Your go-to blog for modern lab management

Do you know his name? It’s Malcolm Knowles. In 1973 he published The Adult Learner, A Neglected Species. He is credited with the wider use of andragogy to reflect how adults learn and differentiate the process from pedagogy or how children learn.

When I was in my master’s program in adult education at the University of Southern Maine back in the ‘90s, my advisor and professor, Michael Brady, Ph.D., told us a story about Malcolm Knowles. He was the keynote speaker at a conference of adult educators in Maine.

After the usual introduction, plaudits, and applause, he spoke. “What would you like to learn?”

Now imagine you’re in the audience. You know of Malcolm and his work in your field. You’re very excited to hear him speak and interested in what this expert has to say. And he asks, “What do you want to learn?” How do you feel? What do you do?

Well, there was a pregnant pause with silence. And finally, one brave soul broke the ice, “Could you please tell me more about how you came up with your theory of adult learning?”

Malcolm smiled, “Why yes, of course – great question.” He then went on for several minutes, answering this learner’s question. “What would someone else like to learn?” And this time, he got a quicker response and another great question from a self-directed learner. And so it went – they’d caught on.

Malcolm was using the adult learning principles (ALPs) he’d written.

In particular, he was both acknowledging and helping them all to be self-directed. There are many other ALPs, including active (not passive), applicability, co-developing the agenda, immediacy of needs, and many more! [I’ll be writing a blog just on his ALPs - #6 in this series, so please stay tuned].

Let’s talk just a bit about what he meant by andragogy. Adults aren’t children – we have different needs, wants, and desires. I’m pretty sure you get this. It applies to learning, too, of course. And I’m willing to bet you’ve experienced it in yourself – I know I have. I was living alone, and a button popped off a dress shirt. No need to toss the shirt – I just need to know how to sew it on. Um, how?

I’d never learned. So, like so many of us, I searched online, found some simple how-to articles with photos, diagrams, and videos, and in about 10 minutes, I’d learned how to sew a button onto a dress shirt. Apparently, you can teach an old dog new tricks, eh? Well, at least a self-directed old dog, that is.

How much of a self-directed learner are you? And perhaps more importantly for your learners, how much of an adult learning facilitator are you, too? Do you facilitate (definition: to make it easy) the learning for your learners? Many of us in learning circles prefer the term facilitator over trainer or teacher. In fact, it’s widely used elsewhere across the globe. I traveled to Trinidad & Tobago years ago, and they introduced me as “our facilitator for our learning this week.” How cool is that?!

Be like Malcolm Knowles – facilitate active learning in others. Use his adult learning principles – trust me, you won’t regret it – and neither will your learners.

And check out heutagogy, too, while you’re at it. How heutagogical are you?

Next: Training needs assessments‚ Do not pass go, do not collect $200

"Recent Blog Posts""popular_all_time

It’s 100,000 years ago on the savanna. You and your clanmate are returning from some nearby foraging. There is a gentle breeze blowing toward you, and the tall grass is gently bending. Some birds were chirping. It’s quiet now – in fact, it’s too quiet. The hairs on your back are standing up. You glance back and spot it – a saber-toothed tiger! You both burst into a sprint for your lives! You’re just a stride or two ahead of your clanmate, and you can hear the Smilodon pounce! You hear the bloodcurdling scream cut off and the rending of flesh, the breaking of bones! And you keep running, and running, and running …

You arrive at your cave out of breath. Your clanmates gather around you. They want to know what happened. You stagger over to the wall, pick up a piece of charcoal and begin drawing. You make some lines, some arrows, and a few Xs. You step back and look at it – yes, it depicts this well. And then you tell them about the graph you’ve drawn.

“As you all can see from my time-bounded graph, our Smilodon-induced fatalities had trended upward for the preceding two moons with a peak in raw numbers at five last moon when our hunting party was fatally surprised by three Smilodons. At this rate, in 3 more moons, our clan will reach criticality and will no longer be sustainable.”

You look at your clanmates, and they stare back at you in wonder and curiosity. What? No story?!

Stories have been with us since we could communicate. Studies of specific myths indicate that they go back at least 20,000 years, and stories in general likely much further.

Why?

Obviously, it’s how we communicated, especially since life is a sequence of events (scenes), involving people (characters), having a path or arc (plot), with critical stages (climax), and an outcome (what’s at stake). I think you can see my point.

But there is so much more to stories and narratives. They are how we facilitate relatability to others, including bonding. [I’ll be writing about that more in blog #2: “Excuse me, sir, are you okay?”]. They help us make sense of our place in both the macro world and our microworlds.

And they play a significant role in cognitive science. They are pretty darn powerful. So, why don’t we use them more? That’s a great question.

In the hard sciences, we have equated stories with anecdotes and have devalued them as a usurper of data’s importance. This has been an incorrect approach to seeing their power to tell the story, including our data. Data and stories go hand in hand – they’re not binary (data terminology) nor a zero-sum game (psychosocial phrase). Thankfully in recent years, there has been a broad movement to use storytelling effectively in the sciences.

Narratives and storytelling have their day in the sun. Storytelling is growing as the norm, with storytellers being sought out for their “particular set of skills.” Studies have shown that some storytellers in tribes have been shown to increase cooperation and consequently to tribal benefits; they are “preferred social partners [with] greater reproductive success.” That sounds pretty good to me. Storytelling skills would seem to be a selected evolutionary trait.

So, what’s stopping you from using them more? If you’re like most of us, you haven’t been exposed to the science (and art) of effective storytelling, including the empirical data that supports it as a tool, technique, and strategy.

In this micro-blog series – “3-minute micro-stories” – I’ll be sharing many of the methods and reasons behind them and, of course, as narratives. You can likely read each one in about 3 minutes or so. Here’s one more micro-story for you. It’s about my Dad, who was my first storytelling teacher and mentor.

My Dad sold shoes for a living. Oh, not in stores like Al Bundy – my Dad traveled all over New England and upper-state NY selling to stores. He knew everyone, and everyone knew him. I remember back in the ‘70s, and I went on a sales trip with him. I would’ve been in my early teens at the time. We stopped at a roadside diner for a late bite to eat.

As we walked in, several people saw us and yelled out, “Hi Keith!” It was like that frequent scene in cheers (“Norm!”) before there was the show. That was my Dad.

Later in life, I was married and had moved up to Maine, a couple of states away. My then-wife was getting her degree, and so my folks came up to help us celebrate. In the crowded gym where commencement ceremonies were, we spot my Dad, talking with two gentlemen. Later in the ceremony, the two men were honored by the college for their contributions. They were the Levine brothers, Levine’s Department Store owners – an icon for decades in downtown Waterville.

My Dad had sold them shoes over the years, and they chatted as old friends do.

Years later, my Dad passed away from lung cancer due to a lifetime of smoking, starting as a teen and reinforced as a sailor in WWII when they’d give the GIs cigarettes. At his funeral, my brother, sister, my oldest nephew, and I all told stories about him both as eulogies and later with loved ones back at the house. I still recall 25 years after that, so many of his old friends and family said the same thing how they loved all of the stories about my Dad. He was larger than life, and they said we’d captured his spirit well.

So, as you can see, stories have the power to transport us, frame episodes, and make sense out of our lives. You can (and I’d offer should) use narrative in many forms of communications.

Some examples to get you primed include training, conversations about risk, team building, meetings, and casual conversations. Drop me a line and tell me your story.

How are you using stories to relate, make sense, persuade, and contextualize your data? Start telling your stories.

Next: Excuse Me Sir, Are You Okay?

"Recent Blog Posts""popular_past_month

Previous: What can Alex Honnold teach us about risk?

Did you ever drive someplace, only to arrive at your destination and think, "I don't even remember driving! How the heck did I get here – and in one piece?!" Or perhaps when you were surprised by an animal or child darting out into the road, and you braked or swerved just in time to avoid hitting it? And you thought, "Thank goodness – that was close!" If you're like me and most of us, you have, and it's a normal part of how our magnificent brain can work – sometimes. We can and often do make split-second decisions without consciously thinking about them. It was a survival skill and up-selected evolutionary trait that we thankfully continue to have and use today. It's called fast thinking or system 1. And as I'm sure you could guess, the corollary or companion to it is indeed slow thinking or system 2. In the 1970s, Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky did a ton of studies on human behavior and decision making, and they learned a lot. Like why we care more about a loss than we do about an equivalent gain? Or why the first number have such an anchoring effect? And why do we throw good money after bad? Basically, they studied our many cognitive biases – how we make decisions that don't appear rational at first glance. And did I mention that Daniel Kahneman got a Nobel Prize in Economics Sciences for it? And he wasn't even an economist – he was a behavioral psychologist and researcher. But their groundbreaking 1974 article, Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, changed how we see risk, perceptions, and human decision-making. I'll be discussing these and many other of our cognitive biases in future micro-blogs in this series – "Risk is a 4-letter word". But what about all of this fast vs. slow thinking? Let's come back to that. It turns out that we don't do a lot of heavy cognition if we can avoid it. Our brains find workarounds to reduce the energy load. Imagine that you're driving, and you see something that looks like a child; you'll likely swerve to avoid it – a good thing, of course. What if it was just a plastic bag caught by a breeze or an animal? Our brain reacts to what it thinks it might be as opposed to what it is. If you want a literary allusion to fast thinking, look no further than Spiderman. Do you recall his Spidey sense tingling? And his super-fast reactions? Yes? Well, those are great examples of this non-analytical intuitive, fast thinking. Now, you don't have to be a superhero to have and use quick thinking (though I'm sure it'd be nice to have Spidey sense in a pinch!). Here are a few examples you may have experienced yourself. You're sitting at the dining room table enjoying dinner with the family. One of your sweet children reaches for a dish and knocks the vase with the fresh-cut flowers tipping it over. And as if in slow motion, your arm shoots out, and you barely manage to catch the vase before it crashes. Your loved one says, "Wow, what a catch! How'd you do it?" And you say, "I don't know, I just reacted." Fast thinking saves the day. Sometimes. You're driving and watching the road when all of a sudden there's a dog in the street! You swerve to the right, barely avoiding hitting the poor thing, likely killing it had you not cranked the wheel. But now you're skidding through into the breakdown lane and onto the shoulder going down the rolling slope! You're braking and trying to hold the wheels straight! You finally come to a stop. You're sweating and thankful that it wasn't worse. And you hope that dog is okay. You're on your way to getting your usual coffee, and while walking, you're looking at your phone, and you get to the door without a mishap—that time. You get your coffee, and you're looking at your phone as you walk off the curb and "Beeeep!" as a car goes whizzing by. You jump back, heart-pounding as the driver curses you out. And you think, "Boy, that was close! I've got to pay better attention!" You're in a lab decanting some sulfuric acid, and you're startled by a loud noise. You react and swivel, and in your fast thinking turn, the acid splashes out, spattering your arm! You turn one way, turn back, and you run to the sink! You drop the glassware in the sink, turn on the cold water, and stick your arm under the flowing water. A labmate rushes over and says, "Let's get your lab coat off to wash your arm better!" You do so, but you can't wash your whole arm, and you now say, "Oh my God, I think it got on my face!" The lab mate has to help get you into the emergency shower—much more fast thinking, which unfortunately didn't help you. These and similar situations happen to us all. Sometimes we notice, mostly we don't pay attention. Sometimes fast-thinking saves our butts, and sadly, too often, it doesn't. Try going without it. You can't. Try insisting that someone "Pay better attention" or "Needs to be more careful." Really? Try it consistently. I'll bet you can't sustain it. Don't expect others to either. Or as Daniel Kahneman put it, "It is wrong to blame anyone for failing to forecast accurately in an unpredictable world. However, it seems fair to blame professionals for believing they can succeed in an impossible task." Which system of thinking are you using when it comes to risk? And which system are those around you?Coming Soon: Why is "threat to value" key to understanding decisions?Sources: Kahneman, Daniel. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Kahneman, Daniel and Tversky, Amos. (1974). Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science, 185(4157):1124-31. DOI: 10.1126/science.185.4157.1124.

