Breakout rooms on Teams - just why??

[SirChenjins]

If you are one of these people who uses them during your training, can you stop please. Getting randoms who've never met each other to join together and work on something they have literally just been introduced to and so know nothing about is lazy teaching and utterly, utterly pointless - no-one is sure what they've to discuss, they're don't learn from others who are as clueless as they are, it's bloody awkward, there's so much wasted time as everyone looks blankly at each other, and actually, they're attending the session to learn from the person who knows the subject.

I've just left another session at the breakout rooms point and have decided I won't attend another one ever. It's very liberating!

If done well, they can be very useful. You need to be very clear what people are expected to do in the time, and what they will need to feed back, if anything. Defo works best with more than one facilitator so you can both pop into each ‘room’ to check understanding. Works really well if there is someone in each room who has been clued up inadvance of the training, so knows what’s expected from the group, takes the lead a bit, etc.

I hate them with a passion too. There’s nothing worse than hearing “we’ll go to breakout rooms”. They’re always too long, no one wants to speak so I end up having to as I hate an awkward silence, half the people don’t contribute at all but still get credit for it, sometimes you get someone in the room that dominates with a monologue and no one else can get a word in (always men!), no one wants to give the feedback or the dominant one will always want to. Then when you’ve finished whatever arbitrary task you’re given, you all just sit in awkward silence until the time is up. I suddenly need the toilet at this point.

Of which there are many. I think they've become a lazynbut popular way of teaching/training - the format seems to be teach a bit, get everyone to go into a breakout room, spend a long time working on a task and discussing something they have little or no knowledge of, come back together, go over what the rooms discussed, teach a bit more, finish the session.

To the people who hate them, do you genuinely think you can sit and listen to someone for a whole day and take in abstract knowledge non stop without trying to apply it in a practical way?
The break out room (or group discussion activities) are a way for you to check what you've understood so far and try to apply it to a case study for example.

I find this discussion interesting as I teach a few courses online and the feedback has always been that the small group discussion is one of the best parts of the course as it is a way for even the shyer students to explore issues and express themselves before we feed back in the main room.

Then you need to feed this back to the trainer or the company. The problem is, people think online delivery is the same as teaching in person. It’s not, it’s a slightly different skill set.
I design and deliver distance learning and online programmes and breakout rooms are one of many tools which, if used properly, can enhance the online learning experience.

They are fucking awful.

I had a training session recently that I thought was pretty poor. We limped through the first breakout room.

But then came the looming horror of the second breakout room. I used the few moments where they're sending you away to hit 'leave'.

Messaged my ex manager who was also on the call to say "I'm done, that's an hour of my life I'll never get back."

Life is too short sometimes.

I really like breakout rooms and find they massively enhance my learning. Sitting and listening to one person, even if they mix it up with quizzes or videos etc is mind numbing for me, you might as well play bird song.

I’d be gutted if someone chose to spoil the learning of others by disengaging with the breakout rooms. It’s like turning your back on someone in a face to face situation, really disrespectful.

Believe me, I'm only too delighted to feed this back. Problem is, too many trainers love them and don't use them well or appropriately.

How would I and others check our understanding of a subject we know little or nothing about by sitting for 40 minutes working through a set exercise on something we know little or nothing about? If there are multiple facilitators working across each room who can guide us then fine, but if I've paid for the trainers expertise I'm not getting that expertise if large chunks of the day is spent working on things with people who know as little as I do. Trainers need to check the knowledge base is there and developing during the day before putting us into rooms to work on some random exercise.

This 😆

That’s never how they work, though. The majority of people sit in virtual silence (not always voluntarily) while 1 or 2 people dominate. Individual tasks would be much better.

Ive also never been in one where the task itself is well set out - normally the time is spent working out what the requirement is.