DUE TOMORROW BY 4PM CST NO LATER

To help you with your reply, please consider the following questions:  250 words each part 1 and 2, Part 3 is different please read

• What did you learn from the posting?
• What additional questions do you have after reading the posting?
• What clarification do you need regarding the posting?
• What differences or similarities do you see between your initial discussion thread and your classmates’ postings?
• How do the techniques recommended in your discussion compare to those identified by others?
• Analyze the recommendations made by others for each scenario. Do you agree or disagree with them? Why or why not? Provide examples where possible.

Part 1

 MondayJul 11 at 2:17pmManage Discussion Entry

Types of Trainees

Scenario A

This training program would have benefited from more trainee interaction to ensure comprehension. While some individuals may thrive in a training program that contains little participation or interaction, other individuals learn differently and would not gain anything from such a course. Understanding the audience, and the group size, will help ensure a training program is properly formatted to support the most development (Blanchard & Thacker, 2019). A trainer that is able to adjust the training style to fit the personalities of participants is more likely to conduct an effective training program (Howard, 2008), Field testing this course prior to deploying to the target audience could have uncovered this issue and allowed time to adjust the course (Hannum, 2022). 

Given the nature of scenario A, overcoming challenges in the classroom, including role-play in the program would have provided the opportunity for participants to see the skills being trained in action. These role-play scenarios could be carried out by volunteers, or performed by trainers followed by participation from the trainees. Having a conversation after each scenario allows the participants the opportunity to clarify any confusion and provide their input into how they might have handled the scenario. Utilizing this role-playing style will allow individuals with a sensor learning type to thrive, while a follow up knowledge check tying in the theories of the training will meet the needs of intuitive learners (Blanchard & Thacker, 2019). 

Breaking into smaller groups following the lecture portion of the training will allow reflective personality types to engage with the course (Blanchard & Thacker, 2019). In smaller groups, this training could include competition between groups through completion of knowledge checks, which will continue to motivate intuitive learners (Blanchard & Thacker, 2019). These small groups will also allow more introverted participants a space where they will feel safe to participate without a large audience (Howard, 2008). 

Scenario B

Focusing so closely on a linear training model, without explanation of how the training agenda will work, can cause confusion for global learners (Blanchard & Thacker, 2019). Following the introductions, a brief overview of the course where the trainer sets expectations and provides timeframes of the skills to be covered can avoid these issues. Telling participants what to expect with timing, content, and expectations will allow the trainees to focus more completely on the course. Training courses need to ensure participants are motivated to learn the skills being covered, failing to gain their interest by not providing a course overview could disrupt comprehension (Howard, 2008). 

Starting the course off with an overview that details how the information of the course interacts with what the trainee already knows and their job role will help secure buy-in (Blanchard & Thacker, 2019). Participants need to know what is in it for them when it comes to competing training programs. Without motivation, participants will likely treat the training program as a box they have to check and not an opportunity to develop within a career. 

Providing participants with a training manual will also help ensure individuals remain engaged with the course (Blanchard & Thacker, 2019). Visual learners benefit from seeing, providing something tangible for the course will help ensure comprehension and maintain engagement (Howard, 2008). 

Scenario C

Fostering an environment of two-way communication will help ensure participants actually participate in a training program (Blanchard & Thacker, 2019). Following the activity’s completion, moving participants back to initial seating where the chairs face the instructor helps reinforce completion of the activity and a return to training content. If participants are left in small formed groups, they might continue engaging with the smaller group instead of returning to the larger conversation. 

A great way to engage participation is to provide rewards around interaction. When a trainee does answer a question, reward them through either a tangible item or words of affirmation (Blanchard & Thacker, 2019). Along with ensuring responses are rewarded, also ensure that incorrect responses are not punished by ensuring the trainer’s wording is not negative (Blanchard & Thacker, 2019). Verbiage such as: “You’re on the right track” or “I like where you’re headed” this type of wording avoids making the participant feel negatively about participating or answering the question. 

Depending on the group being trained, competition around the discussion could also engage the group. If the small groups are still set up, begin a competition between groups for the most correct answers. This will get all the groups participating which will provide a clear picture of the groups comprehension of the training topic. 

Resources Mary E

Howard, C. (2008). Different strokes. Training Journal, , 39-42. https://www.proquest.com/trade-journals/different-strokes/docview/202946020/se-2 (Links to an external site.)

