Author: PRIA Blog
by Dr Sakshi Saini, Senior Program Officer
In the past eight years of my experience working in the development sector I have been part of various trainings, either as a trainee or trainer. Being on both sides of the table has helped me understand a few very basic behaviours of the trainees and trainers as well as the impacts they have on the entire training process. I want to elucidate a few points:
We as a country amuse every other human being in the world with our famous head nods. Nodding to everything the trainer is saying, no matter if we understand it or not. The moment we are asked this question "Is that clearly understood?” mostly every participant will nod, the sign of a yes, giving agreement to the fact that they have understood it all. I am perplexed at this behaviour and make me think, whether they heard it all or understood it all? Another typical response in all the trainings to this other question "Any doubts?” always invites and yet another movement of neck (or nodding of head) symbolizing "no doubts”. Frankly, I myself have done it many times, and as far as I am concerned the reason why I never pointed out that I can’t understand a word of what one is talking about is because I don’t want to be judged, I don’t want people to laugh at me or make fun of me or to find out how ignorant I am, or somebody giving a snide remark of "Ah what a stupid question” that was. All these thoughts cross my mind several times; I have analysed them and then always decided not to ask anything. I guess that’s what other participants also must be contemplating on.
The fear of being judged and considered to be below average among peers is one of the very important factors, which discourages people who want to ask questions even when they haven’t understood what is being talked about. I recall this one incident where I was a part of trainers group, who were providing training on using mobile based technology to collect citizen’s feedback on aspects of governance. During the session one of our team members (a software engineer, very well equipped with mobile technology) took a mobile, connected it with his system and started giving instructions on using the "smart” phone to collect data. Each participant was also given a smart phone to practice simultaneously, as the instructions were being given by the resource person. It was quite an interesting session where the resource person was giving step by step instruction to the participants to use smart phone. The resource person was being extra cautious as most of the participants had never used touch screen smart phone. After every instruction he will wait for the participants to perform an action in their mobiles and then wait for their approval to move to the next step. The session was going on at its normal pace, when I noticed that some participants looked totally lost. Thinking that I might be able to help them in using the device, I decided to sit with these participants. While trying to help them, I realised that they haven’t been able to find out the drop box options mentioned by the resource person. After giving it few minutes I found out that even if I follow the instructions given by the resource person, I can’t find the same path of options as mentioned. I raised that point, and shared it with the resource person. Thereafter, we realised that the handset model being used by the resource person is different from the handset model given to all the participants. None of them were able to follow the instructions being given by the resource person, but they all were nodding their heads at each step giving agreement to the fact that they have understood it all and are able to follow the instructions.
I reflected on what could have been the reason, none of the participants pointed out the problem. Was it the same dilemma I used to face that these participants were also going through, the fear of being judged or mocked at, being considered an idiot or ignorant? In my quest for finding an answer to this burgeoning query, I had an informal discussion with these participants after the training. Those who were familiar with the smart phone even prior to the training pointed out that although it was a different interface, in the mobile, they could understand and follow the instructions. While those who were using the smart phone for the first time pointed out the feeling of being mocked at as one of the reason to remain quite. Anita one of the participants said, "Mujhe lagga sabko to samjh aa raha hai, bus mujhe nahi aa raha. To agar main bolungi to sab hasseinge mujh per or mujhe bevakoof samjheinge” (I thought, everyone can understand and follow the instructions other than me, and if I point out all will think that I am stupid). It’s a phenomenon to agree to whatever people say, no matter whether you actually agree on it or not.
Another important aspect in the training, which limits questioning from participants and their learning, is vested interests of trainee and the trainer. The trainees are very well aware of the fact that there are a particular number of sessions to be covered in the training. And till the time these sessions get covered they won’t be allowed to leave. Thus, it is very commonly seen that, as the training approaches towards its end (it might be end of the day when participants will go home or if it was a residential training, by the end of which participants can leave) this nodding behaviour increases. Participants start nodding every time they are asked a question, whether they understand it or not. At times even if one or two participants try to ask a question, the fellow participants will object to that by either giving strong look symbolizing disapproval or may be saying "Hum samjha denge tujhe training ke baad, abhi training khatam hone de”- (we will explain these points to you after training, let the training end first). Many times even the trainer, who is running short on time, in order to finish the training soon, agrees to this kind of arrangement and moves ahead.
The factor of social acceptability also plays an important role in responding to a question. Research has proved that humans tend to follow others’ behaviour at times even without thinking or agreeing to that. This factor also limits participants to be the "one-off case” in the entire group and ask a query. A person not so confident about herself/himself finds it very difficult to gather the courage and ask something which the entire group has understood or at-least nodded to. It’s a phenomenon to agree to whatever people say, no matter whether you actually agree to it or not.
Also, quite often because of lack of homogeneity in the group, many participants who are extroverted or outspoken end up dominating and suppressing the participation of other participants (either intentionally or un-intentionally). It’s commonly seen that these participants become the active group while the others have limited interaction with the trainer.
Don’t these incidents point out the need to change the strategy being used to impart training, or the ways used to judge that all participants are keeping up with the same pace? Shouldn’t there be a way to ensure that even the participants finding it difficult to understand the content be somehow involved in the process? These weak participants start lagging behind from the very start of the sessions. Shouldn’t the resource person pay more attention to these participants rather than just relying on getting agreement of few participants (which generally is the case)? May be asking content related questions, is a better way to gauge the level of understanding of the participants. It might be time consuming, but better than the possibility of participants not having clarity about the session topics. There is also a need for the trainers to put in conscious effort to limit participation of some of the extrovert participants, to provide opportunity to other participants in the training.
New strategies to involve all participants as well as monitor their active participation and learning should be developed to ensure equal participation. Every participant is on a different level of learning, understanding and interest and the workshop sessions would have to be designed and adapted continually to suit these levels and optimize.
PRIA’s MobiliseHER team traveled to Bangalore during the week of June, 10 – 14, 2024. The aim of the visit was to gain relevant insights into the civil society ecosystem in Bangalore and meet different organisations to understand the city through a lens of gender and inclusive mobility.
Working at PRIA, often leads us to various cities across the country. Each trip is an opportunity to witness firsthand the challenges and triumphs of different communities.
Mr. Yedukrishnan V has recently joined PRIA after gaining valuable experience in the development sector. Drawing from his journey in the social sector and personal encounters in Kerala, he emphasises the importance of participatory governance and research in empowering marginalised communities.'
