I realized that one of the best ways to figure out strengths, pitfalls and design ideas for a new mode of training is being forced to learn using that mode. Just attending it as a spectator simply does not evoke the required emotions J. Based on my experience, I came up with the following thoughts for designing a good vILT.
Designing for Effective vILT: Things to Keep in Mind
· If many participants are new to vILT mode or the application to be used then conduct a mandatory introductory session to familiarize participants with:
o Application features
o Norms of a vILT
o Specific ground rules that the trainer might want to set for the current session
· A download session (one-way download by the trainer) in vILT is worse than one in a classroom because the learners just switch off
· If the trainer is not familiar with vILT as a mode, facilitator notes need to be very detailed to ensure:
o All application features are used effectively and optimally
o The session does not deteriorate into a download
o The trainer sets up and uses the ground rules
· A new vILT facilitator MUST do a mock session with an audience to ensure comfort with the medium before they get into the Live session
· Design specifically for use of all application features to ensure high level of interaction. For example, start with a poll, follow up with some slides, follow up with an open question that should be answered by a few participants, follow up with use of the whiteboard to explain a concept (instead of creating a slide for it). This will reduce fatigue of monotony.
Here is what I like and disliked:-
What I liked (enjoyed is too strong a word):
· I could sit at my desk and attend the session – especially since it was spread over many days and I did not “really” have to be away from work 100% - yes, I cheated and gave in to my email checking OCD behavior ;-)
· I could shut off mentally for small periods of time (a few mins) and do other things (read/send email ;-)) either when the trainer was over explaining or answering questions that I knew the answers to
· I could do many things just like I would in a classroom though I was sitting at my desk. Some of these were:
o Talk to my co-attendees (using personal chat – yes! we could bitch about the trainer’s bad pronunciation and hoped to god it was indeed a private note)
o Ask questions of the trainer (using chat or raising my hand)
o Hear my co-attendees questions and the trainer’s response to those (even when the trainer got a qs on chat; they would read the qs out and then answer it)
The advantages of peer learning in classroom were all mostly present
· A set of people sitting in different parts of the country could attend a session being facilitated by a trainer present in yet another location - seamlessly
What I disliked:
· I could not gauge the pulse of the facilitator and my co-attendees – this would be more of a drawback to a facilitator
· Though all the s/w features helped imitate a classroom experience, the touchy-feely pieces were missing – such as enjoying a private joke with another participant just using a look
· The lag between me asking a question and the trainer answering it – he could choose to park it without telling me or even ignore it – especially if the question was a difficult one
What additional features should the software have to enrich the experience:
· Give the trainer the facility to freeze what is on display and go through other documents on their computer for reference
· Create a trigger/list of unanswered qs for the trainer so they don’t miss out on questions from participants
What should the trainer(s) have done differently to make the experience better:
· Know the features of the application well and in what situations what feature needs to be used
· Be proficient in the use of the application features – especially since they need to track and manage many things simultaneously
· Set the ground rules so that participants know when to ask questions, how to get the facilitator’s attention and how not to distract them while they are explaining
· Do more verbal communication than in a f2f situation because visual cues are missing in this mode. For example, if the trainer needs to take a few moments to refer to their notes then they should state that explicitly; otherwise, participants wonder why there is silence and start indicating that they can’t hear.
· Not shift between pages of the presentation or between 2 different documents – it is very disconcerting
· Personalize the session by using names of people. For example, instead of saying – I have a qs and reading it out, I wish he would say, “Lakshmi has a question which is …” and then address the participant while replying as he would in a classroom.
· Switch between whiteboard/presentation and other tools/props appropriately like you would in a classroom
· Use mike handover effectively instead of not passing it at all or allowing one participant to hog the mike
· Display the appropriate slide/whiteboard while talking about something
In a nutshell, the experience was not very great – but the learning (not of the subject taught but the mode and how not to use it) was awesome!