Hannum, D. (2022). Week 4 Lecture Development [Instructor Guidance]. https://ashford.instructure.com/courses/103796/pages/week-4-weekly-lecture 

Blanchard, P. N., & Thacker, J. W. (2019). Effective training: Systems, strategies, and practices (6th ed.). Chicago Business Press.

Part 2 

Scenario A

It is common for trainers to be unaware of potential consequences while presenting or after the training. According to Bryan, Kreuter, & Brownson, 2009, this type of resistance to training stems from humans' innate desire to know "why" they are in training. In terms of how a course should be received, trainers have a unique perspective. In this scenario, the bulk of the requirements will be determined by the objectives identified during the lecture. In training sessions, the trainer can bring this unique perspective based on his or her own experiences (McCoy, 2006). As a result, the trainers have the opportunity to reflect on their own experiences (Blanchard & Thacker, 2019). It is important to communicate before, during, and after this type of exercise, to set the right expectations, and to encourage discussion. As well as improving retention for trainees, visual aids allow the trainer to continuously monitor participants' interaction during training. It would be helpful to present slideshows, short videos, or power point presentations that reinforce the objectives as well as provide the trainees with visual reminders of what they will learn.

Scenario B

There has been some form of this scenario in the majority of society at some point. A lack of intermeshing within the training curriculum itself can significantly reduce engagement rates. Despite offering introductions, the trainer should make the introductions warm, inviting, and reduce nervousness in the trainees (Blanchard & Thacker, 2019). A visual and auditory welcoming is more important than a brief explanation of who you are. In this scenario, participants' lack of motivation is predominantly a result of rigid learning environments. Bryan, Kreuter, & Brownson (2009) write that human nature is to be inclusive and to feel a sense of control in training settings (Bryan, Kreuter, & Brownson, 2009). A random selection opportunity can also be used to engage training participants. Using the whole training space and showing confidence in the material, along with preventing a central spot for discussion, Blanchard and Thacker (2019) suggest creating an environment.

Scenario C

Trainers often struggle to engage their participants. It will be helpful to be able to ask a variety of open-ended questions or to engage the group in scenario-based discussions in this situation. As the trainer fosters further discussions related to the objectives set in the beginning with the trainers, it is important to maintain a strong dialogue between them (Blanchard & Thacker, 2019). Learning objectives could be set by learners over the period of training, allowing them to measure their progress. It has been demonstrated that setting the goals or objectives with the trainees allows for a more open participation and facilitates an accelerated learning process (McCoy, 2006). 

 Dyvon G

Blanchard, P. N., & Thacker, J. W. (2019). Effective training: Systems, strategies, and practices (6th ed.). Chicago Business Press.

Bryan, R. L., Kreuter, M. W., & Brownson, R. C. (2009). Integrating adult learning principles into training for public health practice. Health promotion practice, 10(4), 557-563. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/doi=10.1.1.894.5906&rep=rep1&type=pdf

McCoy, M. R. (2006). Teaching style and the application of adult learning principles by police instructors. Policing, 29(1), 77-91. DOI: http://dx.doi.org.proxylibrary (Links to an external site.).ashford.edu/10.1108/13639510610648494

PART 3 Is to the Instructor based off my initial post It does not have to be 250 words

 Institutional training programs sometimes come in a package, "one size fits all" and as such, does not take into account the learning styles of the participants.  Online education is a classic example in which on ground pedagogy is used to construct and facilitate online programs. The inherent rigidity is what works against many students who do not learn well in an online environment, partially to a mismatch of styles and expectations. 

Now and in general terms, Gagne' and Medsker (1996) again have pushed the position that previous learned capabilities create a shell in which we catalog information and process it accordingly, irrespective of the system in place.  With this said, what are input cognitive strategies and how might this explain further some of the individual trainee learning situations described in each scenario? 

Please walk us through this in some depth and please support with scholarly works you located via the UAGC Library?  This additional research may be useful to support some of what you will present in the final course project due in Week Six.  Also, how does the lecture fit into all of this?

Interesting analysis touch points here.

Thank you. 

References

Gagne;, R., & Medsker, K.  (1996). The conditions of learning: Training applications. Harcourt Brace.