"""Explore More Posts""popular_all_time

Previous: How Well Do You Know the Father of Adult Learning?

Training (or learning) needs assessments – Do not pass go, do not collect $200 I get asked this question a lot: "Jon, what's the most frequently missed opportunity (or mistake) you see being made with training?" A lot. And it's an easy question – not just because I get asked it over and over. It's a bit of a cliché, but way too many trainers don't follow Steve Covey's habit #3: "Put first things first" (or what I've heard rephrased as "Begin at the beginning"). I keep seeing trainers begin in the middle. Perhaps it's because this is supposed to always be done before even attempting to design the training. Once you do this, you may discover that their needs aren't best addressed via training. Yup, it's to do a training (or learning) needs assessment. I remember learning of a study published in an HR journal several decades ago that studied how many problems brought to a training department were actually solvable via training. Care to guess – out of 8 issues, how many can even be addressed through training? You have a 1 in 9 chance of choosing it randomly (it could be zero, yes?). While it wasn't zero, it wasn't much more – only 1 in 8 problems are solvable by training. So, what about the other seven problems? All sorts of different needs – supervision, supplies, budget, behavior, etc. The list is a long one – no surprise, training can only manage somewhere around 10-15% of typical problems. Many trainers don't know or realize that a learning needs assessment is that key first step. They end up maybe writing learning objectives or go right to put their training together (sadly, often text and data on PowerPoint slides). Or they figure that the learner's needs are whatever OSHA includes for required content. Ugh. Please, just don't. A learning needs assessment is a critical first step - heck, even OSHA emphasizes this in document 2254 on their training requirements. Then we need to develop well-articulated and crafted learning objectives to see just what the heck we expect the learners to be able to do after the learning event (training) (see micro-blog #3 in this series - Learning objectives ("At the end of this micro-learning, you will be able to …"). An easy example that's likely fairly common would be a perceived need for respiratory protection. Let's say that through some reporting, I get feedback that a lab group needs respirators. Hopefully, as a decent IH and trainer, I stop and think, "I wonder what's going on?" So, I check out what they're doing. Maybe they're not working in a fume hood? Or it's not functioning properly? Or who knows what? All great questions. Well, let's imagine that things are all fine with their processes, equipment, etc. They are preparing to use a new substance that's a known sensitizer, and they requested the respirator use as an added precaution above the hood, etc. It seems fine to approve. Now we've determined the need and that it can be aided via training. In this case, on respirator selection, fitting, use, and care. We can now begin to design the training by crafting effective learning objectives. "At the end of the training, the learner will be able to use a respirator properly."Had we found other issues – say, the hood wasn't working, or their process could benefit from some adjusting, then respirator training might not have been the right solution. It's all about a well-thought-out training or learning needs assessment. There are many methods and techniques to choose from in doing a learning needs assessment. Which one should you use? I'll give you an example in the next micro-blog – in the form of a micro-story to drive home the key points. Read on, fellow learning travelers.Coming Soon: "You want me to teach BBPs to who?!"

"""

ANSI/ASSE Z490 Standard on EHS Training has been available for a decade and a half, and few EHS departments use it. The question is, of course, why not use it? Is it fear of the unknown? Do EHS professionals and trainers think it will limit their training or "handcuff" them to unnecessary requirements? There seem to be many false myths that will be dispelled. Not only that, but also this paper will demonstrate that one can have a-rockin' EHS training program, complete with adult learning principles, and still comply with Z490! One should never "settle" for second best when it comes to EHS training – it's too damn important! This article will address many questions, including:

1. What are the major sections of Z490?
2. What are some recent updates to Z490?
3. If we adopt it, what are we then obligated to do?
4. How can it really help our EHS training program?
5. What other questions might people have?

Major Sections of ANSI/ASSE Z490 There are seven sections and four annexes in Z490. They are:

Sections:

1. Scope, Purpose, and Application
2. Definitions
3. Management of a Comprehensive Training Program
4. Training Program / Course Development
5. Training Delivery
6. Training Evaluation
7. Documentation and Recordkeeping

Annexes:

1. References
2. Training Course Development Guidelines
3. Safety, Health, and Environmental Trainer's Checklist
4. Virtual Learning

Let's start by taking a brief look at each of the major sections.

1. Scope, Purpose, and Application:

This section is easily summed up in one 3-part sentence. Z490 is about the criteria ("scope") for the accepted practices ("purpose") of EHS training/trainers ("application"). That's it – simple, isn't it?

2. Definitions:

There are only 14 definitions in Z490. These range from the ANSI/ASSE consistent ones (i.e., may, shall, and should) to the expected but very obvious (e.g., trainer, training, and training everything [course, event, program, provider, etc.] to the somewhat more sublime (e.g., certificate, competent training professional, credit, and virtual learning). None of the 14 terms are so specific as to "lock" one into something. On the contrary, they are pretty generic or wide-ranging.

3. Management of a Comprehensive Training Program:

Section 3 on the management of one's EHS program comprises just four subparts - accountability and responsibility, minimum requirements, resource management and administration, and evaluation – that's all. Within these four subparts, there aren't a lot of things you have to do. You need to identify areas of responsibility and accountability, provide some level of resources, administrate the training, and evaluate it. Oh, and yes, there are a few "minimums." But these minimums are very basic and traditional elements of any training program. What are they? They're such basics as development, needs assessment, objectives, design, format, delivery, completion criteria, evaluation, and recordkeeping of documentation. That's all – and they are the basics that every good training program should have anyway. Really.

4. Training Program / Course Development:

Section 4 is probably the biggest section with helpful guidance on many basic elements of any adult learning. These include needs assessment, learning objectives, design, delivery method(s), content, instructional materials, trainer qualifications, environment, strategy, completion, and continuous improvement.

5. Training Delivery: Section 5 on training delivery (my favorite section, of course) has some good "meat" to it, too. General subparts include trainer qualifications and delivery methods and materials. Planning and preparation have also been added here. 6. Training Evaluation: This section overviews a variety of aspects, including general criteria, approaches, and continuous improvement. 7. Documentation and Recordkeeping: The last section includes aspects of records, including systems, procedures, records, confidentiality/availability, and issuing certificates.

It's also important to understand the four annexes and their overall guidance, so let's review them.

A. References:

There are almost 20 references or resources to consider using in your training, five of which are recent additions.

B. Training Course Development Guidelines:

This annex is by far the most comprehensive one. There is a nice overview on course development with a newly added paragraph on structuring a training course with nine steps of how to do so.

C. Safety, Health, and Environmental Trainer's Checklist:

This annex has a detailed checklist with five major parts and various subparts and items within each of the five. These include delivery, planning/preparation, special issues, other considerations, and key points of delivery. There's also a "day of" checklist. It's a great multitude of basically bullet items to tick off one's list.

D. Virtual Learning:

This is a new annex with four nice parts and many bullet points under each.

Recent Updates to Z490 There really weren't many changes of a significant nature in this revision and process. Mostly it was cleaning up some wording to make it a bit more comprehensive and smoother. Some specifics include:

• Adding needs assessment, development, delivery, evaluation, and management to the purpose.
• We are adding managing and management of the training program throughout it.
• Section 3 became much more about the management of a comprehensive training program (rather than a somewhat disjointed or, heaven forbid, haphazard one).
• Of course, we are adding a definition for "Virtual Learning." Beefing up guidance (and I do mean guidance only) on training evaluations.
• Differentiating between the (overall) training program and (any individual) course development.
• Added "literacy" as an issue or concern.
• Clarified regulatory requirements vs. training needs and the "need" to consider whether training is even the right "response" or solution. Under objectives, added, "skills" and "attitudes" to "knowledge" (to round out KSAs).
• Filled out training development with greater helpful details. Made mention of virtual learning and having a secure connection. Added that trainer qualifications should include both subject matter expertise and delivery skills.
• Suggests that "testing out" may be an option to be specified. Added a few items under training planning and preparation. Added that there shouldn't be noise, should be lighting, and provisions made for emergency aid.
• Did a little bit of nuancing under evaluations.
• Added that incidents, observations, and audits should be used to hone the training and evaluations.
• Tweaked recordkeeping to include certification.
• Added resources to Annex A.
• Added a paragraph on how to structure a training course in Annex B.
• Made a bunch of minor edits.
• Added Annex D on Virtual Learning.

Obligations Under Z490

Beyond the "standard" requirements (which are very basic, as discussed above), there isn't a lot. Have a management system, including the usual training elements, use some common best practices, and document, document, document. How Z490 Can Help Your EHS Training Z490 is a bit like an owner's manual that you get to write – how awesome is that?! But wait – there's more! Sorry. Anyway, Z490 is perhaps best at helping you organize your EHS training and ensuring that you're adopting some type of management system along with a few best practices. And you know what? That's good enough. It has few minimums that any decent training program is likely to have anyway. Also, it allows you to stipulate what it is you're doing to manage your EHS training. So, go ahead, rock it! (and then document what you did to make your EHS training as fantastic as it is). Possible Questions? That's a good question – what other questions might fellow EHS trainers have about Z490 that we haven't already discussed? Most seem to ask about the experience(s) of others who've implemented Z490. Yeah, right. There is a dearth of organizations that've adopted it. This is likely due to two things – no regulatory imperative and a profound lack of exposure/knowledge about it. I guess we'll see in the future how it goes. Final Thoughts on Z490That's really all there is to it. Z490 is mostly just a standard for organizing, managing, and documenting your EHS training, as well as a few best practices thrown in for good measure. So, what's stopping you from adopting and using it to the benefit of your centralize software training program? Happy training!Where do you want to take your EHS training?

Learn more about ANSI Z490.1!

"

Do you know who Alex Honnold is? If you’re a rock climber or a fan of it, you surely do. Or if you watched the documentary Free Solo, then you definitely do.

Yes, he’s that guy. He climbed El Capitan “free solo” – without a rope, just him, using his hands or fingers and his feet or toes at times. To say it’s impressive is like saying the Eiffel Tower is a nice metal structure.

It doesn’t do it justice.

So, what can Alex teach us about risk? Good question. In addition to the first free solo of El Capitan, he holds the fastest ascent of the Yosemite triple crown.

But he doesn’t limit his climbs to nature’s tall wonders. He also has climbed the outside of several buildings – yes, free solo.

His preparations, routine, practice, skills, etc., decrease the probability of a negative outcome.

“For every hard pitch I’ve soloed, I’ve probably soloed a hundred easy pitches.” The repetitions and practice enable a higher skill level than one might appreciate at first thought.

He also rehearses each move and visualizes them. He has even visualized everything that could go wrong in the run-up to a challenging climb, including falling onto the rocks below and dying. A process we would call a pre-mortem. Visualization is a helpful technique used by athletes and others to prepare for a challenging situation mentally. Guided visualization is a training approach that I’ve used in some courses I’ve taught.

