Theories on training and learning

Theories of training '

SECTION THREE

Theories
of training

Theories of training !

SECTION THREE

Theories of training

T
his section of the manual will provide a detailed explanation of the mental
processes behind training and learning. Although explanations are
presented as theories, they have profound practical implications in training.
It is because of this “real world” importance that every trainer should understand
and be able to apply concepts presented in the following pages. This is essential
so that trainers can be conscious of the factors at work in their learners’ mental
processes, and in order to realize the greatest transfer of knowledge and skill.

Domains of learning

In the 19th century, instruction tended to be a simple transactional process.
Instructors presented material in a manner they considered understandable, and
learners were expected to learn. At the time, trainers had nothing more complicated
than this in mind. Those who did not learn well enough were considered somehow
personally negligent, and methods were used to reinforce learning that would make
failure quite uncomfortable. In Europe and North America slow learners were
even punished. At the very least, those who had trouble learning were stigmatized
or ostracized. You may be familiar with Charles Dickens’ novels containing themes
about the negative consequences of this simplistic and harsh method of instruction.
Inherent in the perspective of that era was the assumption that learning is primarily
the responsibility of the learner, and the instructor’s role is merely as a conduit to
material.

In the 20 th century, a new movement arose that offered an alternative
conception. This movement attempted to adapt scientific models and to apply
them to the learning process. Adherents of this new philosophy espoused the belief
that learning could be carried out with the same discipline and precision used in
science, and that this would result in more consistent results. Such an approach to
learning was mirrored in application of so-called scientific methods to a wide range
of fields. For example, there was a scientific management school that argued for
strict application of the principles of physics and mathematics in organizations.
These movements had many unfortunate outcomes, but they also led to some
positive results. For one thing, in the field of education they focused attention on
the nature of the relationship between the instructor and the learner. It soon became
clear that learning was a much more complex task than had originally been thought.
Additionally, the role of the instructor was recognized as important to the success
of a learning exercise. One could not blame the learner alone when learning failed
to occur. Instructors had an obligation to become skillful in transferring instruction
and to make the learning as easy as possible for the learner.

! Training of Trainers

As the decades passed, and with the further application of science, most
particularly the study of physiology and psychology, knowledge about the process
of learning grew more complete. What emerged as research into learning continued,
was that there were actually multiple dimensions of learning, not just one. It also
was realized that learning in each dimension was distinct, requiring different sets
of skills and abilities. This meant that a person might be brilliant at learning in one
of those dimensions and not in others. It also meant that instructors could not rely
on only one method of presenting material; they had to tailor their method of
instruction to the nature of the particular intended dimension of learning.

These dimensions are usually called domains, a term that refers to broad
categories defining distinct types of learning. Conventionally, three domain have
been identified by researchers—cognitive, affective, and psychomotor skills. There
are also subdivisions within these domains recognized by researchers and other
experts, but generally most instructional theorists accept the three as adequate
descriptions of learning categories. Indeed, it is worth emphasizing that most persons
who study learning and learning behavior believe that there is not just one mental
aptitude, but many. Experts discovered long ago that an individual who has strong
verbal abilities may or may not have good mathematics abilities. Likewise, the
person who is recognized as a good writer may not seem to be very skillful when
speaking aloud. Their oral aptitude may not match their writing aptitude because
the two capacities require different skills and mental abilities. The exact number
of different mental abilities is not known, though some experts believe there are
many, not just a few. This is an area of ongoing research, and there is still much to
be discovered on the subject of learning types.

Cognitive learning
The first of the domains mentioned, and possibly the most familiar, is cognitive
learning. Cognitive learning requires individuals to “internalize” facts and
information. Leaning this information might take the form of simple memorization—
how to spell a name or the capital cities of Asian nations. It might also mean
gaining an understanding of concepts in which ideas are connected in some way,
for example spatially or by some type of ordered relationship. Psychologists have
studied cognitive abilities for about a century, but many questions still remain.
Technically speaking, cognition is considered to be any kind of ability in which
mental abstractions (words, propositions, images and the like) of information can
be processed and used. Intelligent learners are better able to process the abstraction
and to do so quickly. Interestingly, it has become well accepted among researchers
that the way human brains carry out cognitive tasks varies greatly from one culture
to another. Even in similar cultures, for instance ones in Western Europe, tests
meant to measure cognitive learning abilities in one society are known to be unable
to measure the trait accurately in others. People who show high levels of cognitive
learning may succeed in the academic setting but may not show higher levels of
ability in daily work situations or in coping with common life challenges.

