7

Systematic Effective Instruction 3

Adapting Instruction for Varied Audiences and Formats

Margaret M. Plack, PT, DPT, EdD and Maryanne Driscoll, PhD

CHAPTER OBJECTIVES

After reading this chapter, the reader will be prepared to:

• Define the non-negotiable elements of systematic effective instruction.
  
• Apply the non-negotiable elements to a variety of presentation formats.
  
• Use the non-negotiable elements to problem solve a variety of common instructional mistakes.
  
• Identify additional variables that influence instructional design.
  
• Adapt presentations to meet the demands of various formats and time frames.

In the introductory chapter, we asked you to “Stop and Reflect” on what you think of when you think about “Teaching and Learning in Physical Therapy.” From there, we explored what the learner brings to the learning situation and the characteristics of our learners, we examined the reflective process and discussed how to facilitate critical thinking on the part of our learners (students and patients), we described the structure and function of the brain and the implications of current brain research on teaching and learning, and we presented a systematic approach to designing effective teaching-learning situations.

By now, you recognize the complexity of your role as an educator. You know that teaching is much more than simply telling your patients or audience what is important and expecting that they will learn it and remember it, or relying on the old mantra “show one, do one, teach one.” Teaching requires a systematic and comprehensive approach to understanding your learners, focusing their attention, presenting materials in a manner that meets their needs, and continually reinforcing the learning so that they can achieve behavior change and/or knowledge retention. Teaching requires deliberate design and planning. By now, you also recognize just how much teaching is an integral part of being a health care practitioner and how each teaching-learning situation is unique.

In the previous chapters, we presented the principles behind effective teaching, whether in the classroom or clinical setting. However, as noted in previous chapters, each teaching-learning situation is unique, and, as health care professionals, we engage in a great variety of teaching activities. For example, you may be asked to present at a community fair or a national meeting, you may want to present your scientific findings in a poster or platform presentation format, you may be invited to do a workshop that lasts 3 hours or a continuing education course that lasts 3 days, you may be called upon to participate in a panel discussion, or you may be asked to teach in a doctor of physical therapy (DPT) classroom or laboratory. These presentations can span across the clinic, hospital, classroom, laboratory, conference room, or community setting. How can you use the principles discussed in the previous chapters to prepare for the variety of teaching-learning situations that you may be expected to engage in physical therapy practice?

This chapter is designed to build on the principles of systematic effective instruction presented in Chapters 5 and 6 as you think about how you might adapt your presentation to meet the demands of different presentation formats and different audiences. Which components of the principles of systematic effective instruction are non-negotiable and which ones can be modified or deleted depending on the situation? What else must you consider in trying to meet the demands of the requested presentation format? What will you do if you arrive and find that your audience is much more knowledgeable than you anticipated or the room set-up is not what you had planned? What will you do if your presentation is taking much longer than you had planned? Will you be ready? To begin this chapter, we would like you to take some time to ponder the scenarios presented in the following sections.

How do you know what to consider when planning a modification to your original plan? As a novice presenter, you may be overwhelmed by the idea of planning more than one way to conduct your presentation. Start with simple modifications, such as differentiating between background or basic information and more advanced information. Then, if you discover through a few questions at the beginning that your audience participants are more knowledgeable or experienced than you expected, you can skip over the extra background information and make the extra information available for audience members who are less familiar. As described in Chapter 5, active learning strategies can also help everyone to learn more effectively. You can design an activity in which participants discuss (review) basic information to be sure that everyone is at the same level. In this way, those with expertise can share their knowledge with novice participants, and the novice participants will have enough information for you to be able to move through your presentation without having to first review all of the basic information needed. These active learning strategies can be as brief as a few seconds or much longer, and the duration of each activity can be modified to meet the needs of the group. In general, we recommend planning at least 2 activities of different lengths for even brief presentations of 30-minute duration. If time is going by more quickly than you anticipated, you can eliminate or spend less time on one activity.

In each of the 3 preceding scenarios, there was a well-intentioned presenter who experienced disappointing results. In this chapter, we consider a variety of different presentational formats that require different design considerations. To optimize your teaching, regardless of the instructional situation, we consider certain components of systematic effective instruction to be non-negotiable. The components or elements of systematic effective instruction were presented in detail in Chapter 5. Figure 7-1 summarizes those elements that are considered to be non-negotiable.