All of this preparation, mental and physical, helps to get ready for the actual event. All of which helps decrease the probability of a negative outcome, which reduces its risk. I’ll let Alex explain it – he sums it up nicely (as they say, “brevity is wit”).

Here is his quote that got my initial attention, and I thought, yup, that makes perfect sense to me.

“I differentiate between risk and consequence. Sure, falling from this building is a high consequence, but, for me, it’s low risk.” He’s right, of course. For anyone, it’s a high consequence (i.e., death) – yup. But for him, it’s low risk, specifically due to the very low probability of a negative outcome. Risk involves both consequence and probability (and we can toss in exposure, too, as it can helpfully add a third dimension).

If you’re familiar with the typical risk matrix (or if not, just visualize it), we have a standard two-axis graph. Consequence (a bad outcome) is usually the vertical or y-axis, and probability (likelihood or odds) is usually the horizontal or x-axis. If we need or want to add in exposure (how much one is exposed or how many of us are), it’d be the z-axis coming out to get a 3-dimensional model.

Due to our evolution and brains as humans, we aren’t good at differentiating possibility from probability.

The result is that we tend to over-focus on the consequence (potential lousy outcome) and under focus on the probability (likelihood). So, going back to our 2-axis risk matrix, the upper left corner – high consequence/low probability – tends to get and keep our attention – it pings our threat and risk center in our brain in a very visceral and affective way.

It’s real, and it’s emotional. It should come as no surprise that many people have wondered if Alex’s brain might be wired a bit differently from the rest of us.

So too have researchers in this field.

So, Alex volunteered to allow Dr. Jane Joseph, the first neuroscientist to study fMRIs of thrill-seekers, to conduct a study of Alex’s amygdala (threat and thus the risk center) compared with a similar control subject. His lack of response to stimuli of the amygdala of his brain fascinated the researchers and others. Images were flashed in front of his eyes – ones that “stimulate” threat or arousal. Some are so awful that Dr. Joseph can’t stand to view them. They tend to affect us all similarly. Well, not quite all of us – they don’t affect Alex, his amygdala doesn’t fire (light up in the scans). He is rather blasé about the imagery shown in the scans, “… I was like, whatever.” He also compared it to “… looking through a curio museum.”

Instead of taking us down the sci-fi-ish rabbit hole of rewiring our brains to diminish our amygdala firing, let’s focus on probability. [Note: I’m likely to focus on sci-fi as a tool to aid us in exploring psychosocial complexities and possibilities via narrative, so please stay tuned!].

If we can imitate, or at least imagine, Alex’s approach, we can be more analytical about probability and thus risk.

This can be as simple as reworking how we think of and word our risk statements.

We often say, “It could happen.” Instead, let’s try substituting probability into it. “What would have to occur for this actually to happen? And how would that occur? Under what set of circumstances?” In other words, we can ask, “How likely is it?” Yes, it’s longer and more complex than our first statement of possibility. But it facilitates focusing on probability instead. And that is risk.

Ever wondered how much of one’s life is spent on our greatest passion? It can be an amazing amount of time. We become experts in it. It can be rock-climbing, risk perceptions, or engineering. Or any of a myriad of other wonderous areas of study.

Besides the passionate pursuit, the commonality is our accumulation of experiences, knowledge, skills, attitudes, and expertise.

All of which can help us better understand both the consequences and the probabilities of our work.

The conversations I’ve had with engineering (and other) scientists and researchers have been some of the most fascinating and fun ones in my career! Somehow, they all eventually get back to the topic of risk. And I’ve found that experts in their fields know risk pretty darned well.

In the upcoming micro-blogs in this series, “Risk is a 4-letter word” (readable in 4 minutes or so), we’ll continue to explore the concept of risk and the cognitive science that supports it. If you’re at all like me, I think you’ll find it fascinating, enlightening, and helpful.

How are you framing the concept of risk in your own contexts?

Next: System 1 or System 2 thinking – which are we all using?

Sources:

• https://films.nationalgeographic.com/free-solo/
• https://www.alexhonnold.com/
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Honnold
• https://www.newyorker.com/news/dispatch/alex-honnold-climbs-halfway-up-a-new-jersey-skyscraper
• https://medicine.musc.edu/departments/neuroscience/research/joseph
• https://nautil.us/issue/39/sport/the-strange-brain-of-the-worlds-greatest-solo-climber

"Recent Blog Posts""popular_past_year

Although MCE provides assurances, it does not ensure competence, nor does it fit adult education's meaning.

Mandatory continuing education (MCE) brings to mind visions of professionals going to courses, conferences, and seminars to hear and learn about the latest cutting-edge trends in an ever-changing society while maintaining their professional certification or licensure. Perhaps instead, one might listen to MCE and think of the seemingly endless parade of mandated training classes intended to comply with almost countless regulatory standards of the U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL's) Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT).

What Is MCE?

MCE is the on-going professional development courses taken within one's field to stay current, demonstrate competence and maintain certification or licensure. Nurses and other allied health professionals are usually required to acquire a certain quantity of continuing education units (CEUs); physicians require continuing medical education (CMEs); Certified Industrial Hygienists (CIHs) need certification maintenance points (CMs); Certified Safety Professionals need CEUs as well; the list goes on.

Also, a wide variety of para-professionals are required to go to some form of annual refresher training to be kept up-to-date and to be able to qualify for recertification. Designers, Inspectors, Monitors and Abatement Workers in both Asbestos and Lead-Based Paint (LBP) abatement fields go to one-day, eight-hour training courses (including a mandatory exam at the end), once per year to be allowed to work in their field, as do Hazardous Materials/Hazardous Waste Technicians. Some consultants who work in all three of the above areas and are multi-disciplined within each can expect to go to upwards of eight or more different one-day mandatory courses each year.

Why MCE?

If any, few persons would question the need for professionals responsible for others' health, safety, and welfare to stay current and demonstrate competence in their field of practice. Many sources consider a professional "half-life" (the time required to forget or invalidate one-half of one's professional knowledge) to be about five years (a number of years coincidental with many boards' required recertification). Nor would common sense let us be dissuaded from recognizing the need to educate persons (workers or the general public) on the hazards that they face in their jobs and lives. However, whether or not it should be mandated, is there a better way to ensure competencies, and how can MCE be improved?So, why mandate continuing education for certain professions in the first place? Perhaps there are several reasons. In a world of constant change and rapid advancement, it is more important than ever for professionals to stay current in their field. According to Professor Michael Brady at the University of Southern Maine, there are 7000 new articles published every day! This is undoubtedly a staggering figure. Also, today's society changes several times during each generation, whereas, in the past, it would take several generations to change the culture. If society is changing so rapidly, how else can we ensure that the physicians, engineers, and health and safety professionals are up-to-date on the latest techniques and trends available and appropriate to their practice? The general public, for whom these professionals perform services, wants them to be held accountable to the highest level of their profession and assured of such. In this highly litigious society, maintaining professional accountability through MCE is its defense against liability, sort of a form of Errors and Omissions (E&O) insurance, if you will.

In addition to professional accountability, society demands that anyone handling hazardous substances, e.g., asbestos, hazardous waste, and LBP, be properly trained to not risk accidental exposures or releases into the environment. Along the same lines, we want our workers protected against hazards they might face as a part of their job responsibilities. The easiest way to ensure that they are trained and educated about these hazards is to regulate and mandate them.

Table 1: MANDATORY CONTINUING EDUCATION

PROSCONSEnsures that training occursIn conflict with adult learning principlesLiability mitigation Inflexible curriculumComply with regulationsDoes not ensure competencyExposure to current trends Tests knowledge, not skillsPublic assurance False sense of security

Why Not MCE?

So, if MCE provides assurances of accountability and currentness in today's ever-changing world, what's the problem with it? In a nutshell, it runs 180 degrees counter to the very principles on which effective adult education and learning are based. There are several widely accepted tenets of adult education that MCE either violates or disallows by its structure.

Adult learners are typically self-directed, and as such, adult education must be voluntary. The content of any training must be flexible; in fact, adult learners like to participate in the planning and selecting course curriculum. For truly effective adult education, there must be a need and relevance for the learners to apply it. In particular, this problem expands exponentially when adults are required to participate in the same training year after year, i.e., Hazard Communication, Bloodborne Pathogens, Asbestos, etc.

Exams imposed at the end of the training are not necessarily a measure of competency as much as they are a measure of knowledge or test-taking ability. Forcing someone into a classroom or attending a conference will not guarantee any learning. In fact, considering expected resentment or even hostility toward the course, any education as an outcome would be unexpected. By the same token that "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink," one might say that, "you can lead adults into a classroom, but you can't make them think (or learn)."

"New and Improved " MCE

With so many problems inherent to MCE, the situation would appear hopeless, but this is far from the case. MCE, as a profession, can be improved upon in many ways that would help to meet the needs of adult learners.

As a start, all MCE offerings need to be more flexible. Courses and training classes need to acknowledge that people go to training to learn, and it's pointless to be restrictive in the course content. Be flexible, be adaptable, give the students choices - let them vote on the curriculum. Then deliver the students' training and the way that the students want or need it to learn. Certifying boards should show greater flexibility in allowing credit for courses taken that help professionals perform their work better, even if it's tangential to the field of practice. For example, health and safety professionals who take courses in management are certainly better able to manage their health and safety programs. Yet, they typically cannot count those courses as part of their accrediting board-required continuing professional development. Many conferences are already making headway here by incorporating a greater number of breakout sessions of a somewhat diverse nature within the field of their target audience. But not all conferences are accessible or affordable, and worse yet, attendees' biggest complaint is the session was a lecture with overhead slides unreadable from much of the auditorium.

This brings up the next recommendation, provide better training. People retain only ten percent of what they hear. Additionally, many people are visual or tactile learners. This doesn't even factor in those persons with auditory processing difficulties. So, why do so many trainers and teachers lecture if it's not effective? Good question. It's how they, in turn, learned as school kids, and it's easy -all you have to do is talk to the students. Many adults don't learn that way; they learn by doing and by themselves teaching and working with others, which is why all well-structured and facilitated, small group work in training is so successful.

Also, trainers should engage and encourage their students. The trainer is an educator, there to facilitate the best learning for all of the participants - the trainer should remember that he or she isn't the star of the day - all that matters is the participants' learning be enhanced to the best possible degree. They should take a train-the-trainer or other course in adult education principles and techniques (though I'm not for mandating it).

Certainly, a frustrating problem area is annual refresher training. Year after year, going to the same training session is at best ineffective and at worst insulting to adults and professionals. There are several viable options here:

1. Do away with it altogether - if it's ineffective, then it's a waste of productivity.
2. Lengthen the time between refreshers. Why is it annual in the first place - was there good data to support requiring retraining every year, or was it merely convenient? Using an estimate of the professional "half-life" (5 years) makes much more sense.
3. Allow persons to "test out of" or "challenge" the training. If they know or are competent at the material, why make them sit through the training?
4. Of course, in true adult learning fashion - make it voluntary. If they want to come to the training, they will, and if not, they won't.

Even all of the above improvements can only improve MCE to the point that it still may not achieve what it's supposed to; maintain professional competency and currentness, assure the general public, and protect the health, safety, and welfare of targeted groups and populations. So, what about the other options besides MCE?

Alternatives to MCE

If MCE doesn't ensure that it's supposed to, let's get rid of it or put something else in its place. There are several viable options to MCE, some better than others or greater success.

