5.4 Training

This Chapter is primarily about training and education in the community sector – with some further focus on leadership (as if you haven’t had enough of it in the previous Chapter).

It will describe what I believe are the essentials of training in an environment which has unique challenges.

I believe that the purpose of training and education is firstly so that we gain the necessary confidence to be successful in our endeavours to protect vulnerable children and adults in families in the Focus Group, secondly to whet our appetite for further learning, training in diverse fields, and thirdly, to get to know ourselves better.

This may mean that we’ll maintain our interest and enthusiasm in whatever it is that we are doing, or, in some cases, it may mean that we’ll seek a new direction altogether.

Education and training go hand in hand even though obviously there are differences in that education – remember I said that its root is from the Latin to draw out – is a broad term and training is usually specific to a job of work or a task to be done.

Optimising learning in any setting is challenging.  In a setting where we aim to include participants and students who come from backgrounds where they may have experienced multiple layers of disadvantage in education, health, financial, housing, etc. all of which inhibit learning in childhood it can be even more challenging.

This Chapter is divided into 11 Sub-Chapters.

5.4.1               TRAINING – INTRODUCTION

5.4.2                MEANINGFUL TRAINING

5.4.3                MODALITY OF TRAINING

5.4.4                PRINCIPAL ELEMENTS OF MEANINGFUL TRAINING

5.4.5                ASSESSMENT

5.4.6                SUPERVISION

5.4.7                A WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY

5.4.8                THEORY INTO PRACTICE

5.4.9                TRAINING AND SCALING UP

5.4.10              NEUROSCIENCE AND LEARNING

5.4.11              TRAINING – CONCLUSION

Isn’t it interesting that as we grow older, while our body decays and slows down, our mind increases in wisdom? And our thought processes do not slow that much either.

While conditions like dementia can affect the mind adversely in advanced years, in normal aging we can still learn new skills, a language, a musical instrument, parenting and grand-parenting, arts and crafts etc.

The Pillars have become aware of this over the past 30 years or so. Lifelong learning is now well established in all educational establishments and there are far more students of older years (and mostly highly valued too) in mainstream education than when I was young.

The graphs below are what I imagine the physical and wisdom aging graphs to be like. The age is along the horizontal line – from 0 to 90 (best of luck after that)!  The first graph (Graph One) that rises quickly in youth is the physical; and second graph (Graph Two) the line that rises slowly through life and doesn’t diminish in older years is the wisdom one.

Graph One – Physical:

Graph Two – Wisdom:

I wonder does this make sense to you – it certainly does to me.  Of course the above graphs are not scientific, or statistically derived – rather they are representations, or a what-I-observe graph – because the parameters of physicality (muscular strength, athleticism, body-mass index and similar); and wisdom (intuition, self-awareness, emotional intelligence and suchlike) are so far apart I’m not sure if it would be possible to compare them statistically.  (I don’t know whether or not it has ever been done).

You will observe that our peak physical performance is in our early 20’s up to our early 40’s and then there is a slow but definite decline.  Wisdom might not be that high when we are at peak physical age – but as we move into our late 30’s and 40’s (and 50’s) we seem to gradually increase in this area – and can continue to get wiser.

Lucky us! 

Because the sponge-like absorption of youth is gone we probably do not learn as rapidly, but the compensation is that what we learn is grafted onto what we have learned before.  And wisdom arises from the increasing ability to learn from our experiences and put them in context.

Most of you will have heard of expressions like an old head on young shoulders (to signify a person who is wise but is still young in years) or youth is wasted on the young (to describe how we wish we’d had more cop-on when we had more get-up-and-go) and similar, to describe our fascination with the connection between aging, learning and acquisition of skills and wisdom.

The wisdom gained from difficult life experiences offers unparalleled opportunities for good work.

Because of that it is important that training and education offered to people who aim to work in the area of family support and crisis intervention 1): is congruent with the work that is going to be done, 2): is designed with the people that it is aimed to assist in mind, 3): takes account of knowledge/insight accrued over many years and decades, and 4): resists the temptation to iron out individuality, i.e. the wrinkles of wisdom forged in the (sometimes) difficult experiences of life.

I am going on a bit about this because it has implications for training and education in all areas of life but particularly in the world of helping people in our Focus Group.

