My main job at work, now that I am a nuclear maintenance technical instructor, is to teach new hires all of the knowledge, skills, and attitudes they'll need to be successful in their nuclear craft. Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, part of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group (CENG) which also includes two other reactor sites in New York, hires between 10 and 40 new maintenance technicians each year. My training group's responsibilities, therefore, really center around the constant process of Instructional System Design known as ADDIE so that the new learners are always getting the most current and relevant technical instruction possible. ADDIE is a constant loop cycle of training creation and refinement which stands for Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation. Since most of the group's training materials have long since been created, most of my out-of-classroom work consists of using student and management feedback to improve training material from year to year.
I think there are a few ways we can significantly improve our training program to dramatically help our learner's ability to use their training to improve their job performance, improving their chances of success and promotion, and simultaneously boosting the line's ability to meet maintenance schedules which drives down costs, increases plant up-time, and maximizes profits for the company.
One thing I have noticed that concerns me about our program is how linearly our training events are delivered. What I mean is we teach a series of discrete topics, starting with administrative material and moving along into complex technical learning, including laboratory demonstrations and evaluations. Each topic is taught in its own predetermined time block, which may range from one day to as many as eight. When each class's instruction is complete and a review is done, an examination is given to check for learning. Students are given their grade, an upgrade is done via an exam review, and they leave. The next day, a whole new topic is taught, with little to no thought about the previous day's instruction, and little linkage to the big picture of their professional technical development.
What I'd like to suggest we do differently involves a sea change in our thinking and process. What I hope to do with this new blog string is refine my thinking and perhaps attract some constructive comments from other interested learning professionals.
One of the biggest challenges in making a training program effective is to ensure knowledge transfer. This, of course, is Donald Kirkpatrick's third step of evaluation, meaning how well can the learner apply the new knowledge, skills, and attitudes back at their job. How did the training make them better while doing their work? Many new ideas about this important stage of learning are being discussed in the training world. The work of Jim and Wendy Kirkpatrick continues to improve Don's original framework. Andy Jefferson and Roy Pollock at the The 6Ds Company have an integrated approach to training system development that focuses on transfer and followup. And there are many others concerned with the importance of ensuring training has a sound business case justifying its costs by firmly demonstrating how learners are better at their job after attending the training.
First, I propose we build into the beginning of each successive training event a short review period of a few of the topics that had preceded it. This reinforcement of past learning can't help but improve learner's long-term memory of the material, but will also serve as a way to discuss how the learning improved their work experience. Some possible discussion questions include: Was a new skill successfully put to use since the training event? Did the learners feel more confident in their work with the new knowledge they could now draw from? How did their new attitudes improve the performance of their teams? This discussion will help learners understand how their training fits into the grand scheme of things.
Next, I propose we stop using the schedule to strictly dictate the length of the learning experience. Now I fully understand how business training cannot just run indefinitely. CENG is a business with an existential profit motive, after all. What I mean is that we are excessively regimented by the schedule. We can find ourselves driven to complete a lesson plan quickly in order to get an exam administered and reviewed before the end of the day. Student feedback always suffers for it as they realize what's happening. We shortchange their learning so that we can meet the time schedule. The schedule is tightly packed with the new class commencing the day after the previous one ends, so there's little flexibility to make real-time adjustments to the plan if needed. There need to be gaps in the training schedule, days left unfilled to allow for schedule creep as classes run long based on the natural pace of instruction. The point of training, after all, is to deliver learning. We should not feel satisfied by just getting the lesson taught and tests passed on time. And those extra days, if not needed for instruction, allow the learners to get some work time with the shop and the instructors to be better prepared for the next event.
Finally, I propose that we follow a simple concept I most recently read about in Jenn Labin's terrific book, Real World Training Design, that states "Knowledge First, Skills During, Application After." This incredibly powerful idea so wonderfully summarizes my critical thinking about our instructional implementation method. We do not currently require our learners to read the course materials, including any relevant procedures, drawings, or diagrams, before they arrive for the training. They therefore need to spend the majority of the training time developing their knowledge of the material, Bloom's lowest level of cognitive learning. Most of our training objectives reinforce this low target with their defining language. What choice do we have when the learners arrive to the class with little to no previous knowledge of the topic? I want to improve our overall learning and transfer of training with a requirement for pre-learning, which can be as simple as sending learners email links to the lesson plan and other documents or as sophisticated as pre-loading materials on the learner's tablet or laptop. This new pre-learning requirement also supports the Leader-Leader and Certify concepts increasingly driving management thinking at CENG. When the learners arrive with a decent knowledge component already under the belts, we as instructors can spend the training time developing the learner's skills through practice, group activities, plant walk-throughs, observations, and discussions. Wouldn't this make our training much more effective? And then, after the training is over, we should provide some followup materials a few weeks down the line to help learners recall the training, again reinforcing long-term memory and use. If we coordinate this followup with the learner's supervisors, we can truly integrate training with the line's needs helping make sure training and performance improvement continues to be viewed as a valuable strategic business partner.
When we really regard training as a way to improve performance, realizing that training is not a means unto itself but a means to an end, we recognize the need to move in the direction I suggest here. Training managers will have to fully embrace this plan and then actively manage the change, first bringing instructors on board with more dynamic training methods, spending less class time on knowledge material and going deeper into understanding and application. Next, the line must understand how they will need to give learner's the time to complete the pre-learning, how training isn't just about being in a classroom or lab somewhere, but is an all-the-time process. The line also must partner more with training, aligning expectations, ensuring post-training evaluations are meaningfully performed, and agreeing on appropriate opportunities for the followup material I discussed earlier. Lastly, learner expectations must be set early, so that the pre-learning is part of their daily routine. Arriving to training on time, well rested, and fully prepared with knowledge, learners will experience a deeply involving training event with lots of interactive practice, skill refinement, and practical application of their new learning. That is a true win-win-win for all involved.