The peer-review process is probably the most popular alternative to MCE. In any of a variety of structures, have other peers evaluate their professional colleagues. After all, who else is better suited to determine true competency than fellow professionals?

An offshoot to peer review is competency determination through some professional associations. Allow the association to "regulate their own." Without its downside, visions of "good old boy networks" are among the biggest potential complaints.

If retention of competency is the need, then competency-based recertification is the answer. Require that competency be proven or demonstrated by any of a wide variety of means or methods; exams, articles, attestations, etc.

Another competency-based alternative, especially well-suited for the technical or para-professional, is a demonstration of work practices. Allow the affected professional the opportunity to show their abilities in a structured fashion audited by an objective third party.

Popular in some circles is periodic (re-) examination. Since most certifications or licenses require an entry exam, continue with exams every five or so years based on a professional "half-life." Exams have their inherent problems, but they have a high degree of control standardization and, believe it or not, can be highly motivating.

It would certainly be hard to argue that the authoring of professional articles or texts was not some form of competency maintenance. The research and actual writing process and editing involve extensive work and are a great learning tool. It even has built into it the third-party objectivity of either an editorial board or publisher.

Similar to writing professional articles or books is writing a journal or the process involved with self-reflection and self-evaluation. The documentation of any of the above can form a means by which professional practice competencies can be evaluated again by objective third parties, peers, boards, or the public.

The final alternative to MCE is perhaps the most obvious but most difficult to ensure, consumer education. An educated consumer is the greatest control of professional services. Just ask anyone who has felt "ripped off" by some service. Unfortunately, often it amounts to "too little, too late," not exactly very reassuring in this heavily litigious society.

Table 2: Alternatives to MCE

• Peer Review Process
• Periodic (Re)Examination
• Consumer Education
• Self-Evaluation/Reflection/Journaling
• Competency-Based Recertification
• Professional Associations
• Demonstration of Work Practices
• Authoring of Professional Articles

MCE - What Is It Good For?

So, back to our original question - what is MCE good for? Control, standardization, compliance, reassurance - all yes. But true learning, education, maintenance of competency, and currentness - no. MCE has its pros and cons (it's greatest being its conflict with adult learning tenets) like most things and has several venues for improvement of training effectiveness and facilitation of the learning process. There are, additionally, many viable alternatives to MCE worthy of further attention and investigation but perhaps not necessarily worthy of mandating.

"

I remember reading Dale Carnegie’s famous book for the first time. He wrote How to Win Friends and Influence People to help others, and once it was published in 1936, it became a best seller with 30 million copies sold and is credited with starting the self-help genre. Not too shabby when if you think about it.

I was impressed and found I got into and embraced Dale’s sage advice. I got to part three in the book “Twelve Ways to Get People to Your Way of Thinking” and thought, “Wow, this will be super helpful in my work!” It was, but not how I thought it would. I looked at the title of Chapter One perplexed and thought, “Really? Why not? I can. Hmm.”

The chapter was titled “You can’t win an argument.” And I thought, “Well, that’s odd. I can win an argument. I have won many an argument.” I must have gotten pretty decent at arguing because my then-wife (now ex) used to tell me, “You should’ve been a lawyer – you love a good argument!” It seemed like a nice compliment at the time.

The funny thing was, I had planned on becoming an attorney when I was in high school. But then I saw the movie, The Paper Chase, and I thought, “Oh wow – I sure don’t want to work as hard as they are!” And so, I became a geology student. That’s the power of a well-told, emotional story. [Note: See my micro-blog series, “3-minute micro-stories,” for more on this topic.]

Even funnier or perhaps, more interesting about not winning an argument is that a 17th-century scientist said pretty much the same thing 370 years ago. Yup, Dale Carnegie was by no means the first to write about this very topic – that winning an argument shouldn’t be your goal. A physicist, mathematician, inventor, philosopher published about it.

Huh. Perhaps if he’d sold 30 million self-help books, we’d all know him so much better. I’ll come back to him in a moment.

Growing up, I remember we’d argue over everything the way boys do. We argued about baseball players, sci-fi movies, chess moves, teachers who were hard, and girls we liked. We argued a lot about girls. Well, we were boys, after all.

In high school social science class, I recall having to debate a friend about nuclear power. He was assigned anti, and I was given pro. We discussed it back and forth following the debate rules – opening statements, rebuttals, more arguments, more rebuttals, and closing statements. I honestly don’t remember who won – probably he did. We both worked as lifeguards and had many a fun and funny conversation while on breaks – sometimes with a good argument, often without. We went away to colleges and grew our careers. He became a pastor – I study risk.

I also loved performing mathematical proofs in 10th-grade geometry class! They made perfect sense to me, and I “got” them. Ah, I embraced the pure logic of them! It was decades ago, but I remember their typical format. “Given the following statements, prove that a ¹ b.” I’d set to working out how to get from the givens to the final statement step by step. It was fun! Well, at least it was to the 10th grade me. It was a logical argument.

Like so many of us in a technical and scientific field, I was quite used to having arguments, or perhaps they too would be better described as polite debates. Well, at least debate if not polite at times. We would argue about exposures, their limits, the OSHA reg’s, training approaches, risk perceptions – the topics seem endless to me now. You name it – we’ve probably argued about it. I want to think that most of the time, it was in good spirits. We’d say the merits of the problem statement. Many a time, we’d argue what was the actual problem statement. But it was always about the problem, not about the person. Again, maybe ours were better termed as debates.

But those aren’t the types of arguments that we typically are getting into these days. No, these days, the arguments are often sadly personal. Maybe not always about a single person, though usually about a group of persons. And they are frequently seen as attacking the other side. Which finally takes us to that 17th-century physicist, mathematician, inventor, philosopher.

Blaise Pascal was a French inventor, philosopher, mathematician, and scientist who lived from 1623-1662. He accomplished much in those 39 years. One was a 900+ page “masterwork” of philosophy, theology, and a fair bit of psychology. He wrote about the dos and don’ts of persuasion, much of which is echoed by Dale Carnegie.

Here is one of Pascal’s quotes: “People are generally better persuaded by the reasons which they have themselves discovered than by those which have come into the mind of others.” This advice is often found in much more recent research and seems intuitive. We all love our own ideas and aren’t as interested in others, perhaps viewing them with a healthy dose of skepticism or an unhealthy amount of scorn.

Pascal also advises empathy – again, a very common recommendation for persuaders and receivers (of persuasive attempts) alike. “Eloquence … persuades by sweetness, not by authority… Eloquence is an art of saying things in such a way — (1) that those to whom we speak may listen to them without pain and with pleasure; (2) that they feel interested so that self-love leads them more willingly to reflect upon it.”

The arguments I mentioned above – the ones that seem impolite at best and virulently hostile at times, are hardly empathic. And yet, that is precisely what is needed – both for greater hopes at successful persuasion as well as relating with each other. It seems that Blaise Pascal was an intelligent – and thoughtful – inventor and philosopher who was hundreds of years ahead of his time.

Dale Carnegie tells some great stories, and he uses this one to illustrate his point quite well. I’ll retell it here as an abbreviated version and in the 3rd person (Dale tells it in the 1st person, of course). [You can find the story in its entirety and better described starting on page 111 – part III, chapter 1.]

Dale worked for Sir Ross Smith, the Australian WWI air ace, who, after the war with three others, flew halfway around the world (England to Australia) in 28 days. At a banquet in Sir Ross’s honor, a tablemate of Dale’s told a humorous story that used the quote, “There’s a divinity that shapes our ends, rough-hew them how we will.”

According to this gentleman, the source of the quote was the Bible. Dale knew this to be factually incorrect – there was no doubt that it was by William Shakespeare in Hamlet. As Dale readily admits, “… to get[ting] a feeling of importance and display my superiority …” he decided to correct this gentleman. The storyteller “stuck to his guns” and insisted it was from the Bible, much to Dale’s amazement and frustration.

Coincidentally, sitting on the other side of Dale was a friend, Mr. Frank Gammond, an expert on Shakespeare, having studied his works for many years. Dale and the storyteller agreed – they’d ask Mr. Gammond to arbitrate and decide who was correct. It made sense to both men.

As Dale tells it, “Mr. Gammond listened, kicked me under the table, and then said: ‘Dale, you are wrong. The gentleman is right. It is from the Bible.’” Dale was smart enough not to argue or protest it there. But on the drive home, he asked Frank why he said it was from the Bible when he knew it was from Shakespeare.

Frank admitted as much to Dale, “Yes, of course, Hamlet, Act V, scene 2. But we were guests at a festive occasion, my dear Dale. Why prove to a man he is wrong? Is that going to make him like you? Why not let him save face? He didn’t ask for your opinion. He didn’t want it. Why argue with him?” And here is Frank’s wonderful concluding alliterative advice – “Always avoid the acute angle.”

I pondered that pithy quote (or perhaps I should say that “adept admonition”). I did some searching and mostly found references to an acute angle, which, if you recall, since I did enjoy geometry class, I knew its mathematical meaning. My gut reaction was, “an angle less than 90 degrees – what?” But then I looked up just the definition of and synonyms for “acute.” Of course, I found more useful help – “Reacting readily to stimuli or impressions; sensitive, sharp, severe, intense.”

Ah yes, of course! Always avoid a sensitive or severe response – the acute angle. That makes perfect sense! If I’d only learned that fantastic advice earlier in life, I might have avoided inducing severe responses in others over the years.

Of course, there is a heck of a lot more to persuasion, but this is an excellent place for us to start the conversation. We’ll cover more of the research in future micro-blog posts in this series. I hope you’ll come back and join me.

And so, Dale’s rule #1 for part three is, “The only way to get the best of an argument is to avoid it.” I quite agree. And it turns out, so does a 17th-century French physicist, mathematician, philosopher, and inventor. I’m persuaded – are you?

Jonathan

Sources:

• Carnegie, Dale.
• 1936, 1940, 1975. How to Win Friends and Influence People. Pocket Books – A Division of Simon & Schuster, New York, NY.
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Win_Friends_and_Influence_People
• https://www.themarginalian.org/2015/05/20/blaise-pascal-pensees-persuasion/

Next: If you think it’s a contest, you’ve already lost

"""

You know, as I look back on the whole process, I don’t think I ever could’ve predicted how really well it went. Even in retrospect, it’s still hard to see it. I mean, we had three major problems. We were going to lose an admin person who did a lot of our data entry daily grind. We had a pandemic going on like everyone else. And we were nervous about our biosafety certifications, tracking problems, etc. And yet, here we are – able to see everything. Here’s the story in a nutshell.

We were finally getting SciShield, and there were a lot of the typical reactions – mostly nervous excitement over how the implementation process would actually roll out, the full-on integration, and of course, how would implementation be?

Targeting our greatest needs, we got two of the modules to start – Inspections and Training – and of course, the Platform, a must-have to run it all smoothly! In the run-up to integration, our IT team was wicked nervous.

It was a tight tight tight schedule for us. But SciShield broke it down into manageable steps. They made it easy on us, and it really really worked great! Our IT folks were seriously impressed – and they’re a challenging group to impress, no doubt.

When we set up our Inspections , Brandon in Professional Services was so patient with us and our questions – he was so helpful and very courteous! What a pleasure!

We were already scheduled to lose an admin person before getting SciShield – and with no plans to replace her, that was going to slow us way down. But we got SciShield, and all of a sudden, we had all of the data we needed, just a click away. Who knew that we’d get a software system, and it’d also fill a gap we had? To be fair, this was not work one of our professional staff would be doing. It was the type of daily data grind no one likes. So, to have software spare us that pain was our gain!

