The World's Largest Train-the-Trainer Company

Sign-In to My Langevin Checkout (0)

Follow us on:

Ralph on Twitter button Langevin Facebook Page button Linkedin Alumni Group button

Langevin Blog

Instructor Supervision: Oh, there’s a problem?

March 1st, 2010

In a recent post, I spoke to you about the value of frequent spot checks of instructor performance on instructor performance. There is unquestionable pay-off in that. After all, that which the boss checks, gets done best.

However, there is also value in the instructor development which may occur because of those spot checks – and that raises a few questions that I will attempt to answer.

How do you identify that there is an opportunity for improved performance (see, isn’t that better than saying there’s a problem that needs to be fixed?) and how do you develop that performance?

The identification of an opportunity for improved performance is sometimes quite easy. Studies show that virtually every training organization will conduct some kind of Level 1 survey at the end of a training session. These surveys typically ask about the content and how the content is presented. These end-of-course surveys are a great way to identify trends or isolated problems that may be occurring with a trainer.

  • Using these surveys you can watch for trends. If a trainer’s average scores are dropping over a period of weeks, it is most likely is an indicator of decreased performance. Not always, of course. The content and the target audience can certainly also affect the perception of how the trainer performed. This is referred to as the halo effect. If the content rocked, the perception of the trainer does better. If the content is poor, or if the learner group is resistant, the trainer’s scores may be lower.
  • As far as isolated incidents go, if a trainer is written up by a student on an evaluation for an inappropriate comment or process, it could be an indicator of a need for intervention. A situation like this, or something similar, would indicate a need to have an immediate chat with the instructor. However, we must always keep in mind that there are two sides to every story. Sometimes students (and trainers) just have a bad day.

Of course, there are many other ways to uncover a need for classroom observation. One of the things I like to do is hang around the break room when the students are on break. This subtle eavesdropping often offers more accurate evaluation of the instructor’s performance than the end-of-course surveys. And, there may even be the occasional situation where an instructor comes to you with a performance problem. Although, in our “excellence-as-expected-baseline” world, that doesn’t happen too often!

Any of these circumstances could signal the need for a classroom observation. If you make these occasional “drop-ins” a regular event, then your appearance in the classroom will not be stressful or distracting for the instructor and you will have a useful and natural work sample on which to base your observations of the instructor’s performance.

Make the private debrief a routine part of these classroom observation sessions, and try to schedule the debrief as soon as possible after the class. Make sure you start by identifying several of the strong points you observed. Then, mention one or two specific classroom behaviors to improve upon but make sure you have suggestions on how to improve those areas. And finally, close with a strong point.

Of course, your job is not done until the paperwork is finished. Be sure to make note of your observations so that you will know what to look for during your next “drop-in.”

As a training manager, one of the indicators of your success is the performance of your instructors in the classroom. Periodic spot checks are a great way of polishing that performance.

Paul


Tags: ,


2 Responses to “Instructor Supervision: Oh, there’s a problem?”

  1. trainer program enhancement in real-time is challenging. Especially because we often get into ruts of behavior and we continue to use those styles until something blows up or we are forced to change.

    One technique I have always enjoyed is having a trusted co-facilitator in the room, whos only responsibility is to give you real time feedback on your program.
    I have develop a series of non-verbal cues varying from
    Preaching
    Talking to much
    Audience is bored
    Ask more questions
    etc…

    while presenting the co-facilitator offers feedback I can take it or leave it. Yet having someone in the roon who’s only job is to help you be your best is a great tool.

  2. Gene Coburn says:

    We use Peer-Peer Evaluations as part of the instructor evaluation process. Each of my facilitators are required to complete 2 peer-peer evaluations each quarter, provide the feedback to the peer, and then send me a copy of the evaluation. I then review the feedback and discuss with the facilitator at their next regular 1-1 meeting. The evaluator also is asked what they learned and consider doing differently based on the observation.

    This has worked quite well for the past 2 years.

Leave a Reply