This is what this Chapter is about.

Training maketh the practitioner!

As I said at the bottom of this post, there is no doubt that if we have had a lot of difficulties to overcome and have worked through the difficulties and are interested in helping others we can make very good practitioners in supporting families in our Focus Group. 

In a post in the Chapter on Important Descriptions, I described the qualities that wise, strong and committed individuals within the Focus Group possess.  Almost always, the big challenge will be getting the balance right between how to be involved and still be separate.

Because our personal and professional growth is as much experiential as didactic [1] in the real world, both types need to be reflected in the training offered.  In experiential learning, what is sometimes known as the experience curve is particularly relevant. This simply means that the more we do of something the better we get at it.

So, from the organisational point of view, if we are committed to involving people who have been very hurt in our work, it is important to get the balance right between challenging people in their learning and ensuring that what is offered is both relevant and attractive to interested, enthusiastic people (of which there are many in communities).

And like the supervision [2] offered, the training undergone in an agency needs to be congruent and empathic with the work to be done.

If we have had a lot of formal education we need to be willing to learn from those who have learned by more non-formal methods, and vice-versa, because it is in the blend that the real strength lies.  (This is where two-way knowledge flow comes in).

And because the work to be done is primarily of an emotional nature, the training needs to have a significant emotional component too – matched with practical skills and down to earth common sense.

[1]. Experiential means learning from experience and didactic means the traditional classroom type learning that all of us who went to school are familiar with.

[2]. A lot of good learning arises from supervision while on the job.

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.

While training should include exposure to a wide range of therapeutic interventions it will be obvious from the Chapter on Modalities that we will lean towards the person centred (PCT) and cognitive behavioural (CBT) methods.

(If you have skipped to this post, and you are not familiar with either modality, the next Sub-Chapter will make more sense if you read the above links now)!

Even though I have stated earlier that people who are very hurt might not have sufficient inner stability to make the most of modalities that are cognitive/behavioural in nature, and/or are task oriented alone, it is necessary include it in training, as CBT and its principles substantially augment person centred work – and vice versa.

Most statutory therapeutic interventions, including mainstream psychological approaches (and the well-known twelve step programme for addicts) use CBT to effect positive change. 

Its success depends on what capacity the recipient has to understand its principles, content, and values – and many very hurt people will benefit from CBT when their acute distress has eased – and their confidence and belief in themselves rises.  It will then be far more meaningful.

PCT’s great strength is that it can be used in a wide variety of settings and will always complement other modalities.

The warmth, hope, trust, inspiration and love that we associate with it, will, hopefully, be present in mainstream psychological approaches, as they will in mainstream education and healing. Sometimes their presence will depend on the characteristics of the individual practitioner – or organisation.

In person centred work they are central and essential elements.

Because they are central and essential in the work, they also need to be present in training provided for prospective staff.

While they are core, or fundamental elements, I believe that the optimum situation would be to have a suite of training on offer.  That is, different training for people with different abilities and involvement, whether the courses are long or short.

I believe when external trainers are used they need to adhere to the above, and to two-way knowledge flow ethos also.

In my experience, people in training positions in organisations that either have never been grounded in the experience of families in distress, or have moved away from the work on the ground to the extent that they have forgotten what the realities are for such families, generally struggle to adhere to the above norms.

That is not to say that there is anything wrong with any other training. But I am describing the training that I feel works with our Focus Group – and that will be concerned as much with personal enrichment as well as enhancement of professional competence.

A Little Warning

Now before I continue with this Chapter on Training, and in particular the Principal Elements that I describe in the posts in the next Sub-Chapter, I need to mention an important aspect that could have negative effects on an organisation.

That is, the formation of an elite hierarchy of the trained who have more entitlement, against those not trained.

This is quite a difficult aspect to deal with as it often slips unknowingly into an organisation.  It needs to be monitored on an ongoing basis as it can become a real danger to the sharing power ethos that we aim to engender. Leadership needs to have awareness that it can occur, and be alert to the danger of it.

If we have more training we may have more positions of responsibility, and therefore higher pay, but that does not give us more entitlement.

If our commitment to sharing power, two-way knowledge flow and non-hierarchical approach is genuine from the start, we will view our position with a humility that is encouraging to others rather than be elitist or off-putting.