Now that we’re using the Inspections , it has helped us with our biosafety certification program.

With our having to work remotely, of course, we had struggled with how to do the checking we needed to. Using the Self-Inspections tool, we were now able to do tracking – like with broken emergency showers for the first time – that was a relief. And as opposed to so many others in EHS land were struggling with not doing inspections, we were excited for how it enabled ours. We have much more confidence in our data now than we did before.

So, what’s next for us?

Hopefully, we’ll get the ChemTracker – then life would be beautiful!

Cynthia PressmanLaboratory Safety Manager Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute """Recent Articles""

I know this sounds a bit weird, but bear with me; I'll explain why I chose it for the title of this micro-blog series (and thus my first post in it). It might still be weird, but at least you'll know why and my various reasons.

First, it's pragmatic – I needed a 5th numeric reference – something alluding to the number 5. If you've been following (or at least perusing) my micro-blogs series, you likely noticed that they count up from 1 to 5.

What started as just my "Won (1) minute warning" quickly became a series of series once I added "2 minutes on learning", "3-minute micro-stories", and "Risk is a 4-letter word". 1-2-3-4. Easy and fun with a bit of wordplay.

And each number represented the amount of time it'd take an average person in my intended readership to read it. Typically, folks like you are well–versed in some areas (perhaps a science but not necessarily so) and are exposed to college courses (or perhaps non-academic reading at that level). Again, you or me.

Since these were all topics within my wheelhouse – safety culture, learning, narrative, and risk – they were worthy, relatively easy, and fun areas for me to blog. And they all apply to my work as well as my studies and research. And then, I got around to studying persuasion theory as part of my Ph.D. fields. It is a fascinating field! So, naturally, I wanted to blog about it, too. Doesn't everyone want to learn more about persuasion? Don't we all try to persuade others? "Let's get pizza for lunch!" "How about we go see the latest superhero movie?" "Why won't you wear your face covering?" Right?!

Let's face it – if persuasion were as easy as merely asking, we'd all be leading happier (and healthier!) lives. Sadly, it's not easy – but there is a science to it. And I'm so glad to share some of those insights with you all. But why compare it to the 5th dimension (besides the numeric convenience)?

Persuasion is something we talk about and don't seem to understand the science of very well - like the 5th dimension. Also, the 5th dimension is a combination of two things – gravity and electromagnetism into something we can't see.

In my Ph.D. research, I'm working on an approach using narratives and risk perceptions to facilitate persuasion – something we can't really see. And as I thought about gravity, the song "Up, Up and Away" came to mind – by none other than the 5th Dimension! This should come as no surprise if you know me and my love of all music from the '60s and '70s.

So, there we are – connecting to and comparing persuasion with the 5th dimension (in physics and in the song). But wait, there's more! A lot more.

Like over 70 readings from journals and textbooks at a start. You see, in my Ph.D., I have two fields – the first one (I passed my exam!) was in risk, its perceptions, cognitive biases, and decision-making. The second one (as I write this, my exam is in 9 days!) is in narrative, persuasion, cognition, and informal learning. It's a trip. It's also a lot of reading.

In my ASU program (Human and Social Dimensions of Science and Technology), each student develops their reading lists for their fields and subsequent exams. These, of course, have to be approved by their committee (three faculty), and then they are tested on their readings. The reading list must include at least 40 relevant journal articles, chapters, textbooks, etc., from the scientific literature.

As I got more and more into the literature, my reading list grew and grew. I was fascinated by the likes of Blaise Pascal, Daniel Dennett, Alan Hajek, Charles Darwin, Jan van Prooijen, and Daniel O'Keefe, to name just a few – and that's only in the area of persuasion! I also am studying narrative (stories), cognition, and informal learning. And while it's a lot of reading, I am enjoying it, and at the same time (just as my academic advisor predicted!), my dissertation plan is taking shape. In future micro-blogs in this series, I'll likely write about some of those ideas.

But let's return to some of the experts and what they studied, researched, and wrote. This will give you a flavor of what's to come in this series. We'll start with arguments … for the sake of argument, of course!

We seem to argue a lot – especially these days. One might think we are trying to persuade each other, but at times it seems as pointless as a Monty Python skit (and sadly not nearly as funny). It might even seem closer to "abuse," or they're "being hit on the head lessons" (watch the skit for context). It's all so pointless. We don't get anywhere with the back and forth, talking past each other, insulting the other who, of course, is so foolish, and the other thinking the same of us. That would mean we are both foolish, and if we were to ask some of the experts, they'd likely agree – we're both being foolish.

We might as well start with Dale Carnegie. Remember him and his famous book, How to Win Friends and Influence People?

I sure do. My old paperback copy is quite dog-eared from years of using it while teaching a Conflict Management and Resolution course. Dale has a great quip and advice on this very topic – which I'll cover in my next micro-blog in this series.

We've known how not to try to persuade others for about 370 years – so why aren't we following this sage advice? That's in micro-blog 2 (about Dale) and 3: "If you think it's a contest, you've already lost."

And then, in micro-blog 4, we'll talk about "Why you want what's in a philosopher's toolkit."

In micro-blog 5, we get to learn from both Charles Darwin and Michael Faraday how to use jiu-jitsu like logic to your attempts at persuasion that I've helped many an engineering student learn when they've asked me to approve their projects. It works, too.

In all seriousness, in micro-blog 6, I'll explain why "Jonathan thinks you should speak of yourself in the 3rd person based on multiple studies." As was said in the movie, The Wackiest Ship in the Army – "Don't laugh; it works."

And for those of you champing at the bit to bite into conspiracy theory research – yup, I will dare to take us there in micro-blog 7.

And finally, at some point (currently scheduled for micro-blogs 8-11, I'll share a bit of my research ideas on how we can conceptualize and systematize our view and approach to persuasion – and while playing a certain game, you likely have played.

Well, that's about enough. At least for now, it is. So, tell me – are you persuaded to read more of these? I guess we'll see.

Jonathan

P.S. It's now after my exam and I …?

"Recent Articles""popular_past_month

Adult learning is many things besides workplace training – here's an overview and preview of future columns from an expert in it and one of our Advisory Board members.

I've been asked to write an on-going, quarterly column on adult learning for Safety Smart On-line. As this is my inaugural column, I thought I'd write about what I'll be writing about in future columns. Does that make sense? Let's try this again. Put another way, in this column, I'll discuss an overview of various aspects of adult learning that we'll explore in future columns. Hmm. You know, I think I like the first version better.

If I have to sum up adult learning in one catchphrase, it's this – put the learner first. If you do that, the rest tends to fall into place.

Adult learning can be a lot of different things. It can be environmental, health, and safety (EHS) training in the workplace (which I'm guessing most of you do), but it can also be such endeavors as:

• Adult primary education (reading, writing, literacy, math, etc.)
• English as a second language (ESL)
• Getting one's General Education Degree (GED – an alternative to getting your High School diploma here in the United States)
• Continuing professional development (for engineers, doctors, lawyers, etc. I purposefully am omitting the vast panoply of EHS certifications because I can't possibly list them all, and if I only name a few as examples, those of you with other credentials will "let me know" I omitted yours. Don't get me wrong; I'd love to hear from you readers, just not solely because I happened to not list your credential in an example of adult learning alternatives. Now where was I – oh yes, …)
• Trade skills (David Lee Roth training to become an emergency medical technician [EMT])
• Adults learning how to swim for the first time (I used to be a lifeguard and water safety instructor decades ago – ah, sweet youth!)
• Adults learning (or in my case re-learning) another language – Est ce que vous parlez le Francais?
• Graduate students taking elective courses (in Health, Safety, and Security or Risk Assessment and Management) toward their Master's degrees (I teach college part-time)
• Many other examples – the list goes on and on.

Each of the above is indeed an example of adult learning – and in each case, the various principles or tenets of adult learning apply. When I teach my fellow trainers in train-the-trainer classes (on adult learning in general, not on a specific subject like fork truck train-the-trainer), I like to describe these aspects as the "training cycle." They are:

1. A training needs assessment (TNA – what are the person's needs that can be addressed by training)
2. Learning objectives ("At the end of the course, the student will be able to…")
3. Training design and development (what approaches and/or methods will you use and including your lesson plans)
4. Training delivery (be it classroom or on-line training)
5. Training validation (perhaps including tests)
6. Training evaluation (those ubiquitous forms)
7. Improvements for the next time (and there's always a "next time" in training)

There are undoubtedly other adult learning principles (I like to call them ALPs – we all have mountains to climb, but boy, what a view from the top!) including self-directedness, of an immediate need, applicability, flexibility, involvement in the design, participation in class discussions, sharing one's expertise, dyads, triads, and small group work to name a few. We'll certainly need to explore these as well in future columns.

Well, that's probably enough for now. I've given you some information to think about and a preview of columns to come.

I would probably be remiss if I were not to mention the father of adult education Malcolm Knowles. If you are not familiar with Malcolm Knowles or his teachings and writings, I highly encourage you to do so. You can find much about him by merely putting his name into your favorite search engine.

So, until my next column – good day and good training!

Next: How Well Do You Know the Father of Adult Learning?

"Recent Blog Posts""popular_past_six_months"""""""""

The work world and global marketplace are quickly becoming more and more multi-cultural. In these settings and with these groups of trainees, culturally appropriate training (CAT) can and should be followed to ensure that the training is well-received and does not "backfire" due to cultural differences. Training development and delivery need to incorporate certain principles of CAT and avoid other inappropriate methods. In this paper, we will examine these including:

• Using language as an ice-breaker
• Learning objectives (for the original presentation as well as this paper)
• Adult learning principles (ALPs – as a "given")
• Diversity training (as a "given")
• Various definitions of "culture"
• Elements of culture
• Examples of culture
• CAT and its definition
• Valuable traits for CAT trainers
• How to prepare for CAT
• Involving others in CAT
• Do's and don'ts for CAT
• Culturally inappropriate training (CIT)
• Great quote on "culture"

Using language as an ice-breakerHere is an excellent way to open a training session on CAT – the word "greetings" in 22 other languages (with each one's country, location, or people): Aloha! (Hawaiian), Bonjour! (French), Buenos Dias! (Spanish), Buon Giorno! (Italian), G'day! (Aussie), Geia sou! (Greek), Guten tag! (German), Hello! (Icelandic), Keshi! (Zuni), Konnichi Wa! (Japanese), Kwai! (Abenaki), Nabat! (Somali), Namaskar! (Hindi), Ni Hao! (Mandarin), Oki! (Blackfoot), Pryvit! (Ukrainian), Rozhbash! (Kurdi), Salaam! (Arabic/Farsi), Shalom! (Hebrew), Tan Kahk! (Passamaquoddy Tribe), Yokwe! (Marshallese), and Zhivjo! (Slovenian)! Learning objectivesThe learning objectives (for the original presentation as well as this paper) were or are as follows:

• Describe the basic principles of good training/adult learning
• Define "culture" and "culturally appropriate training" ("CAT")
• Describe what research should take place before CAT
• Explain the importance of involving the "persons of culture" in CAT
• Explain the use of CAT surveys
• Approach trainees just before their CAT course
• List three each do's and don'ts of culturally appropriate training
• Explain the pitfalls of culturally inappropriate training (CIT)
• Develop culturally appropriate training

Good training and adult learning principles (ALPs)If we're going to engage in CAT or any training for that matter, it should be a "given" that it will be good training, and we will use good adult learning principles (ALPs). Good training is good training no matter what type it is – EHS, CAT, OJT, or any other. These ALPs include (but are by no means limited to) the following:

• Self-directed: Adult learners are very self-directed.
• Immediate need or nature: Adult learners prefer their training to be about things of an immediate nature or need.
• Directly applicable: The topic and materials should be directly applicable to them.
• Involved in setting the agenda: Adult learners prefer to be directly involved in setting the agenda.
• Draw on their experiences: Adult learners like to draw on their work and life experiences.
• Solve problems: Adult learners are problem-solvers.
• Flexibility in discussions: Adult learners prefer that the discussions and trainer are flexible to accommodate their self-directedness.
• Participation: Adult learners like to participate in the training – often a lot!

