Posts Tagged ‘6 CIA’

Two of the best trainer models?

Sunday, September 5th, 2010

I am running a Train the Trainer Programme in a week’s time and am very excited about it. It is a while since I have done one, and for me, in working life terms, life doesn’t get much better than training trainers. Hence the excitement!

Part of my planning has been updating or preparing new handouts for certain models and topics, and this has reminded me of some of the excellent models and theories available to assist trainers in their work and own personal development.

I have just completed handouts on two of John Heron’s models – 6 Category Intervention Analysis (6CIA) and Dimensions of Facilitator Style (DFS). As I completed them, I was left wondering whether these are perhaps the best models available for a trainer to use to assess whether they are a ‘complete’ trainer?

Heron first developed the 6CIA model. It was designed to assist people involved in 1-2-1 helping relationships, such as a doctor working with a patient. As the name suggests, it categorises the helper’s Interventions into 6 Categories (Prescriptive, Informative, Confronting, Cathartic, Catalytic and Supportive). By using this model, trainers can ascertain whether they are using all the Categories, and whether they are using the most appropriate Category at the most appropriate time. I have seen it help a person understand a potential ‘blind spot’ they have by it illustrating to them how they were only using 5 of the Categories.

DFS also has 6 groupings, but here they are referred to as Dimensions (as opposed to Categories). These dimensions are Planning, Meaning, Confronting, Feeling, Structuring and Valuing. Heron developed this model to assist facilitators working with Groups (as opposed to 1-2-1s), and these Dimensions cover all aspects of how a facilitator and a group works together.

This model is sometimes also referred to as 18DFS. This is because not only does it have the six Dimensions, it also has three Modes – Hierarchical, Co-operative and Autonomous. Heron used the Modes to describe the exercise of power in the running of the group by the facilitator – moving from Hierarchical, where all the power is with the trainer, through to Autonomous where the group has the freedom to finds its own way. As each Mode can be combined with each Dimension, this gives eighteen possible combinations.

I find that one of the best ways of explaining this model is to imagine, as a trainer, you have a ‘mixer’, as a producer would use when recording music. On the producer’s mixer they have 6 controls managing the loudness or softness of each instrument making up the track, which they can change as they see fit – thus enabling them to create the perfect sound. As a trainer, change the instruments to Dimensions, and the loudness / softness control to the Modes. You then use your mixer to set the Dimensions and Modes at their appropriate level for the needs of the group, amending them as you see fit.

If you want more details of these models, you’ll find them on the ‘Discussions’ area of the Breathe Facebook Page. If you would like Microsoft Word versions (which contain additional information that I cannot reproduce on Facebook), please drop me an email and I’ll happily send them to you.

Are these the two best trainer models, or would you suggest any better ones? I’d be very interested to hear your views.

Paul

To the Affective and beyond …

Thursday, July 22nd, 2010

Buzz, Woody and co are back! Toy Story 3 has arrived and is at a cinema near you. Reports say that it is a quite brilliant film, with the ability to appeal to both young and old. I’m getting excited just writing about it (and on a personal note, I’m surprised it has taken me until my fifteenth blog post to mention anything Disney)!  

Whilst it appears that Toy Story 3 will appeal to all ages, I get the impression that it’s one of those films where the adults will get more emotional than the children, and the children probably will not understand why the parents are getting all tearful – so some explanation or meaning may be required.

As many trainers know, this could be a great example of some affective learning. I’m also aware that many trainers know very little about the affective domain, and even when they do they are reluctant to use it. This is often due to the perception of such scenarios being complicated to de-brief, or that they may lose control of what takes place and not be able to gain the learning.

The majority of trainers will have a good understanding of Benjamin Bloom’s Taxonomy (or ‘ordered list’) of Cognitive learning which describes the 6 levels we, as trainers, can seek to attain with our learning methodologies. Many of us also use the Psychomotor domain of learning – the domain through which people learn how to use, for example, tools. So, when we learn to drive we learn through the Cognitive domain (what signs mean, when to indicate) and the Psychomotor domain (how to change gear, how to steer the vehicle along a correct course).

I can also recall a few affective experiences during my time driving. The one that immediately springs to mind involves a level crossing near Barnsdale Bar, but the less said about that the better – suffice to say it didn’t involve any trains or vehicles other than mine.  The Affective domain relates to feelings, and Affective learning is when we learn from those feelings.  Due to feelings having been involved, it can make the learning far longer lasting and far more potent than would otherwise be the case. Consequently, due to how much I scared myself at that level crossing, and the fact I understand what I did wrong, I haven’t made the same error again.

The use of the Affective domain can be a really powerful tool in situations such as role plays, when using an evocative piece of music or when asking people to imagine themselves in a certain scenario. I will explain in another post how to run these as effectively as possible.

The most important thing to remember, however, is that a person doesn’t actually learn whist experiencing the feelings – they learn from being de-briefed. They learn in the cognitive domain from understanding their feelings – and in learning situations people will often not fully appreciate why they have experienced certain feelings.  And the rest of the group – who may not have experienced any feelings – will learn vicariously from the effective de-briefing of the situation.

The reviewer of Toy Story 3 at Movies.com commented, “You might bring a handkerchief along. Or some tissue. Whatever you have. A long-sleeved shirt will do. You’re going to need it. My viewing companion openly sobbed during the entire final five minutes”.

If you go and see Toy Story 3, I’m pretty sure that you will understand where any feelings come from – but those around you may not, particularly if they are young. You will be able to increase their understanding of the world with a helpful explanation of what happened for you – once you’ve stopped sobbing!

Paul