This Sub-Chapter describes what I believe to be the most important elements in formal training and/or courses designed by and delivered in an organisation committed to supporting families in our Focus Group. 

Emotional learning generally takes a long time – think of how long it takes to grow from a child to an adult!

And like the process of human growth, it is optimised by a multitude of experiences at regular intervals rather than separate or discrete modules delivered in short bursts – as might happen on training courses covering technological or business type fields.

It also takes some time to process the experiences. 

It is worth digressing briefly to explain what I mean here, because in cognitive learning – that is, learning done mostly by thinking things out rather than feeling them – there is also processing.  For example we may be learning mathematics and spend ages trying to solve a mathematical problem.  The processing happens when we distract ourselves with something else for a while (perhaps study another subject) and then when we go back to the mathematical problem the solution might come to us.  The same thing often happens doing a crossword puzzle, Our unconscious does the processing.

This processing is qualitatively different to the processing of emotional problems.

That is, once we get a cognitive (mathematical) solution, we get it, and can move on to a slightly more difficult cognitive problem, using what we have learned in solving the first one to solve the second.  This is called stepped, or linear learning. Emotional processing, particularly in people who are deeply hurt, is rarely as stepped or as linear as cognitive processing [1].

The principal reasons why it is different are to do with how emotional distress is held in the body. (I hope that as the Sub-Chapter is read the differences will become clearer).

Emotional learning done on our courses needs to mirror the type of support work that will be effective in healing deeply hurt people – even if the participants on the training are not as (obviously or evidently) deeply hurt as the people who will ultimately be the beneficiaries of the training.

Because of the time taken to process, the elements described in the following posts will need to be delivered in parallel with each other rather than in sequence.  For example, a course should, perhaps, deliver a Skill, then an Emotional element, then do a little on Ethos and then include another Skill, then do a Practical element etc.

[1]. This is one explanation as to why very hurt people such as those who end up in prison appear to take a long time to learn from their mistakes.

I mentioned design, in general, in a previous Sub-Chapter.

When designing courses that aim to train practitioners to support vulnerable people in families that constitute our Focus Group the experts consulted need to be both formally educated people, including academics, with some experience of community type work or have some relevant skill (to ensure that the professional boundaries are adhered to) and people who have direct experience of imprisonment (to ensure that the real, felt, world of imprisonment and all its aspects are included).

Both sets of experts should be afforded equal value.

If we are committed to two-way learning we need to be open to people’s oppositional type opinions and behaviour – the non-conformists – and determine whether the anger that usually accompanies such opinions/behaviour can be heard.

This is a good test as to whether or not we are open to real two-way knowledge flow. 

Or is it all aspirational, written in a mission statement but always, when the chips are down, deemed to be of secondary importance?

It is sad that people’s hopes might rise when they read a mission statement – and then they are dashed when they encounter the realities of training (not to mention the day-to-day work) in an organisation.

The next eight posts list elements that I feel are most important in training programmes.  Depending on the size and capacity of the organisation, there may be a major course that would include all the elements described below, but equally there could be shorter courses which would include a lesser amount, and of course, supervision (covered in Sub-Chapter Six below) is also training.

As students/participants, in all training delivered, the emotional elements of our experience need to be attended to.

The reason for this is that we will gain in confidence and competence in dealing with the emotional dimension that is, and will be, a central element of the day-to-day practice in the field.

One of the most important changes aimed for in our work is, after all, the emotional atmosphere in the family and home in general – and in particular individuals taking age appropriate responsibility for their emotions.

There are a number of elements that I consider to be of importance in the area of emotional education, and they will be present to some extent in all the others listed in the following posts. (That is, posts 5.4.4.4 to 5.4.4.10 inclusive).

It will be necessary to explore fear, how to recognise fear, and the link between fear and anger. Anger is very common in people who have suffered trauma (as we already identified in different parts of the website). It is helpful to identify the role of anger, how it manifests and how it can be used constructively and proactively. Because so many myths surround anger, the difference between anger and resentment, between anger (our emotion) and violence (our behaviour) all need to be explored.