Theories of training !!

Training in the cognitive domain stresses improvements in the quality of thinking
activities by moving learners toward achievement of goals. The trainer’s role is
one of adjusting the learning situation to enhance the pace of learning and to
arrange the sequence of learning points to suit the material being presented.
Simplification and organization are keys to enhancement of learning in cognitive
training. Many trainers also focus their attention on building strong motivation
into the learning exercise—typically through tactics such as gaming and competition,
structured recognition and reward systems, and the like. Other trainers emphasize
the importance of making the learning engaging, especially through the use of
puzzles and other intellectual challenges to the learner. In the end, the learner
controls most of the factors that influence the success of training. Learners must be
encouraged to set their own objectives and to strive for these goals. In a positive
learning environment, these goals are influenced by the successes of others in the
training group and by the leadership of the trainer.

One of the most common types of abstractions included within the domain of
cognition is the ability to learn or “memorize” meanings and associations of words.
This can include what words mean, lists of words, and so on. It includes any other
kind of learning that involves acquiring facts and knowledge. Facts not only mean
numbers and words, the kinds of things we normally think of memorizing, but the
way that something looks—its color and appearance. It can include sounds, and
other types of impressions that our senses give us. Cognition might involve such
things as the steps in troubleshooting a piece of equipment, the proper way to
light a set, the procedures for filing budgets in our organization, and so on. Beyond
mere memorization, cognitive learning also involves problem-solving, decision-
making, and explanation. These are obviously complex processes, but we can
generally define a series of steps required in each. Take, for example, problem
solving. First, must come an awakening of interest in the problem, then a review
of the issues, an analysis of the problem, tentative formulation of explanations or
solutions, weighing of these options, and finally selection of the best option. This
is then followed by some kind of evaluation as the option is exercised—in other
words asking, does the solution work as expected?

Learning and memory
As a side aspect of cognitive learning, it must be recognized that the way human
brains process information apparently has three modes: short-term memory (also
called working memory), long-term memory, and sensory memory. Short-term
learning is the memorization of information to be retained for relatively short periods
of time. The time may be just seconds, or at most minutes, before learning is lost
if it is retained only in short-term memory. This may seem to be a problem for
trainers, but it actually can be an advantage. Suppose your memory was cluttered
with long-unused names, facts, and other trivia. It is really better to remember
some things only long enough to use them, then they should be discarded. For


instance, suppose you wanted to make a telephone call to schedule an appointment.
You would look up the number and quickly memorize the number, then dial it.
Ten minutes later, you would not be able recall the number. Dropping items from
memory that serve no further purpose avoids the mental jumble that might otherwise
accumulate.

Long-term memory is used to retain important and useful information for long
periods, perhaps for years, decades, or a lifetime. Even in long-term memory, our
brains are constantly culling through the items stored to find ones that can be
discarded. For example, can you recall your family’s telephone number used when
you were a child? When you were a youngster that telephone number was
important, and you made use of it often enough to retain it in long-term memory.
But today you may not use the number any longer or it may have changed.
Retaining in memory an obsolete telephone number has no purpose, so perhaps
you have moved it out of long-term memory. And even if so, you probably would
have no difficulty recalling the appearance of your childhood house (its color,
size, the arrangement of rooms, etc) because these facts stored in long-term memory
are still relevant to your life due to their personal significance.

