Remote VS. In-house Training PROS AND CONS

Sheila Shermet – 6th MoU Conference Three experiences with remote training

• Coached a MIIS student during second year- Emailed recordings/in- person (before the MoU network established). • Coached a colleague who had added Spanish for freelance exam- Skype • UN English booth Hybrid In-house/On-line Courses over last 8 years First Experience: The MIIS student

• Summary of meeting her • Bit dummy booth at UNOG • Listened to recordings and sent back my recorded feedback • The need to work with her in person: to check her pacing and some technique in real time and work on couple techniques and exercises – to follow up long online.

• Home leave in CA: met with her for a couple of two hour sessions. Outcome:

• Trust and confidence building ( when misdiagnosed with source language problems by someone not understanding the learning trajectory of a simul trainee) • Her performance improved so much over second year- diagnosis changed • Ultimately passed first freelance and year later LCE- now staff Experience with SKYPE sessions

Modality • Colleague interpreted UN speeches live for me while I listened. Gave feedback over skype in real time. Usually I had the text to read along. Pros and cons The benefit was providing structure ( an assigned day and time to practice). Personally supportive and easier to give and discuss feedback Did not work so well for seeing her pacing ( hard to line up my recording with hers) or work on technique per se. But since working on adding language and already experienced this was not as important. OUTCOME

• The coaching achieved the end goal: she passed the exam • It was a good method for providing support and structure to a peer: like a pacer who runs with someone training for a race • I concluded it was less effective for more in-depth training and coaching. Putting prior experiences to use: UN Pilot online/in-house Program

• 8 weeks online: during GA from Oct to December. Busy period for interpretation. • 3 weeks in house: January when slower, can afford to release a couple of staff from booth for a day. Alternated. • Team of 10 to start: Half with Russian other half doing the French. 8 Week Online

• 2 speeches per week per language: Russian and French • One trainer for each language • Different trainers each week • Each week had specific topic focus: easier and more general to more specific or terminology laden • Each trainer sent feedback by email or a recording 3 week in-house intensive

• 6 hours instruction – following UN schedule of meetings • One half day mid-week for prep, research and rest • Team taught in pairs : first week experienced trainer with each mb of team • Classes divided between simul and sight translation • Mock Conference • Mock exams OUTCOME

• LCE pass rate improved. • Half the class passed as predicted in the report to management. The remainder improved enough to to successfully freelance at other UN agencies such as ICAO, in Geneva, etc. • Of the ten colleagues, six continued to be involved in training. Several have now taken their experience and expertise to other duty stations ( UNOG and UNOV) and are involved in training programs there. Lessons Learned

First lesson: • Hybrid On-line and In-house model very cost effective and pedagogically sound. It has become the new model for English booth courses. Second major lesson: • Run in-house portion first and follow-up with on-line as support and coaching for exam prep, using what was learned in-house with individually tailored feedback. PROS and CONS of ON-LINE

• PROS:

• Cost neutral for organization • No opportunity cost for students or living expenses • Transcends time and space: good for trainers and students • Excellent for using teams of trainers across duty stations • Provides personalized feedback in private CONS OF ON-LINE

• Difficult to get a handle on what student needs: technique and diagnosis • More difficult to introduce new exercises and ensure done properly • No learning from rest of class • No collaborative learning • Harder to use “teachable moments” for benefit of whole group. • More difficult to build the necessary trust with students. PROS OF IN-HOUSE

• Depth and breadth of exposure to students/work • Team teaching • Collaborative learning • Intensity of practice/exposure • Can do a speech, give feedback and immediately redo it, or immediately try a strategy. • Exercises to address problems such as speed, etc. • Trust building CONS

• Pedagogically: NONE • Limiting in time and space

• COST- to the organization running the program • COST- to participants ( actual expenditures and opportunity cost). Conclusions

• Remote or on-line training is a great supplement • Good for post in-house coaching or support for exam prep. • Good for individual coaching/tutoring with a mentor • Preferred exchanges of recordings: time freedom and more in-depth • You can introduce ideas/exercises in online lectures- but need in-person follow-up to make it work.

• Do not believe you can achieve the same successful pass rates on exams or learning outcomes without a minimum of in-person contact.