Hello All,
   
  I would like to comment on what I feel is the biggest issue in providing workplace literacy training, and it perhaps comes along under the theme of “managing client expectations.”    I believe that when we go to a company we must approach them on their terms, in their culture, and seek to understand them.  Company training is very different from classroom teaching.
   
  To illustrate, when I first considered offering workplace literacy as a director from a small CBO, I talked with the local adult school principal about it. I was told it was a waste of time.  They had tried it and found it to be 100% failure.  As I probed further, I realized that what he had tried was to take their standard ESL classes and simply offer them at a company site.  Each one had a great start and each one quickly fizzled out.  
   
  I later became a workplace literacy instructor and found success with it.  As others have described, I set up the program, met with management, HR and employees and developed the curriculum.  (By the way, I like to take pictures of the workers doing their jobs and build these into the workbooks.  The employees love it.)  The key to success was being able to approach the job as a workplace trainer, not an educator.  And central to that is understanding that my client is the company, not the individual employees.  The employees benefit tremendously, but my client is the company.  Let me quickly add I would not sacrifice the employees to meet a client’s expectation, and clearly there are times when you must teach the employer what is not acceptable, but it’s the underlying attitude that you are serving the employer that is important. 
   
  I think the best way to approach it hearkens back to Stephen Covey’s “7 Habits” in which you seek first to understand, and then be understood.  I believe that if we approach workplace instruction from the culture of the workplace, we will learn a lot and from what we learn, we will even find ways to improve our ESOL instruction in the traditional classroom.
   
  I don’t think I’ve communicated this well, but let me at least throw this much out there at this point.  I do agree with Amber's post, and with others I've read; and I feel this perspective is also important to interject into the conversation.
   
  Cathay Reta
  Cornerstone Concepts
  6670 Southside Drive
  Los Angeles California   90022
  cathayreta at sbcglobal.net
  

Amber Gallup <agallup at essentiallanguage.com> wrote:
                    In response to Pat Sawyer's last message -

Several posters have alluded to the challenge of managing the client's expectations.  It's common to hear questions like that which Pat mentioned, "How many weeks is this going to take?"  I have found that it will take much more than one conversation before my clients really begin to understand  what I'm saying regarding the process and time commitment of language learning and the goals of the course (which we develop together as much as possible through the needs analysis process.)  

I have found that the needs analysis itself is useful not only to identify students' and workplace needs, but also to bring out into the light of day the stakeholders' expectations....which are often unrealistic and/or conflicting with other stakeholders' expectations.  The needs analysis process provides an opportunity to do the very important work of getting all stakeholders on the same page...it's a little teachable moment.  If important stakeholders have different ideas of why we're doing this (say, union and management) and  how it will impact them....that can deal a death blow to a program!  

I always use an example from a electricans' union for which I once put together a VESL program when I first began this work:  In the needs analysis, I did my language task analysis and I interviewed some workers, the union leaders, the apprentice coordinator, the organizer, and the contractor (the "big boss").  I felt good that this part of the needs analysis had been thorough and everybody shared an understanding of our goals.  Yet, by the end of the semester, the otherwise very successful class was almost done away with!....why?  Because the workers' foremen (who were not getting jobs finished on time because they lost some of their crew for a few hours each week) were angry and refusing to let their workers leave for the class.  I had neglected to make them part of the process, and their differing expectations and needs led to revolt.  We modified the course schedule and luckily continued on, but I learned some lessons about needs analysis.

Also, I liked Miriam's description of how she did her observations (language task analysis) BEFORE she interviewed the various stakeholders.  I'll be using that tip...it's a great idea - because it gives us more information on which to base our questions to stakeholders, and as Pat already mentioned, often the management (or HR, or union leader, etc.) will just say, "I want them to learn English," and not be able to go much farther than that.  

Amber

Amber Gallup          Director, Essential Language
  (202) 234-4565
  www.essentiallanguage.com
   










----------------------------------------------------
National Institute for Literacy
Workplace Literacy mailing list
Workplace at nifl.gov
To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/workplace
Email delivered to cathayreta at sbcglobal.net


Cathay O. Reta
Cornerstone Concepts
6670 Southside Drive
Los Angeles, CA  90022
Ph: 323) 728-4302
cathayreta at sbcglobal.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/workplace/attachments/20080723/47e4e08b/attachment-0001.html