeler and Marshal (1986) classified teachers in one of four categories.  (listeners, directors, interpreters and coaches).10  If the group discussions go in any of these directions it may be necessary to switch to more of a “director” type approach to training where the trainer takes a more active and assertive role in any discussion, leading the discussion and the learners in a meaningful, timely exchange of ideas.  It is extremely important when facilitating group discussions that all learners feel that their contributions are respected not only by the trainer but also other learners.

One of the greatest techniques a trainer can employ with learners is the use of exercises.  Traditionally this has been a very effective method employed in both adult (andragogy) and child education (pedagogy).  At the end of two day courses I allow students to choose to complete one of several exercises based on case studies.  These will incorporate most of the skills already taught in the course and require the students to demonstrate a thorough knowledge of the material in order to complete the exercise.  Inevitably, post course evaluations prove this to be the most popular session of the two days.  Students gain more knowledge through the practical application of the topic.  Students undertaking exercises inevitably develop analytical and problem-solving skills and are allowed to exercise their own freedom of creativity and take their time.

Unfortunately, exercises like this can be very time consuming.  I have experienced many cases where the time taken to complete the exercise exceeds 25% of the total course time.  This is completely unacceptable to most training companies and also the learning and development  departments within the organisation.  Once again the number of topics advertised can not be met.  This is usually outlined by learners in post course evaluations or conveyed by the learners once they return to their company.  Trainers are graded and employed on whether they meet the delivery standards imposed by the training companies.  Fail to follow the manual and you will fail to gain employment!  It is very easy, in this type of environment, for trainers to become robotic in the way they train as they are rewarded for it.  Unfortunately, the lecture style is the predominate method employed.

Having some short, sharp and relevant exercises ready prior to the course is a way of getting the best of both worlds.  The students will benefit from the exercises and the time taken to complete each exercise will not get out of hand.  Having a good cross selection of varied exercises at the ready is a must.  Many trainers will simply not put in the after hours effort to create numerous exercises preferring instead to rely on the provided manual for guidance.

Depending on resource and time constraints there are several other teaching methods which can be called into play depending on the training undertaken.  These can include guest speakers, role plays and report back sessions.  Guest speakers can be useful when conducting in-house systems training.  Having a “subject matter expert” sell the advantages of using a particular software application or even just being there to answer some of the more technical questions can greatly add to the success of the training program.  As a teaching method in information technology training, role plays are unsuitable as it is a technical concept that we are trying to teach and role plays do not lend themselves to this function.  In the past I have tried to stimulate some minor role playing into the class, but it has proven largely irrelevant to the subject matter.

Report back sessions could be quite beneficial to the student as I could gauge how they are progressing and I could give extra guidance and direction where needed.  Unfortunately, this method is not available as I usually do not have any contact with the students after the course.  Although I could follow through with some of my own clients via the phone the cost of this extra time spent per student would not be redeemed in the initial course charge.  Also working for a training company, contractors are not permitted to contact the students after the course.  At most the organisation may get a call from the sales staff.
Like a balanced diet, good teaching requires a balanced approach, utilizing many styles so that all learners may be catered for.  There is no best way to teach.  Promoting learning for large numbers of people requires a command of many different teaching and learning styles.11

Use all methods available for a well rounded training session which meets the outcomes discussed at the start of the session.  Give demonstrations broken up with group discussions, personal anecdotes and experiences.  Allow learners to contribute with their own personal experiences wherever relevant. Always finish by summarising the topics covered and how they relate to the course objectives, making sure that the learners are fully aware of the knowledge they have gained and of what benefit it will be to them and their organisation.

Be prepared to experiment with new styles and techniques even if they are outside your own personal comfort zone.  Remember that learners are all different and respond to different techniques.  The broader the range of styles a trainer employs the more chance they have of getting the information across to the learner and the greater the chance it will stick.

Going beyond the scope of a training session and incorporating many different styles of teaching is a way of making the most of the available time and money.  If learners can be taught in a varied and effective manner they will disregard the constraints imposed on them and appreciate the alternatives to a session jam packed with content but presented using a singular teaching method.

Billet,S, 1995, Cost benefits of  Training: A Queensland Study, Australian Vocational Education Review

Blunden, R, 2000, Teaching and Learning in VET, Social Learning Press, NSW

Brinkerhoff, R and Gill, S, 1994, The Learning Alliance: Systems Thinking in Human Resource Development,  Jossey-Bass Inc.  Publishers, California

Burns, R, 1995, The Adult Learner at Work: A Comprehensive Guide to the Context, Psychology and Methods of Learning for the Workplace, Business and Professional Publishing, Sydney

Department of  Employment, Education and Training, 1997, Skills for Australia, Canberra: AGPS

Kenney, J & Reid, M, 1986, Training Interventions, Institute of Personal Management, London

Kolb, D, 1984, Experiential Learning, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

Kroehnert, G, 1990, Basic Training for Trainers, McGraw Hill Book Company, Sydney

Pfeiffer, J & Ballew, A, 1988, Training Styles

Phillips, K and Shaw, P, 1989, A Consultancy Approach for Trainers, Gower Publishing Company Ltd.  England

Tovey, M, 1997, Training in Australia, Pearson Education Australia

Wheeler, M & Marshall, J, 1986, The Trainer Type Inventory (TTI): Identifying Training Style Preferences, University Associates, San Diego