Uncertainty can lead to anxiety which can also cause anger – so the implications of uncertainty will always be interesting! The rhythm and flow of training courses will have some built in flexibility so that we will experience the challenge of uncertainty – though always, of course, in a safe way.

I mentioned previously how time (or lack of it, or pressure to do something within a particular time) can lead to stress and then anger so time will be worthy of exploration also. Remember also, time is one of the root foundations of growth.

Shame is probably the most debilitating emotion that we experience. This will manifest in training in many different ways and is the reason why trainers need to be very skilled and experienced – particularly in the field of imprisonment and addiction. It is the principal reason why we do not favour the A – B – C assessment beloved of academic training.

Getting away from all the negative type emotions above, we also need to focus on joy, the role of joy, the experience of joy, and the importance of joy in healing and maintenance of good mental, physical and emotional health. Joy is an antidote to depression – so the difference between feeling good that brings joy and instant gratification that gives a short-lived high would be important.

And there is a spiritual dimension to joy. As participants we will derive great benefit from exploring the role of inspiration in our work. All training will benefit from the inclusion of play, playfulness and humour. And as we are encouraging hope and generosity, their emotional origins will be important.

There is an emotional dimension in being true to myself – sometimes it brings fear and a little defensiveness. Being authentic, or real, is usually a risk. The Johari Window is a very beneficial tool in our self-awareness – it assists us finding in out what we know about ourselves, and how others perceive us.

Self-Care helps us to stay fresh and enthusiastic.

The emotional impact of our work on ourselves as practitioners is important. There is a balance between do I need the job or does the job need me as well as proper use of supervision. There is a boundary between personal (including family) and work life including balance necessary between distance and immersion in the job (that is, bringing work to home and bringing home to work. The effects of working with people in deep distress include compassion fatigue, as well as secondary and/or vicarious trauma.

I discussed earlier how trauma seeps into teams. Sometimes this manifests in power struggles and conflict that is difficult to resolve. Very often, resolution involves logical, legal processes that are generally head-based and result in a I-win-you-lose result. Even the winners can be hurt in such processes.

Imagine if you had a bruise on your arm and rather than let it heal you hit it, every day, off a hard object. It would never heal! Sometimes I think that this is how we deal with trauma. Instead of offering compassion, hope, understanding and empathy by listening and encouragement, and allowing time to heal, we prod and prod and prod, raising anxiety and perpetuating the hurt from the trauma.

Garnering the emotional skills of dealing with trauma is probably the most important aspect of training of practitioners who work with very hurt and distressed people.

Finally, it is very important to include the nature and the role of crisis in people’s lives. There is always an element of choice in crisis situations – but people are not usually aware of this as thought processes in crisis situations are usually driven by unconscious forces.  People can initiate, stimulate and perpetuate crises.  Our aim is to encourage people to dream of a world beyond crisis.

Note:

All the above are included organically – that is, as they naturally arise over many sessions, facilitated by course leaders, rather than having a module on anger, a module on fear, a module on trauma etc. etc. This will model the nature of emotional learning.

And anyone reading the above might ask ‘how do we ensure that they are all included?’

Actually, all we need do is allow time and space for the root foundations to work away at their own pace and, with skilled facilitation, propagation will occur naturally as we described in Systems Theory.

It probably goes without saying that numerous skills need to be practiced in order to equip those who are attending courses with the competences necessary to assist people to cope with unexpected situations, ease their distress in life, and ultimately change the lives of people who have suffered deep trauma for the better.

In addition, emotional awareness will be greatly enhanced by being skillful.

The skills that need to be learned are summarised in the paragraphs below. Once again, this is not an exhaustive list – or the final word – but I believe that they are of some importance.

Listening is a crucial element of support. The essentials of listening skills need to be practiced in a trusting and yet challenging environment. The challenge will come from the warmth of the relationships in the training group. Closely related to listening are relationship skills themselves, i.e. making genuine relationships and enhancing them, recognising the value of dialogue in relationship, and the  importance of presence, attunement [1] and congruence.

In addition to congruence, the development of empathy is crucial. (In this, it is always helpful to know the difference between empathy and sympathy). The curiosity that comes from genuine interest and is not intrusive helps us understand people’s circumstances and walk in their shoes a little.