Let us consider the non-negotiables as they apply to the opening scenario. In attempting to ensure credibility of her presentation, MJ used 120 slides to convey as much as possible about her model for teaching communication. There was a mismatch between her goals and the audience’s expectations. In this instance, the presenter could have done a quick on-the-spot needs assessment and asked participants if they were clinicians or academicians and if they had encountered challenging patients with whom it was difficult to communicate. The presenter might have asked the participants to think about any questions or concerns they hoped would be addressed during the workshop. Once the participants had spent 30 to 60 seconds thinking about their questions/concerns, they could have turned to a person nearby to exchange their questions/concerns. Lastly, the presenter could have asked for questions/concerns from the larger group and written these on a flip chart or digital white board to be put on hold or revisited during or at the end of the session. Within 2 to 3 minutes, the presenter could have learned something about the audience’s expectations and could have clarified the extent to which the planned presentation would address their concerns. Audience members also would have learned quickly whether to stay in this workshop session or to leave and find another session more appropriate for them.

Asking audience members to reflect on questions and concerns that they hope will be addressed and responding to these expectations can serve both as a needs assessment and a motivational hook. It will help focus the participants’ attention to the topic of the presentation. Personal connections to relevant concerns also help establish context for the workshop material. In describing the purpose of the workshop, the presenter has the opportunity to present the specific learning objectives of the session as well.

Assuming that this, in fact, was not a workshop, but rather it was a presentation about a recently developed program for improving communication, it would be important to consider ways to engage the audience (active learning) as much as possible and to boost the content in a meaningful way. The presenter might have shown video clips of students engaged in clinic-based role plays before they learned the new techniques. These video clips could have been followed by an opportunity for audience members to speak with participants nearby to critique the student-patient role-play scenarios. Several comments about the student performance from the audience could have been shared in the large group. This brief discussion could have been followed by a brief lecturette (lasting 10 minutes) about the new communication training program. Following this lecturette, a second video clip showing students using the new communication techniques could have been presented. Once again, audience members could have commented on the student role plays, with instructions to compare and contrast the different communication approaches they had observed (lasting 2 to 3 minutes). Based on observations and comments from the audience, the instructor could have reviewed the key points of the new communication training program and highlighted the different outcomes observed in the role plays. This 2– to 3–minute encapsulation could have served as a summary of the presentation. This interactive presentation could have been done within the same 30-minute time frame originally allotted for the lecture plus PowerPoint presentation. The adapted version contains all of the components necessary for effective instruction and is much more likely to engage learners.

Although we emphasize the importance of incorporating certain components of effective instruction regardless of the teaching-learning situation, these are not the only variables to be considered when designing your instruction. Additional variables appear in Table 7-1. Creating optimal teaching-learning experiences requires you to consider both the non-negotiable components of effective instruction and the unique characteristics of your situation. These unique characteristics or variables may include, but may not be limited to, the audience, time frame, format, room set-up, and equipment available, and context.

The people who comprise your audience definitely influence your instructional plan. As discussed in detail in Chapter 1, the participants may have different expectations of your presentation, depending on their level of experience, current knowledge of the topic, cultures, generational differences, learning styles, and purpose for using the content that you are presenting. What about participants of different ages or literacy levels? For example, if you are presenting information on the benefits of aerobic conditioning to a high school health class vs a group of senior citizens at the local community center, you will likely need somewhat different pacing (ie, ratio of content and process), content boosters, and active learning strategies. Even in a setting where you assume a more homogeneous audience in terms of education and experience, such as when you present at a conference of professional peers, it is important to consider the specific audience in your session. Are these participants clinicians, academicians, or a combination of the 2? Are they expecting a lecture or a workshop format? How familiar are they with your topic? More often than not, you should expect a fair amount of diversity in your audience.

The key is to make the presentation as relevant as possible for the audience. If you discover that most of the group is familiar with the key background information needed in your presentation but a handful are not, you may provide less of the background information you had prepared and frame it as “review for many of you and new information for some of you.” Clearly stating that you are aware of, and accommodate for, these differences in baseline knowledge indicates that you recognize and value the characteristics of this specific audience.

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Join