Diversity trainingSimilarly to the given of good training and ALPs above, it is another "given" that CAT should include but be more than diversity training. Good diversity training typically might include the following elements:

• We're all different…yet we're all the same
• We have different values…but we should value our differences
• We should embrace diversity… and be aware of various legal issues such as discrimination.

What is "culture"?If we wish to understand CAT better, first, we must understand "culture" better? So, what exactly is "culture"? Here are some good questions to help us better understand this:

• What is your definition of "culture"?
• What is the dictionary definition of "culture"?
• What is or are your culture(s) – how do you self-identify with your own culture
• What are some types and examples of culture(s)?
• What is your definition of "culture"?

Before we look at others' definitions of "culture," take a minute to consider and/or formulate your definition of culture. What exactly is culture? What are some examples of culture? Got it all set? Excellent! Let's take a look at some others now. What is a good dictionary type definition of "culture"?Rather than an actual dictionary definition, let's look at a couple of textbook definitions. Both of these are from Associate Professor, Ifte Choudhury, at Texas A&M University (TAMU). Professor Choudhury defines "culture" as: "Culture refers to the cumulative deposit of knowledge, experience, beliefs, values, attitudes, meanings, hierarchies, religion, notions of time, roles, spatial relations, concepts of the universe, and material objects and possessions acquired by a group of people in the course of generations through individual and group striving." Certainly a comprehensive definition, albeit hardly a good "working" one that we can easily get our arms (or brains) around. Fortunately, he also has a good working definition. "A culture is a way of life of a group of people--the behaviors, beliefs, values, and symbols that they accept, generally without thinking about them, and that are passed along by communication and imitation from one generation to the next." A much simpler one that likely works in most situations. Well, now that we have adequately defined culture, let's look at some examples of it. What is or are your culture(s)? How do you self-identify your own culture(s)? What types, elements, and/or examples do you use for yourself? Types and examples of culture

There are both obvious and not-so-obvious types or elements of culture. Some typically obvious culture types include the following list:

• Ethnicity
• Native country
• Language
• Race or Creed
• Color
• Religion
• Gender
• Sexual orientation
• Age

Some not so obvious culture types include the following:

• Locale (e.g., Texas culture, West coast culture, etc.)
• Disability (e.g., "Deaf culture")
• Politics (e.g., Conservative, Liberal, Green, etc.)
• Eating (e.g., vegan, etc.)
• Consumerism (e.g., "got to have it now" culture)
• Hobbies/Activities (e.g., Model railroaders)
• Profession (e.g., Safety culture?)
• Education (e.g., College degree, various colleges, etc.)

Author's cultural self-images As you read this paper, you have little way of knowing my cultures unless you know me. If you're going to ask other persons to share information about their culture types, you must be prepared to share your culture types. In that spirit and as an example, here are my obvious culture types or examples:

• White
• Middle-aged
• Male
• Baby Boomer
• Health-conscious
• IH/EHS

Culturally Appropriate Training (CAT)Now that we've examined culture let's turn our attention and focus to CAT. We will discuss the following questions and their answers (of course).

• CAT - what is it?
• What are some valuable traits to have if doing CAT?
• How do you prepare for CAT?
• How do you involve others in CAT?
• What are the dos and don'ts of CAT?
• If there is CAT, is there also Culturally Inappropriate Training (CIT)?
• Do you have any remaining questions regarding CAT?

CAT – what is it? So, finally, we get to our discussion about CAT itself – but what exactly is CAT? Here are some good, "working" definitions of CAT. The first is from Australia and is regarding their Aboriginal persons, whereas the others are from the National Library of Medicine (NLM). CAT is…

• "…developed and delivered in a way that takes account of a learner's cultural background and needs." – Australian National Training Authority (ANTA)
• "…based in the traditional and cultural values of (Aboriginal) people." – NLM.
• "…adapted and presented in a way which is both understandable and respectful of cultural diversity." – NLM.

What are some valuable traits to have? If you are going to develop and/or deliver CAT, here are some valuable traits to have. These come from Terence Brake of Transnational Management Associates, Ltd. (TMA) at www.tmaworld.com.

• Adaptability
• Cooperation
• Curiosity and…Learning
• Empathy
• Friendliness
• Objectivity
• Patience
• "Perspectiveness"
• Resilience
• Self-Awareness

How do you prepare for CAT?Finally, getting prepared to develop and/or deliver some CAT – how should you prepare for it? Here are some ways to start.

• Learn – as much as you can about their culture
• Ask – permission/if ok to do CAT
• Buy-in – get it from respected members (e.g., tribal elders)
• Survey – both the trainees and stakeholders
• Involve – the persons of culture
• Embrace – their culture (as appropriate)
• Empathy – "Walk a mile in their shoes"

Involving others – how do you do it? Clearly, the most important aspect of CAT is the involvement of the cultural group or individuals. Here are some ways to go about it.

• Get buy-in from respected members of their culture (e.g., tribal elders).
• Have them help develop various training approaches and methods.
• Have them deliver the training as co-trainers or as the sole trainers (without you).
• Use surveys of both the trainees and stakeholders.
• Approach trainees just before class. At the least, you can do this, but not as a substitute for any of the above.

What are the "dos" of CAT? Obviously, there things that a trainer can and should do when doing CAT. Here's a list of some common ones.

• Be prepared
• Involve them
• Show respect
• Learn their culture
• It their way
• Give them ownership of it
• Your research/HW
• Ask questions

What are the "don'ts" of CAT? Where there are do's, it follows there are also don'ts – and there are. As is typical, the don'ts are even more important than the dos. Just think, when things go badly, they often go very badly. Here are some don'ts that you want to avoid. Don't…

• Use clichés!
• Be condescending!
• Make jokes!
• Do it your way!
• Use pop culture references!
• Assume!
• Pretend to be "them"!
• Give up!

There are various other ones that are specific to various cultures (e.g., Latino, Chinese, Native Tribes, etc.). Is there "Culturally Inappropriate Training" (CIT)? So, if there is culturally appropriate training (CAT), is there also the reciprocal – culturally inappropriate training (CIT)? Sure, of course, there is – but let's hope that collectively none of us ever experience it – either giving or receiving. There are a couple of general points to consider. It is absolutely more important what not to do! Review the don'ts listed above. Then review them again. Consider if there are any other don'ts you can think of. Then be sure to avoid them at all costs – which brings us to the second point. It only takes one innocent faux pas to undo much goodwill. It takes a lot of hard work, patience, etc., to develop trust with others of a different cultural group. But all it takes is one relatively innocent slip of the tongue, physical slight, etc., to lose that hard-earned trust. Try not to do so. My own mistake – a case study Many years ago, I was doing some Asbestos Supervisor training for a Native Tribe. We had worked most of the day building a polyethylene sheeting containment and decontamination facility. We had worked outside in the sun in July – it was hot – especially in the poly containment. Everyone was hot and tired. We went inside, where it was a bit cooler (but no A/C), to do our hands-on session on donning PPE, including disposable suits. Despite XL suits, they did not fit everyone. A taller student was having some trouble donning his suit. To try to encourage him, I made an unfortunate reference to trying to also help my young son. Immediately he got mad, pushed me aside, and stormed out. You see, Natives were often treated as and compared to children—clearly not my intent, but a huge gaffe never-the-less. We took a break, of course. I found my contact person and explained my mistake, and took responsibility for it. The next day back in the classroom, I explained and apologized to the entire class and specifically to the student offended by my remark. I shared with them my own experiences of being taunted as a child for being Jewish. Having something of a common bond helped get past our differences. To this day, I still provide their refresher training each year. A great quote on culture It's always nice to have something profound to say at the close of an article or training – CAT or otherwise. So here's a great quote from someone else on culture (and by extension on CAT). See if you can guess who said the following. "If we are to achieve a richer culture, rich in contrasting values, we must recognize the whole gamut of human potentialities, and so weave a less arbitrary social fabric, one in which each diverse human gift will find a fitting place." Are you able to guess who said it? Here are some hints if you need them:

• A woman said it.
• She studied many different cultural groups.
• She was an author – her first major work was "Coming of Age in Samoa."
• She was not only an anthropologist but also a cultural anthropologist.
• She was an expert on culture (of course) and quite likely CAT, too.
• She lived from 1901 to 1978

Did you figure it out – I hope so! It was an anthropologist, author, and culture expert… Margaret Mead (of course – who else could it be?)Any remaining questions? Hopefully, this has helped give you a foundation in CAT. There is always more we could discuss, but this will have to be it for now. However, if you, the reader, have any other questions, please feel free to contact me at the contact information below. Thanks, and good training!

Next: How Well Do You Know the Father of Andragogy?

"Recent Blog Posts""popular_past_year"""""""""

* Bored Student (What did you think it meant?!)Page 2 of 2Keep it "on-time"! Everyone's time is important. If the meeting doesn't start and end on-time, people won't want to attend or will be late. Respect their time, and they'll (hopefully) respect yours (by paying attention). Keep it "short"! The longer the meeting lasts, the less effective it becomes. People have short attention spans. Remember the "KISS" method – keep it short and simple (yes, there is another version, but we're being polite here). Keep it "focused"! Don't ramble. Stay "on message." Let's face it – you're lucky if the workers pay attention to what you're saying. So say what matters most – the message. Keep it "topical"! Make sure that the topics are directly applicable to the daily/weekly operations/tasks. Make sure that the meeting relates to the job and what's going on. Adult learners of all stripes need to have their training apply to their work – and I mean directly applicable. Make sure that your lesson or example is on the same tools, same tasks, sites, jobs, and situations. Get the idea? Keep it "timely"! Ensure that you're covering only things that are happening (or are about to or just did happen). Adults don't want training if it does not matter. Remember that it must directly apply? Boy, I hope so – it was number 4 above. This is the corollary to it – adult learners need to have their training be of an immediate need, not for future needs. Keep it "fresh"! Don't do the same stuff repeatedly. Cover new items or in new ways. Do you know the cliché that "doing the same thing over and over but expecting different results is an example of insanity"? So, you can't do the same training over and over and expect different safety results. Otherwise, trainees tune you out. Keep it "organized"! Be prepared, just like the Boy Scout motto. Don't leave it to the last minute, or people will pick up on that, and it will lose its perceived value. Don't "wing it," or your trainees might "take wing" and fly away. Again, it comes down to respect – respect for them for you and the subject matter – their safety and health. Disorganized = disrespect. Unprepared? Just don't do it!Keep it "open"! Be "open" to attendees' input before, during, and after the meeting. Adults like to contribute when/where it matters. Adult learners want to be directly involved with setting the agenda – so let them! When they're involved (in training), they're engaged in it! And that's what you want. Before training, they can help you craft the important message(s). During the training, they can help with the validation of the hazards and solutions. After the training, they're the ones that always want to discuss something with you about the training. Ready for another cliché? Minds are like parachutes – they only work when they're open.

