Training- lecturing style - good or bad?

[Stressedgiraffe]

I'm a trainer and am observing another. He's spoken solidly for the last 2 hours. No slides/ activities or questions. I'm soo bored. The students seem really bored.
I'm relatively new to this company and try really hard to make my courses entertaining. Less me speaking and lots of them talking. Group activities etc.
Hes been with the company 15 years. So they must like him.
Im going to be asked my opinion what do i say?
Wibu to tell the truth?

University students don’t need activities in their lectures. The people in your work situation are also grown ups they don’t need activities etc. to learn.

I'm with PP, the activities can often be a bit patronising and/or pointless breakout discussions in my opinion. I prefer to just get through the content then go home.

Slides and questions would be good though.

I do understand. Maybe I just have a different learning style. People pay lots of money for the courses so I want them to be engaging.

As a learner, I loathe endless activities and group chats. I also loathe death by powerpoint especially if the trainer/lecturer is simply reading from the slides. A good lecturer is worth their weight in gold and I have been to plenty of long talks where the lecturer was giving high quality information in an engaging way without slides and activities.

What is he training them in?

We aren't lecturers,we are trainers.
Maybe I'm mistaken then.

IT training

I disagree with the others. No one can take in anything of use from two hours of solid talking, no matter how engaging the speaker.

No one should be reading slides aloud, but clean slides give the speaker a scaffolding and also help the listeners by drawing out key points and giving them something to focus on when they (inevitably) lose concentration and need to rejoin. They're also useful to circulate afterwards as they'll have the key points - no one will remember everything.

Activities can be naff, but they don't have to be (for example, answering multiple choice questions on an app is easy, or giving thoughts on a padlet type app). They can also have additional benefits outside of the training if it involves group work and allows people to chat and make acquaintances with people they don't often see. Even if it's just moaning about the training!

If asked for feedback I'd give it, but be cautious given you're new. It was interesting to see a style so different from your own type stuff.

I HATE the stupid activities and "group work" you describe, OP. It's so patronising and self-serving. I understand that "trainers" have to justify their employment by creating endless buzz words and party games and slides to read at captive audiences, but don't delude yourself that the majority of your audience gets anything from these stupid activities or wants to be there.

Here's the deal: I did not choose to attend a training session for fun. I'm probably there because my work is making my team do it, and I resent that. I would prefer to just be given the slides and be allowed to read them myself: I HATE hearing someone read slides at me, and I HATE it when that person adds stupid "breakout activities" and group work in this process because those things are pointless and just add to the time I am a captive. I just want to get the information I need so that I can leave.

I

You have a different learning style, and you won't be the only one. Yes, more interactive stuff is off-putting for some too - that's why it's important to have a mixture and balance within a 2 hour session. Yanbu.

This on repeat!!

I hate the group activities and little chats. I've paid for training- not to do little pointless tasks/activities with colleagues. I am not a child.

@Stressedgiraffe I’m with you! Back in the day I did a City & Guilds FE lecturers course. No way would anyone pass with just talking. It pays no attention whatsoever to the variety of ways people learn. I would not go back if a lecturer did this. 2 hours is awful!

So yes. I would expect some variety to check learning within the session. Case studies, Q&A and group work can all help consolidate learning. It breaks up the time with stimulating conversation and delegates learn from each other too. Is this guy qualified in teaching? Are you qualified to evaluate? I’m only asking because what you have witnessed is poor practice and the pp commenting probably aren’t aware of styles of learning can be visual, collaborative and even role play.

Did you get a lesson plan? What are the learning objectives? How did he intend to check learning has taken place? How are delegates going to implement the learning at their companies? Are they asked? Do they have a feedback sheet to ask these questions? If I’m honest this sounds really poor and you should be given the info above before you evaluate him. Otherwise you have no idea of what he’s supposed to be doing.

Adults don’t learn in hugely different ways from DC. Attention span might be longer. Might not. Delegates might have very varied pre learning - like DC. Some delegates might be far more visual learners. How are they included? Some delegates might need case studies to practice and learn more effectively this way. They might not all think as pp do above! I would not. How does anyone know? Were they asked?

I know the course hes teaching as i also train it. There is a trainers guide with slides activities and timing. He hasn't used any of it.you don't have to stick to it religiously but not to use any of it seems odd.
I used to be a teacher so am aware of different learning styles and try to accommodate them as much as I can.
He's now back to lecturing.