Any group of students can be considered to be a microcosm of family life in general in that people will inevitably adopt different roles. A wealth of learning can come from identification of our roles, how and why the roles are maintained – and perhaps, challenged, and how we resist change both individually and as a system.

A team is a system, so teamwork skills, how to work as a team, morale, trying to rid ourselves of the tyranny of comparison and being congruent in our relationships will be important. (In that respect, our goal is that our team will be a model of pro-social attributes).

One of the most important skills in working with individuals in the Focus Group is advocacy. This is because many people who have the characteristics as described may not be well practiced in the skill of having their voice heard. As I say a number of times, there are many staff members in statutory organisations who are committed, enthusiastic, idealistic and compassionate, that are partners in our work.

When we build relationships with agencies remember that the relationships are always with people in the agencies. An important part of advocacy is recognition of other organisations’ limitations and our acceptance of same.

In the Chapter on media I described at some length its effect on people in distress due to imprisonment and involvement in crime. I believe that we can learn skills in dealing with the media. Our aim is to use their considerable power and, indeed, concern – because there are many concerned and sincere media people – to make the lives of the Focus Group better. Mostly, media people are not that interested in positivity and good news – but some are!

We also need to practice outreach skills. Firstly, why bother reaching out at all?  What are our motives? Well – I believe anyway – reaching out to people in distress is a central part of our work; otherwise we will not be effective. When we reach out to vulnerable people we always need to be ready to deal with the unexpected – and the work will always include an above-average dollop of chaos.

There are, of course, special considerations of health and safety also – and all need to be included.

Finally, there are skills of challenging the organisation that are helpful for all of us workers. This is always a difficult process because we don’t want to bite the hand that feeds us so to speak.  We mentioned in a previous post that a community leader needs to stick to the mission and vision but staff also have a role in this.

[1]. Attunement is tuning in to what another is really saying – and feeling. The irrelevant bits are tuned out – for the present anyway. Like, for example, tuning a radio into the correct station with no clutter or what is known as white noise.

It is necessary to have a good understanding of, and to stimulate critical discussion on how society functions in order to ensure that people who are training become aware of how its structures affect families and in particular children in the Focus Group.

(You will twig that some of the topics listed below are connected to the subject matter covered in the Chapter on Power and Control in Society).

We often view compassion as a kind of optional extra instead of it being central in our work. I believe that compassion has a purpose in humanity and is of significant relevance in our organisations. But things often get in the way of compassion – usually when it is most needed. We might need to find out what gets in the way. Exploration of this is very fruitful in our work.

There are substantial power issues in society – and this seeps into the helping professions. (I have written about this already). The effects of power, how power manifests in different circumstances, how power may corrupt; and responsible use of power can all be learned experientially.

I already described what I referred to as disingenuous rooms.

Decisions made in such environments lead to the socio-political contradictions which many people would label as hypocritical that are so prevalent in our society. Therefore, exploration of the role of myth in perpetuating injustice will be of real value. The difference between peace and non-violence would be of interest.

Much injustice in our society comes from an inflated sense of importance – and then entitlement – that some members feel; i.e. a sense of being in a different class.

Such inequality leads to racism, discrimination, poverty and as a follow-on from that – higher involvement of certain sections of society in crime and anti-social behaviour. The fundamentals of anarchy, discussion on topics such as political correctness, activism, and action that is helpful to the Focus Group will all be of interest.

Related to the above would be knowledge of the difference between radical action and campaigning, including a discussion on what effect campaigning has on those who are the subject of the campaigning! This could lead to critical discussion on what we can do nothing about in society and what we can affect – in turn leading to how we intelligently use our time and energy. (See 12 – Work Ethic in this post)!

Since our principal focus is protection of children in families in the Focus Group, it will be helpful to examine the role of crime in society; what a crime-free society would look like; who would gain and who would lose in a crime-free society, and how society experiences the phenomenon of crime. The roots of violence in child-rearing and in society in general and a discussion on legal violence vs. illegal violence will raise people’s awareness of own prejudices that are linked to myths.

Finally, since we have posited the central role that the family has to play in child protection, it will be helpful to explore how the family has, over the centuries, perpetuated what the establishment wanted to prevail, both good and bad, i.e. promoting true democracy and maintaining docility in institutions.  Allied to this would be an exploration of what democratic families are like.