Keep it "flexible"! Be flexible enough to allow for attendees to ask questions. This gets right back to "keep it open." If the group suddenly wants to change the topic and it's a relevant topic to site safety and health – go for it! Again, they're engaged in the training, and that's what you want. To do otherwise (not to address relevant sincere questions) is to risk alienating trainees, shutting down discussions, giving them a distaste for the training and health and safety, and flies in the face of sound adult learning principles. (Do you need any more reasons?)Keep it "diverse"! People will get tired of the regularity. Change something about the meeting so people will look forward to it. Change the venue, change the setup, change the topic, change the trainer, change the teaching method, change the message, heck change the whole blessed thing (I bet you thought I'd say the whole enchilada or the whole nine yards, didn't you?). "Variety is the spice of life," so why not make it the spice of training, too!Keep it "safe and healthy"! Don't engage in any unsafe or unhealthy behaviors during the meeting. You'll at best be sending a mixed message; more likely, you will lose any respect for the training and could get hurt or ill. My Dad used to tell me, "Do as I say, not as I do." You know what? I did as he did. We learn by watching others. How about a great quote? "Your actions thunder so loudly; I can hardly hear what you're saying." Henry David Thoreau. Keep it "lively"! Make it exciting. Don't be a "talking head" – do something. Demonstrate safe behavior, get them involved and moving. Adults learn best when doing things. They also will pay better attention if there's a "show" – so give them one. A good trainer is 1/3 teacher, 1/3 coach or counselor, and 1/3 entertainer. You know what they say, "The show must go on!" Keep it "well-fed"! Let's make it a "baker's dozen." People love to be fed. Consider bringing or providing some refreshments. Good food = good training! I hate it when I get to a class, and the client has not provided the obligatory coffee and donuts for the students (or maybe something healthy like yogurts, fresh fruit, and whole-grain bagels)!

"popular_all_time

Does your organization have a Hazard Communication program? Sure you do. What about an emergency action or response plan? “Of course,” you say. A lockout/tag-out program? Most likely. Other health and safety programs and plans? I bet you answered “yes” to all four questions. (By the way, those were all rhetorical questions, so don’t answer out loud, or people around you will begin to wonder.)

Now then, what about a written EHS training program? Now I bet you answered “no” – and that’s unfortunate. It’s unfortunate because, as with the written plans you said you have, you should also have a written EHS training plan. Without a written plan on EHS training, how will you know that the training is correct, consistent, well developed, delivered, and effective? Most likely, you won’t or don’t know. In the book “Alice in Wonderland,” the Cheshire Cat asked Alice (when she said she didn’t know where she was going, just that she was in a hurry), “If you don’t know where you’re going, how will you know when you get there?” How willyou know when your organization gets “there” in training?

You probably won’t know – that’s where an EHS training plan comes in.

So if you’re going to develop an EHS Training Plan or Program, wouldn’t you likely (or like to) use an existing standard that has been well developed, is credible, and well-accepted?

“Sure I would,” you say (to yourself – the folks nearby think you’re working too hard and have lost touch with reality when you talk to yourself aloud). Well, you’ll be glad to know that there is an EHS Training Standard – it is ANSI Z490.1 - Criteria for Accepted Practices in Safety, Health, and Environmental Training. This standard has been accepted since 2000 and is a comprehensive standard for any EHS training.

Even if you don’t think that you need an EHS Training Program, you still do EHS training, don’t you?

Hello? Still there? That’s good. I thought you’d left when I didn’t hear you answer. Anyway, as I was saying, you do EHS training – and probably a lot of it. Haz com, LOTO, BBPs, noise/hearing conservation, HAZWOPER, PRCSs, fire, EAP, ERP, ad nauseam, it seems like the list and the training goes on and on and on….

Where was I? Oh yes, EHS training. Well, OSHA lists the required training topics, but they don’t tell you how to do the activity. That’s where the Z490 standard comes in. It goes into detail on all manner of training issues and guidelines – from development to delivery to evaluation and documentation – “it’s in there!” (sounds like a spaghetti sauce ad – sorry, no “product placements” here – you’ll have to figure out which sauce uses that as its tag-line).

Are you looking for a “best practice” in EHS training or an “accepted practice”? Want your HazCom training to be “effective training” as OSHA requires, and any good trainer, of course, wants that. Were you looking for standardized methods for evaluation and documentation? You guessed it – Z490 has got it (you’re so smart!).

“What’s in it?” you say. Funny you should ask – let’s take a look at its overall content. (Again, stop asking out loud – or is it the voices in my head?)

The standard has two columns – the left one gives “Standard Requirements” and the right one gives “Explanatory Information,” which helps clarify the standard requirements. The standard contains seven sections, three annexes, and two checklists. They are as follows:

• Section 1 – Scope, purpose, and application
• Section 2 – Definition
• Section 3 – Training Program Administration and Management
• Section 4 – Training Development
• Section 5 – Training Delivery
• Section 6 – Training Evaluation
• Section 7 – Documentation and Record-Keeping
• Annex A – References
• Annex B – Training Course Development Guidelines
• Annex C – Training Delivery
• Appendix C – Safety, Health, and Environmental Trainer’s Checklist and

Day of Training Checklist

Let’s take a brief look at each one of the above, shall we? (Don’t answer – you know why).

Section 1 – Scope, Purpose, and Application: Pretty obvious, this section gives the range of applicability and where to use the standard (any EHS training, but again, it makes for an excellent benchmark for any training – not just EHS. “Z490 – it’s not just for EHS training anymore!” Another great advertising tag-line, don’t you think? Don’t bother answering).

Section 2 – Definitions: Everything from “certificate” to “trainer” is defined in this section.

Section 3 – Training Program Administration and Management: This section goes into great detail on responsibility and accountability for the training program and discusses appropriate resources and evaluation as well.

Section 4 – Training Development: One of the more significant areas of the standard, this section discusses needs assessments, learning objectives, course design, and training methods in much detail. All of the components that make up and go into effective training development.

Section 5 – Training Delivery: Another extensive section, this one, of course, discusses trainer criteria, subject matter expertise, continuing ed., management of the class, planning and preparation, delivery skills, and even adult learning principles (yay!).

Section 6 – Training Evaluation: The most extensive section (believe it or not) is very comprehensive. It covers the evaluation of the trainee (and their new skills), the training (and its effectiveness), and the trainer (and their impression on the trainees).

Section 7 – Documentation and Record-Keeping: This section obviously discusses what records to keep (a lot) and how to document them (paper copies, electronically, etc.).

Annex A – References: This “informative” annex gives a wide range of training references from ISO, ANSI, NIOSH, OSHA, IACET, and ASTD for use and, well, your reference (of course).

Annex B – Training Course Development Guidelines: This additional “informative” annex goes into great detail for several pages on course development and expands upon section 4 quite a bit.

Annex C – Training Delivery: Of course this “informative” annex does likewise for section 5 by detailing what makes for an effective trainer.

Appendix C – Safety, Health, and Environmental Trainer’s Checklist: A vast “trainer’s checklist” is included as part of annex C – much detail.

Appendix C – Day of Training Checklist: Last but not least, a “Day of Training Checklist” covering everything from training location and the A/V through the trainer’s image to thanking the class.

Wow! So as you can see, there is a ton of very good, helpful information and guidance in the standard.

Still not sure what to do? You can get the standard from ASSE at www.asse.org. Take a look at it – it’ll help your organization’s EHS training program. Perhaps you even noticed that it’s really about any training or adult learning, so you should be able to incorporate other training (e.g., human resources, quality, etc.) into your program or plan as well as your EHS training (everything from asbestos to zero energy state training).

What? Are you still not sure you’ll be able to come up with an EHS Training Program or Plan? Well, there also is an implementation guide that you can get to supplement the standard (it doesn’t replace it – you still need the standard – it’s more of an adjunct to it). You can also get the “Accepted EHS Training Practices – An Implementation Guide” Implementing the ANSI/ASSE Z490.1: Criteria for Accepted Practices in EHS Training. Available through Business & Legal Reports at www.blr.com (ISBN 1--30-8).

Now stop talking to yourself, go get the standard, and develop your EHS Training Program or Plan!