In fairness I think learning styles are largely debunked now (open to correction on that, far from a pedagogical expert), but I think very few people would learn anything from two hours of talking with no other resources.

I don’t know if it’s useful to add to the list who have already said down with the break outs, activities etc. Hate it all. Work make me go on these things but never make allowances for the work not getting done while I’m there. Cut out the flannel!

It sounds like your chap mainly needs to cut down on the droning on, insert a loo break and give people some handouts to doodle, make details notes on or colour in. They’re adults, they know their own learning styles, they can sort it out for themselves.

I do wish I was allowed to bring my knitting to these things though, I take in complex information really well if I’ve got my knitting. Not professional though, other people decided that a ‘speed dating game’ to introduce me to what a collaborative work culture looks like (recent example) is the professional approach 🙄

Some interactive elements in training make me cringe, but that doesn't mean multiple hours of talking is good practice or an effective method of delivering information. If information delivery is the only point, just email a PDF. If it's going to be worthwhile employing a trainer and holding a live event then there should be some thought given to how best to help participants learn.

It should be possible to come up with meaningful ways to get people to engage with the information, or at least to give some variety in presentation style. Breaking up the monotony of listening to the lecturer with short video clips or an exercise involving participants reading case studies and summarising them to the group doesn't seem cringe-worthy, for example.

Also, slides aren't just for bullet points of text to read out. It's hard to imagine some of that volume of information couldn't have been meaningfully represented by a diagram or graph, or illustrated by a relevant photo.

4 people are on their phones.
I mainly teach courses with exams so I need to cover the syllabus and have activities which enhance the course. This course has no exams
I guess it's just different ways then.
I've been asked to take over the course.

To those who hate interactive elements, I would say: I agree to a point, but ultimately if you're being paid to attend the aim from the employer's POV should be to do what is most effective.

Hours of talking isn't effective for anyone, and I can't just "know my own learning styles, and sort it out for myself" if that's the only way the info is delivered.

@BarbaraHoward I don’t think so but fair enough if all attending are similar. If you don’t know it’s difficult to say that. Most people, for example, would display a diagram and explain it at the same time. I still deliver learning visually but it’s what my groups want. I could not possibly do 2 hours without illustrations. I’ve never sat through 2 hours of solid lecturing anywhere and that definitely would not be the best way for some to learn.

@Stressedgiraffe Are you giving feedback to him or the company? Surely if delegates have paid, they or their companies expect learning to take place. How do you know it has? Surely that’s key? Are delegates giving feedback? That could tell you a lot with a properly constructed feedback form,

They will be giving feedback.
My manager will ask me later today how it was.

You are of course right, sitting for 2 hours listening to a bloke reading out slides is pants. Just as much as the cringe activities. I think employers send us because they need us to know the stuff, but I don’t think they give too hoots about effective learning styles, they leave that to the trainers. But we all have examples of the droners like this one and the ones that think they’re in a 1930s gospel revival tent. Most of us I think at the end of the day want it done efficiently and get back to our work and not have to do it on Saturday morning because we spent all of Thursday afternoon in break out groups going over what we’ve just heard already.

@Stressedgiraffe What questions are asked on the feedback sheet? That’s actually quite important for mature learners. Not sure what I think about delegates using their phones! Rude or bored of both? The big question is surely, how will you evaluate whether learning has taken place and objectives are met. That must be the reason the people are in the room. I would look at quality of delivery, whether delegates are engaged and whether they have learnt anything. As a teacher you would expect everyone to learn wouldn’t you? (Maybe they would rather be knitting and are not happy about being there?)

I hate having to do stuff too. Wastes time when the expert could be telling me stuff. Maybe it doesn’t need two hours? Or it could have a break after one? Or be done on consecutive days? Only if people genuinely aren’t taking it in as is.
OP, whatever you did some would be on their phones. It could be a work email for all you know, but you’ll never get everyone engaged.

Doing is learning. Often implementing what you have learnt to a real life problem. That’s an important part of learning in many cases. If the lecturers never know you have learnt anything and can make use of it, what’s the point of the training? Why would companies engage trainers for no demonstrable favourable outcome?