Because of our commitment to two-way knowledge flow, described elsewhere, participants need to have a significant voice in how the training proceeds.
One size will not fit all and much is to be learned by both participants and trainers through meaningful dialogue and exploration.
Most importantly, training should trust the root foundations, as well as energy, wisdom, and spontaneity.
If we grew up in a family in our Focus Group – because of adverse experiences in school – we may not be accustomed to trusting our own judgement. And if we have loads of formal education – because we are so used to experts dictating to us what to do – we might also distrust our own judgment.
I do not believe that it is necessary to use language, methods, and norms that may be commonly used or practiced in academic, business, or corporate circles. Of course, those in training – whatever our background – will learn some new words and terms, if they are appropriate to the subject matter. It is important, though, that they are not used for the sake of using them, or to sound superior.
Language can often alienate people who left school early, and/or whose education was mostly non-formal. (Sometimes it may have been used, perhaps unconsciously or inadvertently, by professionals to do this).
And in respect of other methods and norms of particular significance there is the grading (A-B-C) so beloved of the mainstream education system.
I propose that in training offered in organisations that support vulnerable families it is only necessary to state, during or following training, whether a student is satisfactory or unsatisfactory in whatever subject is being examined.
Any grading, within that, will feed into unhealthy competition and comparison mentioned elsewhere. If we are students and we do not like this, and yearn for A-B-C, distinctions, credits etc. our values and core beliefs on competition, comparison and judgment would be a rich source of exploration and ultimate learning for ourselves and our peers. (Once again I am reminded of Paulo Friere’s writings on the internalisation of the values of the oppressor mentioned here).
In being two-way with respect to facilitators and learners, the emotional dimension of the work needs to be mirrored in the training. Also to be encouraged is camaraderie, as the sense of belonging inculcated in training propagates to those in distress who are the subject of the subsequent work.
Pride is a highly motivating factor in people and is (generally speaking) a human characteristic. To be proud of what is learned or achieved, or how learning is applied to real situations, is necessary for that extra bit we seek.
To summarise, I strongly believe that training offered should be comprehensive, fulfilling, inclusive, creative, emotional, and should focus on warmth, dialogue, and trust.
Complementing these necessary qualities are other elements; i.e. sound theoretical understanding of the principles and methodologies underpinning our work, and holistic assessment methods.