Training in general and safety, health, and environmental (SHE) training, in particular, is often thought of as boring by the students. Furthermore, most trainers are continually looking for ways to improve their training. Training is best when the trainees are actively engaged in the training. Consequently, many trainers choose structured "training games" as a method or approach to facilitate trainee participation and increase training perception as fun. This article (and the original conference presentation) is designed to provide trainers with various "training games" for their use in their training courses. Each "training game" is listed and discussed, including design hints, "how to play," usage suggestions, pros and cons, and both high and low-tech options are given (where applicable). So, without further ado – on to the games!Jeopardy! Jeopardy! is perhaps the most common training game used by trainers. Maybe this is because it seems to be naturally well-suited to be adapted for training purposes. Think about it – there are categories with five "answers" in each, most (but not all) persons know the basic rules, it is easily adaptable, and it lends itself to quick, spirited play. It works well as a review, especially at the end of the course before a post-test. Take critical points and divide them into categories (categories can be broad or encompass more than one area to make it easy to do). Develop an "answer" (e.g., "This is the most frequently used training game") and its respective question (e.g., "What is Jeopardy!?"). For high-tech versions, use Excel to make the "game board." Make large cells with the category names at the top and the "answers" below. Type each in and then highlight it in black – no one can read it. When it needs to be revealed, block it and "de-highlight" it! Be sure to type and print out a summary sheet of answers and questions for the game "host." For a low-tech version, use Post-It notes. Write the categories on them as well as the point amounts. Then write your answers and questions on the backside of each Post-It. There are also several commercially available Jeopardy! games that can be adapted.Some general tips for ease of use and play are as follows (some of these apply to many training games): Create "teams" of multiple players to get everyone involved. Give them (or have them choose) creative team names. Use kids' "squeaky" toys instead of "lockout" buzzers. Call yourself "Alex Tyvek" for fun. Decide ahead if they have to say "What is…?" or not. Give everyone a prize (not just the "winners"). Family Feud!Family Feud is another "spirited" and fun game. It is better suited for "teams" rather than single players. Again, one can use (large) kid's pop-up (or other) toys as the buzzers; for high-tech versions, use overhead transparencies or Word, PowerPoint, or Excel for the "board." For low-tech versions, use an easel and pad as the board. Either way, the answers must be covered somehow. With the computer version, do the highlighting in black (as discussed above). For the low-tech versions, a paper will need to be secured over the answers – either by using Post-Its on the overhead transparencies or large pieces taped over answers written ahead on the easel pad. It should go without saying that it's best not to embody former host Richard Dawson by greeting each female "contestant" with a kiss!Teams are necessary for Family Feud – usually four or five persons on each of two teams. Develop key points and use a "survey type" question to lend itself to a list of "common answers." Decide which are the top answers and assign point values accordingly. An example might be, "We surveyed 100 trainers and asked them to name a type of test question". Multiple choice would likely be number one with the most points assigned, followed by true-false, matching, fill-in-the-blank, and short answer in that order. The team or "family" heads meet in front, shake hands, and try to be first to answer. If they get the number one answer, the team chooses to play or pass. Otherwise, the other team gets a guess to see if they get a higher answer and the right to choose to play or pass. Continue with several rounds.Family Feud is better for easier concepts and for lists of multiple possibilities. Each round can take a while, so it can be a longer game. Hollywood SquaresHollywood Squares is a great game that involves the whole group – no matter how big it is! Just like with the game show, it basically is tic-tac-toe. Get two contestants from the group – one is "O" and one is "X." Make a page with a big, bold "O" on one side and an "X" on the other side. Make copies and distribute them to all in the group. Take a couple of rolls of crepe paper (or flagging tape, colored rope, etc.) and divide them into the requisite 9-squared tic-tac-toe board with approximately equal numbers of trainees in each "square." The two contestants take turns choosing a "square," which will be a group of trainees usually. Ask the "square" to answer a question and decide as a group, then ask the competitor if s/he agrees or disagrees with the square's answer. If correct, they get the square; if not, their competitor does – except for the win, which the competitor must get for themselves. Remind the trainees in the "squares" that they can "bluff" and should try to have some fun with it. Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?Obviously, this game needs some adapting. One can make the "player" into a team (or keep as just one trainee), and the others in the course and classroom can be the "lifelines," etc. It's important to directly involve as many of the students as possible for it to be a useful learning experience for all. As usual, develop the key points from the training. Next, arrange them from easiest to hardest concepts. Come up with four possible answers (as with a multiple-choice question – one correct and three incorrect ones). For a high-tech version, put them into a Word document with the answers typed out and highlighted in black (to be revealed). Keep a list of all questions and answers to use and refer to during play. For a low-tech version, use overheads (that are covered by a sheet of paper, or put it on an easel pad (again, covered with paper for the reveal). The game takes a while, and typically there is only one player, so it cuts down on active participation. To this end, encourage a "team" rather than a single-player and allow for more than three uses of help (i.e., "phone a friend," "poll the group," and "eliminate two answers").Wheel of FortuneAnother obvious game well suited to adapting in training, although obviously Wheel of Fortune is the kids' game "Hangman" with better props and prizes. One can choose a "letter-turner" (Vanna) to help (choosing a man can make it very funny). Have it spell out a key point which can be a phrase (as opposed to just one word). This will make it more of a challenge. The high-tech version can be easily done in word as described above, and the low-tech version with large, single-sheet letters covered with colored pages. As far as "spinning the wheel," one can use a board game wheel or make one if desired. Otherwise, a simpler way is to make up points, prizes, "bankrupt, etc. (like in the game show), put them on folded pieces of paper, and throw them into a (hard) hat for drawing out by the players. Training CharadesTraining charades can be lots of fun and some just plain silliness (a nice ice breaker and/or stress reliever). What's really nice is that it gets students up and physically active (and so it is especially great for the afternoon). Similar to the "parlor-game" version of charades, two (or more) teams are chosen. Instead of each team coming up with the charades, the trainer should do so. Various training lesson key points are written down on slips of paper that can be drawn out of a hat by a trainee/team member. The trainee has to pantomime (or silently act out) this key part of the lesson (e.g., fit-testing a respirator). Their team has to guess the answer. The two (or more) teams can also give each other the clues to demonstrate if the trainer has confidence in their ability to do so. Pictionary or "Win, Lose or Draw!"The basic premise of this game is to draw a concept or thing – sort of charades on paper. The trainer writes out a bunch of key points on lips of paper for each side to have to draw. Teams are made up, and one player/trainee has to try to draw the hazard, personal protective equipment, emergency response, etc. The team has a finite time period during which to guess the answer. It can be done on a dry erase board, but if done on an easel/paper pad, then the trainer can post the drawings for all to enjoy the "artistic renditions." It can be lots of fun, as most folks are not really artistic, especially under pressure. This one is also physical and gets people up, so it is nice for the afternoon, as a break from "brain-work," as an ice-breaker," and/or as reinforcement of the lesson, of course. Blind Man's BluffThe training version is not exactly like the kid's game. In this version, one person is blindfolded, and their team tries to help them perform something physical (e.g., disassembling and reassembling a respirator) but only with verbal help. It's an effective training tool for communication and teamwork. The advantage is it can be as short or long as the trainer (and trainees') wishes. Clue or Who Done It?This game is played like a murder mystery; only in this game, they're investigating an accident scene. It can be done in at least two different ways. One way is to play it like in the board game Clue, in which the trainer creates a "board" (on paper, a dry erase board, on a computer program) and create a "facility" with rooms, persons, tools, etc. Cards representing these things are also made (and dealt out to all players/trainees). They take turns guessing who done it like in the board game. The second option is to create a scenario that is an "accident." The trainer creates characters and the situations and hands out roles to trainees as appropriate. With a bit of guidance, the trainees in their roles are directed to try to solve the accident. This option obviously allows for much greater group interaction and active learning. There are lots of ways to go with this one – be creative in the "setup." BaseballTeams are chosen, and either a physical diamond in the room or a "virtual" one on a board can be used. The trainer will need to have quite a few questions at the ready for this game. Players get on base by answering the questions correctly. Each question can indicate how many bases it is worth. Three strikes (wrong answers) make an out. Close answers are balls. Correct answers are hits, but the other team can get the player out by answering a related question. Three outs, of course, per side of the inning, and the other team is up. There are so many ways of both having fun with this game and making it more like a real game of Baseball. For instance, play the national anthem, have uniforms, wear ball caps, take a 7th inning stretch, serve ballpark hotdogs, peanuts, and Cracker Jacks, sing "Take Me Out to the Ball Game," take the game outside in good weather, etc. Play ball!FootballSimilar to Baseball with a setup and basic construct similar to the actual game. Again, the trainer will need lots of questions. The questions can indicate how many yards each is worth. The trainer will need special questions for kick-offs and punts with yards depending on answers. This can be a multi-part question or one with many answers. The more the team gets right, the further the run back is worth in yards. Teams progress with yards by answering questions correctly and get stopped with incorrect ones. Interceptions and fumbles happen when the other team answers the question correctly. Four in a row is the first down, and that team continues, otherwise play turns to the opposing team. It's best to set up a "virtual field" so everyone can see where the teams are, etc.There are so many ways of both having fun with this game and making it more like a real game of football. For instance do a coin toss, have a half-time "show" (as a good break), take the game outside in good weather, have a two-minute warning, etc. 20 QuestionsThis is the game that always starts "Animal, mineral, or vegetable?". Although that query isn't used, teams (or "panels" like in the game shows of old – think of "What's My Line?") ask yes or no questions. They have to guess the "course aspect" (perhaps "safety don'ts") in 20 questions (or fewer). The trainer can be the host and can have a trainee play the contestant, with several others being panel members. One can also try it less formally with the class taking turns asking the questions. For a little high-tech addition, type in the questions (and answers) as they are asked so all can see what has been asked thus far and keep track better.To make it more like the old game shows, have the numbers 1-20 on paper or in word, etc. If the group is mostly Baby Boomers, put the numbers on large cards (8-inches square or so) punched through two wires, and "flip" them over as each question is asked. They'll get a kick out of it. ConcentrationThis is the one where one has to find pairs of matching items (undercards usually). Many people have likely played this with their kids, but there was a game show based on it. The matched pairs can be such things as a regulation and a requirement of it, a hazard and control, PPE and its limitation, etc. The nice thing about this one is you can give the same decks of cards to several pairs of students, or they can be divided into (small) teams (of a few students in each) as a low-tech version, for a high-tech version put the grid of squares into Excel. Type each one in and highlight it in black (as discussed above). Do the reveal by blocking it and undoing the highlighting. It can be lots of fun, albeit frustrating at times, so beware of trainees who don't do well with memorization and special relationships. The obvious way around this is to make it a team event, so no one trainee stands out, and all get involved. Whose Line Is It Anyway?Whose Line Is It Anyway? is pretty much a role-playing challenge. I know what you're thinking – it's not a "game." Well, role-playing can be a game if presented that way (also, it does have the word "playing" in its name). Make the contest into which team or group can do the funniest role play. As the trainer, develop some scenarios that lend themselves to comedy – less serious is generally easier for people to do – drama is more of a challenge. Write out the scenario, roles, or whatever, and let them go for it! TelephoneThis is the kid's game where one person whispers to the next, who whispers to the next, and so on to the last one. Then what was said first is compared to what was heard last. Obviously, this is most useful for training on communication and similar issues. As the trainer, be sure to instruct the players to repeat what they heard, not necessarily what they know it to have been. Two teams can "compete" to see which one gets the final safety message the closest to the original one said.Hot PotatoThis is the kid's game where you pass around an object like it's a hot potato (really quickly), trying not to be the one caught or stuck with it. Use a soft or squishy ball or bean bag. Have the trainees throw it back and forth, and when caught, they have to give an example of whatever the lesson is about. If they cannot think of one, they drop out, and play continues until just the winner is left. It's good for reinforcing a list of key points that was just reviewed or discussed. It's especially fun and great to incorporate some physicality into the class. Musical Hot PotatoThis time the trainees get in a circle and begin to toss the hot potato to each other while music is playing. When the music stops, whoever has the hot potato has to answer a question. If they get it wrong, review the correct answer, and they leave the circle. This continues with harder and harder (more obscure questions) until the last person remains and wins the game. The music adds another sense and dimension and can actually help with the learning. Brain Teasers/RiddlesThese are often pictograms with words and/or symbols that make up a well-known word or phrase. Great for reinvigorating folks and getting their creative, brain juices cooking (what an awful metaphor!). It can be done as individual players or as teams. Be sure to include the answers on the back (for them and for you!). Riddles are more typically a word puzzle or "poser" (one that makes you think or scratch your head). These can be especially useful to reinforce group process (i.e., team play) and working things out together. Crossword PuzzlesThese are pretty much self-explanatory. You can create your own, or there are software programs that will create the actual puzzle grid for you (and are very easy to use). Crosswords are great when you want individual games or as a "take away" for after class. For a high-tech version, use Excel and create a grid of squares (hint – use the "W" to set the width, then "eyeball" the height). Start to put in the words that link. Blacken the non-letter squares and add the little numbers as superscript. Next, use either Excel or Word for the "Across" and "Down" clues. JumblesThis is yet another word puzzle-type game. Jumbles are the puzzle where the letters are there but are in the wrong order – basically an anagram – they're mixed up. It, too, can be done with single players or as teams. It is great for term recognition. Either just the mixed-up letters can be written, or a clue can also be used. The high-tech version is to use the word and to blacken out the answers with black highlighting. The low-tech version is to use large pieces of paper, of course, and then rearrange them accordingly. This can be especially helpful for introducing new terms that may be a bit foreign – it really emphasizes them. Word SearchesWord Searches are those grids with all of the letters, and you have to find the hidden words. It's an obvious inclusion after the previous two entries. It is very much like Crosswords above in the puzzle construction. Use Excel or graph paper to design it. An easier version is to just list the hidden words, whereas a more challenging version is instead of listing a hidden word, one can list the hidden word's meaning. It gives it more of a Crossword "feel" to it but with many more terms. Create Your Own Game!One of the best games I've played was a board game we created in grad-school for the "Group Process" class. It was fun to design and to play. We got an "A" on it, too. It can be done as a group in class – especially if the course goes on more than one day or they have a break with time to work on it. Provide supplies such as 3x5 note cards, large easel paper, markers/crayons, small toys for "players," etc. Tell them that above all to have fun!

Next: 10 Reasons to Digitize & Centralize Laboratory EHS Data

Well, good playing and good training! Now go have some fun!"Recent Blog Posts""