We do need to keep some information indefinitely, of course. It appears that
information to be stored in long-term memory must first be processed through
short-term memory. Our brains have the capacity to shift learning from short-term
learning into long-term storage when needed. Clearly, the task of trainers is to
ensure that learning is not just temporarily stored in short-term memory, but moved
onward into long-term memory. Training is of little merit if all we can do is enhance
knowledge of information for short periods of time. Unlike long-term memory,
short-term memory has a limited capacity. Try to memorize a list of random words.
The difficulty of this learning task rises as the number of words is increased until
finally the capacity of short-term memory is reached and you cannot memorize
the entire list. Research has shown that about seven (give or take two) bits of
information are about all that can be held in short-term memory. In training, the
need to pass information through this limited memory storage poses a problem.
Short-term memory acts as a bottleneck and forces us to rely on special tactics to
ensure transfer to long-term memory. One approach is to “chunk” information or
to combine together bits of information so that they can be stored as one. An
example of this is to use a mental cue such as “SMARTE” (see section six for an
explanation of this) to internalize a list of learning points. Another tactic is called
rehearsal. This is where the item in short-term memory is restated again and again
to hold it there until it can be transferred to long-term memory. But remember
that even if we succeed in moving cognitive learning from short-term to long-term
memory, there is no guarantee it will remain there. Because our minds are constantly
looking for ways of discarding information no longer needed, we may forget learning
unless it is regularly used.

Theories of training !#

The main goal of cognitive training is to provide our learners the knowledge
necessary to carry out their functions in the workplace. There are several problems
we have to overcome in order to be successful in this type of training. First is the
problem just mentioned—making certain that the learning is moved from short-
term to long-term memory. There are several ways to combat that problem; each
involves making the knowledge more memorable. One way is to link the learning
to knowledge that learners already have internalized. If your learning extends
knowledge already in long-term memory, it is more likely to be retained in long-
term memory too. Another solution is to link the learning to something that is
unusual or odd. The use of peculiar audio visual aids, or presentations that contain
surprises or other unusual features seem to help people retain knowledge longer.
In the end, there is no substitute for repetition of the learning. Repeating material
helps freshen the learning in short-term memory, eventually leading to its transfer
to long-term memory. This works best if the trainer varies the way repetition occurs.
If the training reviews material already presented offering slightly different
explanations, different examples, different ways of understanding the topic, it not
only makes the material more interesting, it speeds the conversion to long-term
memory. Fortunately, our long-term memory appears to have an unlimited capacity,
so we need not worry about overloading our learning processes. Also, the
commonly-held belief that learning capabilities decline with age has not been
verified by research. Many experts think that learning in healthy adults can continue
to an indefinite age, though research is still underway on this.

The third category of memory, sensory memory, is used when information is
registered by our senses: touch, hearing, smell, vision, and taste. This memory is
very short-term, often lasting less than one second. To see how this type of memory
works, close your eyes. Wait for a few seconds, then blink your eyes open for just
a moment. Note that the image from your eyes remained for a fraction of a second
after your eyes closed again—sensory memory provided that brief glimpse of the
image after the visual stimuli disappeared. This kind of memory is important from
a physiological point of view but does not seem to have a significant role in training.

Psychomotor skills
There are some tasks that require a different sort of “memorization.” Take, for
instance, the skill of riding a bicycle. One can easily know and understand what is
required to keep a bicycle upright, yet be unable to ride a bicycle. Training learners
to pedal and steer the bicycle so that they remain upright is an experience shared
by practically every parent. Consider what is expected in this learning task. This
skill demands more than cognitive knowledge, it also requires an ability to use
muscles in a very particular way, a way that is not necessarily “natural.” The learning
that is necessary to accomplish tasks such as bicycle riding, playing football, or
driving an automobile employ special physical abilities. These are called
psychomotor skills, although sometimes they are also known as sensorimotor,

!$ Training of Trainers

perceptual-motor, or simply motor skills. Abilities such as these are associated
with the sensory and motor segments of the brain’s cortex. Other examples of
psychomotor skills are keyboard touch typing, playing a musical instrument, and
swimming. In the realm of broadcasting, tasks such as loading film cameras, news
reading, and operating an audio mixer, all require the development of psychomotor
skills.

