Posts
Point Two: Attendance
Given the radical schedule changes and the fact that our
Mozambican associates really have never scheduled a seminar on their own
before, our attendance was pretty much what we expected. Our first night saw
around six people; over the next few days, we lost a couple of people and
gained about four more. By the end of the first week, we were averaging six
people a night. The second week, however, saw a decrease in attendance. Whether
this was due to a certain amount of miscommunication about what to expect from
the seminar or participant fatigue is hard to determine—I am planning on
working with Leonard to follow up with the participants to investigate the
details. In any case, by the end of the second week, we were down to three
people.
While discouraging, this is not unexpected. The seminars are
far more complex than many Mozambicans are used to, and it is not unusual for
the stress of the material to cause some to give up.
On the other hand, the
miscommunication regarding expectations has been identified and we will be able
to better communicate what the seminars are about next time. In Mozambique,
many nonprofit organizations have taken to offering people food or money to
attend their seminars. The offer is appreciated, of course, but it creates a
situation where participants attend not to learn, but to earn.[i] While this may sound like a nice way to
provide poor nationals with money and allow them to learn, all it really does
is set an expectation that “classes” equal “stuff.” Thus, seminars and other
training are often valued for the prizes, not the education, provided. Once we
clarified that our seminar was there to give people tools in the form of information, a few of them lost
interest. Others, however, were excited to learn something they actually
considered useful, and saw no need to have any other incentive.
Point Three: Participation
Of utmost importance in the seminar is participation by the
attendees (which is why I usually call them participants). The seminars don’t just
spit out information at the participants—it is important to us that people
understand the principles we’re trying to communicate, and are able to apply
them to their lives. As a result, the seminar is geared toward a lot of
activities to reinforce our ideas. This is especially important in Africa,
where most of the participants have never encountered these concepts before.
This, thankfully, was a great success. The participants were
very engaged with what we were discussing (even those who were just there
because they thought they would get food were interested and participating).
There was a definite level of excitement in the group, and we noted not only a
steadily increasing level of engagement from the remaining participants, but
also an increasing level of excitement. Some of these activities and discussion
are quite difficult and complex, and the participants were definitely rising to
the challenge. This was exactly what we wanted, and we are extremely happy with
the results.
Next Entry: Conclusions
[i]
These same organizations often later wonder why there isn’t any long-term
impact from their training. Here’s a tip for anyone who is interested in
teaching people: if you have to pay people to attend your training, THEY ARE
NOT THERE FOR YOUR TRAINING. People do not learn by infection—simply going
to a training session does not guarantee participation or retention, and paying
your students to attend will only get them in the seat. If anyone out there is
considering or has been paying people to attend your training/seminar/workshop,
please just stop (note: this does not
apply to workforce training by businesses – if you want your employees to know
something they don’t you should pay
them to learn it). OK, footnote rant over.
No comments:
Post a Comment