It should come as no surprise that because development of psychomotor skills
is so different from cognitive learning, the training required must be different as
well. Learning a skill such as playing a piano cannot be accomplished in a lecture
hall; it has to be achieved while seated at a keyboard, playing and playing, again
and again. Knowing how to play a piano is only the start of becoming a pianist; it
must also involve honing one’s physical abilities so that pressing the keys (and the
pedals) produces music of pleasing quality. Motor skills training aims to refine a
person’s ability to produce coordinated muscular movements that are governed
by signals he or she picks up from the environment. That is to say, the learner
acquires the ability to sense needed movements and to match his or her muscular
response so as to produce those movements. Pianists listen intently to their music
in order to determine how they should move their hands and fingers to produce
the desired sounds. In building psychomotor skills, training focuses on
demonstration and repetition of the specific physical actions necessary to perform
tasks. This means that learners must acquire the ability to observe their own physical
movements and to analyze and interpret them properly so as to correct and enhance
their performance.

There are several characteristics of psychomotor skills learning that distinguish
this type of training from others. First, the trainer ordinarily operates in a one-on-
one mode with the learner. The trainer must work directly with only a single
individual. It is not generally possible to work with an entire group at once. It may
be possible to have a group of trainees working on their skills individually within
the same room, and the trainer may be able to move from person to person,
working with each one in turn. But the basic need in psychomotor training is to
provide observation and feedback on an individual basis. Secondly, the kind of
feedback given each learner is in the form of “coaching,” to direct the trainee
toward improved physical mastery of skills. Conventionally, this follows the model
in which the performance is observed, the trainer looks for discrepancies, then
advises on how to correct these deficiencies, and the trainees repeats the
performance. This leads to another round of observation and correction, and so
on. Progress in learning is often uneven, with learners’ abilities frequently reaching
a plateau or even declining before showing improvement. Direct sensory feedback
plays a big role in this type of learning too. This occurs when the learner can
observe his own behavior and then determine for himself what corrections are
needed to reach the expected level of performance. For example, good pianists
learn to improve their performance by listening to their own playing.

Theories of training !%

An interesting aspect of psychomotor skills is that once internalized, they remain
a “learned” skill thereafter regardless of the passage of time. Such skills can be
retained for years without regular use. Imagine what might happen if you tried to
ride a bicycle after years of not using one. Your attempts would be awkward at
first and you would seem a bit unsteady, but you should be able to keep the
bicycle upright without too much difficulty. And if you rode the bicycle each day
for a week or two, your skills would have returned to nearly the same level as
when your abilities were at their peak. Hence you did not “forget” the skill entirely
and with just a little practice you would be able to restore most of your abilities in
a short time. Recapturing that level of performance required only a small fraction
of the effort that was needed to achieve it the first time.

In some ways, the demands of learning psychomotor skills impose fewer
burdens on the trainer than other types of training. The performance is usually
easy to observe and therefore judgments about it are easy to make. There need
be little guessing about what the trainee is thinking, or about procedures—if the
performance matches the standard required, that is usually sufficient. The main
factors that seem to influence psychomotor skills learning are motivation and the
presence of accurate feedback about performance. Of course, as in all types of
learning a significant determinant of learning capacity is purely genetic. Not all of
us can become great pianists; some people are simply born with more talent for a
specific skill than others. But an individual lacking abilities in one physical
performance does not mean all other psychomotor skills are deficient as well. A
person who plays the piano poorly might have great skills as a swimmer.

Attitudes
The training of attitudes is the third and final domain of learning. We define attitudes
as the tendency to think and behave in persistent patterns according to one’s
predisposition toward events, objects, persons, organizations, and so on. Attitudes
are closely related to the concepts of opinion, sentiment, and beliefs. Most experts
argue that the concept of attitudes is broader than mere opinion or beliefs. Attitudes
refer to a consistent way of thinking about a general group of things, whereas
opinion and beliefs are limited to a specific situation or thing. The concept of
sentiment is even more expansive and less well defined than attitudes. Another
word often used to describe this category of learning is affect, though this is usually
taken to mean something somewhat different. Affect refers to any mood, feeling,
or emotion that influences behavior. It is a technical term borrowed from the field
of psychology. In practice, the term refers to the states of mind that cause a person
to behave in certain predictable ways. Moods, feelings, or emotions might not
seem to be the kinds of things that a trainer ought to be concerned with, but these
can be extremely important aspects of the way people carry out their work and in
the way people react to events in the workplace. For this reason, it is a facet of
human behavior that deserves attention in training programs.


Attitudes influence behavior in many important ways. If we have negative
attitudes toward our work organization, we will surely perform less effectively than
if our attitudes are positive. Creating a positive atmosphere in the workplace is an
important aspect of attitude training. More specifically, attitudes play a role in
aspects of work such as punctuality, safety consciousness, performance accuracy,
and motivation. All of these can be influenced by training aimed at attitude
development or attitude modification. Consider the issue of safety consciousness.
This is undeniably important in every job setting; we all want our staff members
to be able to work without worry of safety threats and to work in a way that ensures
safe conditions. Few people would disagree with the proposition that safety is highly
desirable in the workplace, yet some persons knowingly behave in ways that
compromise safety. Attitude training about safety can raise consciousness of the
importance of safety issues and promote positive attitudes that lead to safer behaviors
on the job.

Among the three modes of learning, training of attitudes is usually thought to
present the greatest challenge. The chief problem faced in attitude training is that
a person’s attitudes are internal states. A trainer cannot directly observe the attitudes
of learners. At best, they can be seen indirectly through behaviors that suggest
individuals’ internal states of mind. Although this is also the way cognitive learning
is assessed, the means for making attitudes observable are not so easy to construct
as ones for cognition. Usually, evidence about attitudes is built through
questionnaires, though it is possible to infer attitudes from other kinds of behavior
or from physiological measures such as heart rate or Galvanic Skin Response
(commonly known as lie detectors). Broadly speaking, human beings tend to be
shy about exposing their attitudes to others. This is especially true if a person’s
attitudes are considered unpopular or likely to arouse suspicion. In such situations,
individuals tend to hide their attitudes or to send misleading signals about their
true feelings. All this may be done unconsciously. Attitudes are elusive and not
easily understood, either by the person holding them or others who observe them.
Most people are not fully aware of their own attitudes, and they seldom reflect on
their states of mind. Even if we do weigh our attitudes on a particular topic, we
may not accurately judge them.

Perhaps the most difficult aspect of training in this domain is that firmly
established attitudes are not easily changed. Training over a period of a few weeks
cannot possibly alter attitudes that have been formed over a lifetime. As a matter
of fact, the definition of an attitude is an enduring pattern of thinking about a
subject. So, if an attitude truly is enduring, it must be resistant to rapid or casual
changes. For this reason, there is a big difference in the strategies employed for
attitude formation and for attitude revision. Establishing a new attitude on a subject
where no previous attitude was held may only involve building a clear and
compelling justification for the new attitude. Bringing about a change in already

Theories of training !'

held attitudes requires
trainers to first offer
convincing arguments
against attitudes held and
then arguments in favor of
the new attitude. This
sounds simple, but it is
actually quite difficult. The
entire exercise is based
upon an appeal to logic, but
as we well know, people do
not always behave
rationally. If people were
truly rational, they would not drive automobiles recklessly, smoke cigarettes, or
engage in other types of risky behavior.

Psychologists also have noted a factor called “instrumentality” in shaping our
willingness to modify attitudes. Instrumentality refers to extent to which a thing or
subject is valued by individuals. Changing your opinion on a topic of little
importance to you will be easier than changing your opinion on a matter that you
consider of great significance. It would probably be easier to convince you to
change the brand of your toothpaste than it would be to convince you to change
your attitudes toward members of your family or to change your views on political
matters. The latter subjects are ones that are at the very core of our identity as
humans and therefore matter a great deal to us. We are unlikely to modify our
beliefs on those matters, but our brand of toothpaste is something that counts for
little either from a psychological point of view or from a practical perspective.

Theories on training and learning

More Related Content

Similar to Theories on training and learning (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Theories on training and learning